1. wxEuphoria v0.15.0

I've released wxEuphoria v0.15.0 and wxIDE v0.6.0.

I've included a 64-bit build of wxEuphoria that can be used with a 64-bit build of euphoria 4.1 (there's also a link to download a current build from the hg repo).

The big change for wxIDE is that it has a working (though still pretty rudimentary) visual designer that uses sizers to place and resize your controls.

Matt

new topic     » topic index » view message » categorize

2. Re: wxEuphoria v0.15.0

I downloaded full 32 bit linux - and once again there is no configure and no makefile.gcc

Is there something I am not understanding?

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

3. Re: wxEuphoria v0.15.0

penpal0andrew said...

I downloaded full 32 bit linux - and once again there is no configure and no makefile.gcc

Is there something I am not understanding?

Assuming you downloaded the "full" version, the Makefile and configure script should be in the src directory.

Matt

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

4. Re: wxEuphoria v0.15.0

mattlewis said...

I've released wxEuphoria v0.15.0 and wxIDE v0.6.0.

I've included a 64-bit build of wxEuphoria that can be used with a 64-bit build of euphoria 4.1 (there's also a link to download a current build from the hg repo).

The big change for wxIDE is that it has a working (though still pretty rudimentary) visual designer that uses sizers to place and resize your controls.

Matt

Thanks for the new offering.
Is the use of wxWidgets 29.1 languishing because of lack or time (understandable) or because of bugs and problems (Can i help?)

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

5. Re: wxEuphoria v0.15.0

Vinoba said...

Thanks for the new offering.
Is the use of wxWidgets 29.1 languishing because of lack or time (understandable) or because of bugs and problems (Can i help?)

I've stayed with 2.8 so far mainly because that's what wxWidgets considers stable (though they believe that 2.9 is pretty robust). If you're running Linux, your package manager is probably still on 2.8, as well. Also, yes, time is definitely a factor.

I'm definitely open to anyone who wants to help. Development of wrappers for 2.8 is pretty straight forward at this point. I'd recommend first looking at the wxEuphoria Developers section of the wxEuphoria documentation first. The wrapper functions in C++ are pretty straight forward, for the most part, and there are lots of examples from which to base new stuff. Most of the other wrapping is done automatically, except for adding an entry per function to the exports.lbc file for Watcom.

Anyways, please take a look at that, and let me know if you have more questions.

Getting 2.9 up and running will take a bit more work. I think they made some changes to the way wxStrings work, which may require a bit of work in the guts of the library. I don't know how many classes have gone away. I'd imagine the build system is fairly similar, but I haven't really looked.

Another thing I've been wanting to do is to start using MinGW builds for Windows. I haven't been able to build anything with Watcom since 2.8.7.

Matt

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

6. Re: wxEuphoria v0.15.0

mattlewis said...

I've stayed with 2.8 so far mainly because that's what wxWidgets considers stable (though they believe that 2.9 is pretty robust).

wxWidget site says: “2.9 series bring many improvements compared to 2.8 series and, in spite of being called a development release, we believe that 2.9.1 can be used in production environment, especially for the new projects for which (small) changes in behaviour since 2.8 are not a problem.”

mattlewis said...

Also, yes, time is definitely a factor.

That’s understandabl;e.

mattlewis said...

I'd recommend first looking at the wxEuphoria Developers section The wrapper functions in C++ are pretty straight forward, for the most part, and there are lots of examples from which to base new stuff.

I will have a look. For a long time, for me, a complex Assembler program looked exceedingly simple, and conversely, a simple C or C++ was a big challenge to me.

mattlewis said...

Getting 2.9 up and running will take a bit more work. I think they made some changes to the way wxStrings work,

wxWidgets site says pf 2.9 “(small) changes in behaviour since 2.8” I do not buy that argument. It is also completely Unicode so even your English language Ascii page would have to be brought up to 2 bytes level like Microsoft’s internals. We can have debate whether or not to go UTF-8 route (your preference for Linus would tend to drag you that way), but as of now, there is no problem with memory availability, and since Euphoria is already at 4 bytes per character level, one might stick to a 32 bit (or rather 21 bit) level . Welcome, Chinese audience!
C, C++ and assembler routines to convert are already available and debugged, and would, in any case, be easy to develop in Eu. At a personal level, I have a problem with variable number of two bytes per Indic word. Simply put, the complexity (variable number of bytes) is exactly same as with UTF-8 to ANSI and vice versa. I am in the process of solving my problem using location E000 private pages of Unicode.

mattlewis said...

Another thing I've been wanting to do is to start using MinGW builds for Windows. I haven't been able to build anything with Watcom since 2.8.7.

I think I have somewhere in my hardware, a cheat sheet of conversion of C level string functions to bring it all to Microsoft’s two byte per character. It is a major overhaul of Euphoria to get it to that level and then you would use MinGW or Visual C++ easily. However, since Euphoria does not really have a string type, it might be fairly easy.
I have toyed with the idea of doing it but my mental block against C++ stops me from going ahead.

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

7. Re: wxEuphoria v0.15.0

Vinoba said...
mattlewis said...

Getting 2.9 up and running will take a bit more work. I think they made some changes to the way wxStrings work,

wxWidgets site says pf 2.9 “(small) changes in behaviour since 2.8” I do not buy that argument. It is also completely Unicode so even your English language Ascii page would have to be brought up to 2 bytes level like Microsoft’s internals. We can have debate whether or not to go UTF-8 route (your preference for Linus would tend to drag you that way), but as of now, there is no problem with memory availability, and since Euphoria is already at 4 bytes per character level, one might stick to a 32 bit (or rather 21 bit) level . Welcome, Chinese audience!
C, C++ and assembler routines to convert are already available and debugged, and would, in any case, be easy to develop in Eu.

Actually, I remembered incorrectly. It's 3.0 that has big changes to strings in wxWidgets. wxEuphoria already has code that converts sequences to wxString (for both ANSI and Unicode wxWidgets builds). In the C++ wxEuphoria code, converting a sequence to a string looks like this (showing the full wrapper from wxEuphoria.cpp):

object WXEUAPI  message_box(object s1, object s2, intptr_t ok) 
{ 
	intptr_t ret = wxMessageBox( get_string(s1), get_string(s2), ok ); 
 
	wxDeRefDS( s1 ); 
	wxDeRefDS( s2 ); 
	return ret; 
} 

You can see the two calls to get_string(). That's a function that I wrote that does the conversion from a sequence to what wxWidgets wants. They use a UTF-16 sort of encoding. There are also wrapped functions for converting to/from UTF-8 (part of wxWidgets). So the user can use either way, right out of the box (assuming he uses a Unicode build of wxWidgets, of course).

Vinoba said...

I have toyed with the idea of doing it but my mental block against C++ stops me from going ahead.

The C++ coding to simply add new wrappers to wxEuphoria is pretty trivial at this point.

Matt

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

8. Re: wxEuphoria v0.15.0

mattlewis said...

Development of wrappers for 2.8 is pretty straight forward at this point. I'd recommend first looking at the wxEuphoria Developers section of the wxEuphoria documentation first. .... Most of the other wrapping is done automatically, except for adding an entry per function to the exports.lbc file for Watcom.

Matt

Looks simple. I will try.
I hope my computer or monitor does not explode!!!

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

Search



Quick Links

User menu

Not signed in.

Misc Menu