>> That's a miracle. It's a pretty rare language...
> 
> I used Icon too, which is also a pretty cool language. :-)

OK then...

>> Didn't try it personally, no. But that's what the language spec says. 
> 
> It has been an ongoing complaint that nobody actually implements the 
> hard parts of the language.

Heh. I never actually tried it, so I can't comment. I just assumed it 
would work. ;-)

>> Note that Eiffel Studio isn't the only implementation. There's Smart 
>> Eiffel (AKA Small Eiffel) that reguarly does quite well in the 
>> language shootout benchmarks... But either way, the libraries are very 
>> poor.
> 
> Unless you use Eiffel.NET.  *That* is the power of the .NET stuff, in my 
> view.

Depends. How good are the .NET libraries? [I hope to God they're better 
than the Java ones!]

>> [E.g., Eiffel provides strong generics support with a whole heap of 
>> infrastructure to support writing really generic code. So they 
>> designed one class for character I/O, and a completely unrelated one 
>> for binary I/O. GAH! >_< Why?!]
> 
> Meyers was really desiging a language for designing data structures in. 
> The data structure libraries are really nicely thought out. A shame the 
> *useful* stuff isn't there.

Yeah. Bloody type-I languages...

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message