1. Extensions for EUPHORIA proposals

  • Posted by SDPringle Aug 18, 2008
  • 1079 views

Before we vote let us understand the different options:

EXD proposal : exd - DOS32, exw - Any GUI program (!DOS32), ex - Generic platform 1,2,3 proposal: ex - Generic AND DOS32, exw - Windows 32, exu - LINUX, FREEBSD, OSX one extension proposal : ex - All platforms and generic alike.

Are there any other proposals before we debate which one is the best?

Shawn

new topic     » topic index » view message » categorize

2. Re: Extensions for EUPHORIA proposals

  • Posted by jeremy (admin) Aug 18, 2008
  • 1041 views
SDPringle said...

Before we vote let us understand the different options:

EXD proposal: exd - DOS32, exw - Any GUI program (!DOS32), ex - Generic console

platform 1,2,3 proposal: ex - Generic AND DOS32, exw - Windows 32, exu - LINUX, FREEBSD, OSX

one extension proposal : ex - All platforms and generic alike.

Are there any other proposals before we debate which one is the best?

I think it's important to understand the issue first. For instance, the issue will totally remove the 2nd option above from the list and the 3rd.

The problem with the 2nd is that generic programs are tied to ex.exe. So, things like irc_console.ex will be ran under ex.exe, which will not work. irc_console.ex uses open_dll() as many console programs do. Thus, linking .ex to ex.exe is a bad idea. DOS programs are the minority, they should be the ones to take on a special extension, .exd.

Now, you have more problems with .ex. This is fine in a Linux, FreeBSD or OS X world as they only have "exu" as the interpreter, but on windows we have three getlost ex.exe, exw.exe and exwc.exe ... So, how would you know which .exe to run or link to in the registry if you were going to run a .ex file?

Therefore, I think the last 2 options are off the list, leaving only one option left. Now, there could be other options we have not thought of and maybe we should consider. Are there other plans out there?

Jeremy

new topic     » goto parent     » topic index » view message » categorize

3. Re: Extensions for EUPHORIA proposals

  • Posted by ChrisB (moderator) Aug 18, 2008
  • 1067 views

Hi

I took issue with Jeremy over this once before, but on further reflection :-

All euphoria programs, on all platforms, should have the same extension. The script itself should determine whether it is able to run (using the ifdef or platform system), and any further requirements. The name of the translators should be different for each platform (to indicate that they are running on different platforms)

Since all programmers would want to keep their extensions for their platform, might I suggest a completly new extension system .eup for a runnable script, runnable on all platforms .eh for an include, or euphoria 'header' file

Just some wild thoughts.

Chris

new topic     » goto parent     » topic index » view message » categorize

4. Re: Extensions for EUPHORIA proposals

SDPringle said...

Before we vote let us understand the different options ...

My view is that regardless of what you guys decide, I'll be removing all connections between Euphoria and specific file extensions. On my system, I want text editors to open the source files when I open them. I don't want to run them at all, I want to edit them.

new topic     » goto parent     » topic index » view message » categorize

5. Re: Extensions for EUPHORIA proposals

  • Posted by jeremy (admin) Aug 18, 2008
  • 1060 views
DerekParnell said...
SDPringle said...

Before we vote let us understand the different options ...

My view is that regardless of what you guys decide, I'll be removing all connections between Euphoria and specific file extensions. On my system, I want text editors to open the source files when I open them. I don't want to run them at all, I want to edit them.

That's already what I do smile However, I think this goes further than just window associations but it goes to common practice which I think is something we should strive to have in common smile

One person using ex to mean a dos program, exw to mean a windows program, another with ex as a unix program, yet another with exg for a gui program. Further, what for a cross-platform? There has been no set standard for that yet. It seems like it is assumed that although Euphoria is a cross-platform language that no one uses it in a cross-platform manner sad

Jeremy

new topic     » goto parent     » topic index » view message » categorize

6. Re: Extensions for EUPHORIA proposals

jeremy said...
DerekParnell said...

My view is that regardless of what you guys decide, I'll be removing all connections between Euphoria and specific file extensions. On my system, I want text editors to open the source files when I open them. I don't want to run them at all, I want to edit them.

That's already what I do smile However, I think this goes further than just window associations but it goes to common practice which I think is something we should strive to have in common smile

Yeah, I know. Just wanted to make sure that there are a multitude of needs.

jeremy said...

