OpenEuphoria

Re: Critique <revisited>

• Posted by Ray Smith <smithr at IX.NET.AU> Jan 21, 2001
• 487 views

On Sun, 21 Jan 2001 18:19:02 -0500, Euman <euman at BELLSOUTH.NET> wrote:

>>Robert Craig wrote:
>
>>The trouble is, there are dozens of
>>such features, and I believe if they were all
>>added, the language manual would be harder
>>to digest without there being much more power.

I understand this, but if the main issue was how
to learn Euphoria I'm sure the current refman could
be split into a beginner and an advanced version.
I'm sure some of the advanced features like profiling
could also be moved to the advanced version.

>>The small size of the language is also helpful
>>when porting to other platforms, and in writing
>>various tools, such as Euphoria To C, and David's
>>Euphoria To Java, etc.

I understand this is well, but where will the line
in the sand be drawn?  Will the compatiabilty with
add on tools kill enhacements to the base language?

(Note: As much as I like DOS, I think the DOS port
has a similar effect on Euphoria.  To keep DOS
compatiability the other 2 ports are more restricted.)

[snip]

>I hope i didnt misconceive here but, didn't Robert just
>say there was not going to be a (continue)?
>I would also guess that y'all can forget about the GOTO
>aswell.

I would come to that conclusion as well.

It's the old age problem ... you can't please everyone!

I have written a medium amount of code with Euphoria and
have yet come to the point where I thought a continue or
a goto were required.

Ray Smith