OpenEuphoria

Re: Newspaper column mentions Euphoria!

• Posted by Derek Parnell <ddparnell at bigpond.com> Jun 14, 2003
• 454 views

----- Original Message -----
From: "Al Getz" <Xaxo at aol.com>
To: "EUforum" <EUforum at topica.com>
Subject: RE: Newspaper column mentions Euphoria!


>
>
> Derek Parnell wrote:
> >
> > > I think an improvement for Eu here would be constant
> > > sequences (of a fixed element type) that would be accessable
> > > by pointer or something like that.  Probably a sequence
> > > of type ulong would be good enough to do a lot with.
> > > I guess it would be ok to call it an Array?
> > > That would of course add a new base type to Euphoria.
> >
> > I agree, but this has nothing to do with robustness, in my opinion.
> > --
> > Derek
> >
>
> Think about this for a minute....
>
> I said "I think an improvement for Eu here would be..."
>
> and you said
>
> "I agree, but this has nothing to do with robustness, in my opinion."
>
> So you are saying that you believe that:
>
> Improvements dont improve the robustness of something,
> even when they add functionality AND speed?
>

If by robustness I mean how hard it is to cause the program to fail, then
adding new datatypes may or may not increase a program's robustness. The use
of the new datatype is independant from the robustness of the application.
In other words, one cannot predict with certainty that a program's
robustness will increase if a new datatype is used.

This is what I meant. If you are thinking of 'robust' in a different way,
then your statement could be true. It's just that that's not what I meant. I
do not automatically associate increased functionality or increased speed as
a measure of robustness. But that's just me.
--
Derek