One person using ex to mean a dos program, exw to mean a windows program, another with ex as a unix program, yet another with exg for a gui program. Further, what for a cross-platform? There has been no set standard for that yet. It seems like it is assumed that although Euphoria is a cross-platform language that no one uses it in a cross-platform manner sad

Ok then ...

Extension DOS *nix Windows
ex ex.exe exu exwc.exe
exg ex.exe exu exwc.exe
exu ex.exe exu exw.exe
exw ex.exe exu exw.exe
new topic     » goto parent     » topic index » view message » categorize

7. Re: Extensions for EUPHORIA proposals

  • Posted by ryanj Aug 18, 2008
  • 1035 views

How about this?

Platform Extension Interpreter
DOS .exd exd.exe
Windows .exw exw.exe
Windows Console .exwc exwc.exe
Unix,Linux,BSD,OSX .exu exu
Generic .ex any
new topic     » goto parent     » topic index » view message » categorize

8. Re: Extensions for EUPHORIA proposals

  • Posted by jeremy (admin) Aug 18, 2008
  • 1052 views

I think the idea is to simplify. For instance, no other interpreter I know of has 5 file extensions just to state platform. DOS is the odd man out, so I would not give it the coveted .ex extension. .ex should be generic, cross platform. It would be nice for us not to need exw and exwc, but I am not sure of the inner workings of that. In fact, it would be nice not to have to have ex.exe, exw.exe or exwc.exe... and where does ex come from anyway? shouldn't it be euphoria.exe smile

Jeremy

new topic     » goto parent     » topic index » view message » categorize

9. Re: Extensions for EUPHORIA proposals

  • Posted by ChrisB (moderator) Aug 19, 2008
  • 1041 views

Or how about

Platform Extension Interpreter DOS .exd exd.exe Windows .exw exw.exe Windows Console .exwc exwc.exe Unix,Linux,BSD,OSX .exu exu Generic .ex any

Platform Extension Interpreter
Dos .eup exd.exe
Windows .eup exw.exe
Windows Console .eup exwc.exe
*nix, BSD etc .eup exu
Generic .eup any
Euphoria include, or header file
.eh

Then 1st few lines of your program (even make a standard include) (pseudocode) 

ifdef not platform LINUX then 
       puts(1,"This program is designed for the Linux platform") 
end ifdef

etc

Otherwise put a comment at the top of the main file

(This is just as constraining to the coder as saying you have to run with this program to whoever runs the program).

Or, program run with exd 

ifdef not platform WINDOWS_CONSOLE 
       create a batch file to run the program with exwc 
       exit 
elsifdef WINDOWS_CONSOLE 
       delete the batch file if created\\ 
end ifdef

The program would (hopefully) transparently restart with the correct interpreter.

Chris

new topic     » goto parent     » topic index » view message » categorize

10. Re: Extensions for EUPHORIA proposals

I think what ever is decided exwc.exe which doesn't open a new console window is the prefered program for use at the command line and exw.exe is what should be associated to what everextension is deemed to be GUI.

It is also understood that there will be an include extension for each program extension.

So, what if we have one extension for all platforms? Then we need to put ifdef end ifdef at the top level of the program and the user will see all of these icons that look runable and they do run but most give do not setup a Windowed environment and under UNIX like OSes they appear to crash for the message wouldn't even become visible to the user.

The user should see two different kinds of program files: Console and GUI. That means at least two extensions. The platform DOS32 is most unlike the others and with some meta data techniques you might be able to have the DOS interpreter execute its Windows cousin with the same arguments inspite of these differences. Yet it is a lot of defining stubs for routines that exist on one and not on the other. It seems like a lot of work for just DOS. I don't think there is a such a thing as a generic EUPHORIA program. Either it is console based or GUI but I have not yet recognized one as both.

Shawn Pringle

new topic     » goto parent     » topic index » view message » categorize

11. Re: Extensions for EUPHORIA proposals

  • Posted by jcmarsh Aug 21, 2008
  • 985 views
  • Last edited Aug 22, 2008

How about defining a list of preferred interpreter(s) at the top of main if the program is not generic, or a list of unsupported interpreter(s).

Psuedo code: 

run_with exwc,exw -- this would look for these interpreters in order 
 
only run_with exwc,exw -- this would look for these interpreters then fail if it doesn't find one 
 
unsupported ex,exu -- this would run on all interpreters except the ones listed

Or something like that. I am not very familiar with the naming conventions in Euphoria 4.0

new topic     » goto parent     » topic index » view message » categorize

Search



Quick Links

User menu

Not signed in.

Misc Menu