Re: ANN: SmartEiffel 1.2 (transitional) project

Daniel F Moisset a écrit :

>
>The second best option (to me) after an standard, is a high-quality
>open-source implementation. It has to be so good that it establishes
>itself as a defacto standard. There is no such thing today; SE has a lot
>of unpolished edges, 
>

could you please develop this point and enumerate which are these 
"unpolished edges" ?

I had the impression that the purpose of the SE team was also  to have a 
"so good"
compiler " that it establishes itself as a defacto standard".

What did they miss ?

>and VE  (the open source version) has not much of a
>community behind. So the choices are:
>
> 1 start a new free compiler
> 2 fork away from an existing one
> 3 improve an existing one
>
>  
>
Why not to help the present SE team to "polish" its compiler, rather 
than doing a new one?
Is it so badly written ?

Thank you to give me an answer.

Best regards
-- 
François Colonna
telephone: 
until 1:pm 33-1 40 19 92 38
from  2:pm 33-1 44 27 42 11