RE: Eu's poor design
Andy Serpa wrote:
>
>
> I don't understand your "put" function. It seems like the only thing it
>
> will do is try to overwrite new data that is identical to the old data,
> unless I'm missing something.
Hm, I should stop coding in a "reply to EUForum" window. You are
correct. I just wanted to give a small example -- well it was too small
and therefore wrong. But the point is there: You can't modify the tree
iteratively.
>
> In any case, the short answer to making trees is to use recursion.
In C/Pascal/etc. I have a choice, but not in Eu, pity.
> use trees heavily in Euphoria. The ease of making trees in Euphoria of
> any shape and size is one reason I like Euphoria. Making almost any
> type of data structure is trivial. Making non-recursive "flat" trees
> where each node has an explicit index to the next node will gain you a
> bit of speed if your trees are huge with lots of floating-point values.
I don't see what this has to do with floating-point values.
> That is a little trickier since you need to maintain your own stack to
> build them (making a stack in Eu is easy), and I've done that as well.
> These are not major obstacles.
>
> Strong-typing as pointed out by Irv can be a problem, and the type &
> error system in Euphoria is where the next improvements in the language
> need to be. But as another in a growing list of "million-liners", I
> have never found myself beating my head against the wall because I
> didn't have pass by reference. (And I don't care if you don't believe
> me -- doesn't make it untrue.)
>
I am tired of argumenting about this.
Still nobody showed me how to do
seq[1][2][3] = some_func(seq[1][2][3])
easier in Eu. Still nobody showed me an elegant tables.e implementation
without pbr.
|
Not Categorized, Please Help
|
|
