OpenEuphoria

RE: Block Commenting

• Posted by Dave Probert <zingo at purpletiger.com> Aug 03, 2003
• 471 views

Derek Parnell wrote:
> 
> 
> > Dave Probert wrote:
> > > Any chance we'll see block commenting abilities in the next Euphoria?
> > 
> > I don't think so.
> > I'm not interested in having two different ways
> > to write comments. 
> 
> And yet your *customers* are. Interesting, no?
> 

I really have to agree wholeheartedly with Derek on this - is this a 
language that is being improved, or just your own toy?  If it's the 
latter then you're gonna LOSE a lot of potential customers with that 
sort of attitude.

> >In ed, I hit F12 a bunch of times
> > to comment out a block. (uncommenting isn't quite as easy)
> 
> And why were block comments invented? To make life easier for the CODER 
> not the language author.
>  

Of the top 5 programming languages how many don't have block commenting? 
 If I wanted to program in NotePad (Not that I'm that crazy!), I can - 
for C, C++, Java, PHP, JavaScript, HTML, ActionScript and a huge bunch 
of others.  I don't see that the editor should control the language 
features!!!

I will say that I'm enjoying learning Euphoria, but it's a real struggle 
when comparing it to more 'professional' languages that have been around 
for a few years - Oh wait - so has Euphoria!!!

If the task of adding or improving features is too hard a task then may 
I suggest that you look at getting some help.

> > > Also is there any chance of gathering together some of the more useful 
> > > (small!) code funcs/procs, that are often rewritten by coders, into a 
> > > base include file (ie one that is supplied with the standard Euphoria 
> > > download)?
> > 
> > Do you want me to maintain a bunch of code written
> > by other people? When they change/improve their code
> > will I have to keep my version up to date as well?
> 
> Of course not! However, some of the submissions (and stuff not 
> submitted) are so common that you ought to consider making them standard 
> (read: RDS Supported) routines. For example: abs().
> 

Again, I have to agree with Derek.  The route to a full blown product is 
versatility and a good range of features - Euphoria certainly works Ok 
for the former, but falls down with the latter.

I was not suggesting a HUGE library of routines, but just the more 
common ones.  Why not have an 'official' package, some nice person could 
be the one to do the maintenance - just like Derek does with Win32Lib 
(thankyou).  Sorry, I can't volunteer for the task - I'm only a beginner 
with this tool.

> Would it really hurt RDS to take on a bit more responsibility for this? 
> I'd pay for such an 'add-on' service.
> 

It would definately help persuade me and, I assume, many others in 
actually going beyond the free download.

I will reiterate that I'm enjoying Ehphoria and like it a lot, but would 
love to see some sort of organisation that takes it beyond just a 
'Hobby' language.


PS.  Look at the history of PHP from a few years ago when it was PHP/FI 
- now it's a major system on many, many web servers.  And is constantly 
being improved.