Re: Standardized Euphoria
- Posted by duke normandin <dnormandin at bsdrocksperlrolls.com> Dec 24, 2006
- 736 views
Chris Bensler wrote: > > Ray Smith wrote: > > > > cklester wrote: > > > > > > Robert Craig wrote: > > > > > > > > I don't think you should change the existing standard .e > > > > files in a way that will cause existing programs to break. > > > > > > True. Instead, release a "Standard Libraries Package v2.0." > > > > > > All new programs can use this new library, and the old one can be > > > phased out or whatever. > > > > > > I agree 100%. > > Only after "most" people are using the new library should there be any > > thought > > > > about breaking backward compatibility. > > > > Ray Smith > > <a href="http://RaymondSmith.com">http://RaymondSmith.com</a> > > > "1. Besides additional functionality, I would prefer to redesign/reorganize > the > existing libs. Would this be acceptable to people? > > The new libs would not be compatible with the RDS libs but they would include > the same functionality, plus much more. The alternative is to just build upon > the existing libs, though I strongly beleive that we would be better off if > they were reorganized. Now that Eu supports include subfolders, I do have a > way for 'legacy' code that uses rds libs to be compatible with the new libs, > since that would of course be a concern. This plan has actually been on the > backburner for many years because Euphoria didn't support include subfolders > until v3." > > I'm too tired to try and find a different way to explain the same thing. > Please read the thread again more thouroughly. I bet you are!! Could it be that Euphoria after all these years, has reached a crossroad? A "defining moment" as the famous Dr. Phil puts it? That happened in the Perl world between Perl4 and Perl5 -- and soon again with the upcoming Perl6. Some things got broke, but that was the price for moving on. Anybody *use* that old DOS stuff any more? I'm too new to Euphoria to pop-off too much, but you have my "go-for-it" vote! ( he mumbles: Gosh I hope that this doen't mean I *have* to learn OOP ) ;) -- duke