OpenEuphoria

Re: Rob: List?

• Posted by Juergen Luethje <j.lue at gmx.de> Mar 22, 2006
• 554 views

Cuvier Christian wrote:

>> Subject: Re: Rob: List?

When we read "RE: Digest for EUforum at topica.com, issue 5758" on the
main Euforum page, how can we know that the concerning post contains
text about the topic "Rob: List?"??
So in your posts use the proper subject, please. Thanks!

>> posted by: Robert Craig <rds at RapidEuphoria.com>
>>
>> CChris wrote:
>>>> 2. provide non-blocking I/O support to assist multitasking
>>>>
>>>
>>> Could you elaborate on this? If it means that Eu gets at
>> last a set of file
>>>
>>> xplat commands which are not blocking, this is a welcome
>> development.
>>> How would a progress or completion status for a I/O command
>> be reported?
>>
>> I haven't decided exactly how it will work, but Linux and Windows
>> have API calls that let you start some I/O, and then check a variable
>> or memory location to detect when it has finished. Meanwhile you can
>> do other things, rather than getting blocked at that point.
>>
> 
> Of course, and the current mechanisms in Eu already allow to wrap and use
> them. So what is this support made of? That was my original question.

Wrapping the API calls yourself will take you more time for writing and
bug searching/fixing. In this post
<http://www.listfilter.com/EUforum/m7071.html> you wrote that you want
to save this time -- and so do I.
I want to write "pure Euphoria" programs, if possible. Maybe wrapping
those API calls is so complicated, that I'm not able to do so. Of course
Rob's programming skills are much, much better than mine, so he is able
do write stuff, that would not be possible for me. But the result of
Rob's work is a simple and easy to use programming language, so that I
can use it to write programs -- you see the principle? 
So "We can do this ourselves in C or assembler or whatever." holds only
true for a little number of Eu programmers, and it's not an argument
when talking about improvement of Euphoria at all.
Additionally, most Eu routines are cross-platform. So why should I
want to write my own Windows wrappers, and when I've changed to Linux
write again Linux wrappers for the same stuff? Why should I want to do
so, when Rob offers to implement those very useful routines for the next
Eu version???

<snip>

Regards,
   Juergen

-- 
Have you read a good program lately?