OpenEuphoria

2. Re: Ubuntu on tabets

• Posted by jimcbrown (admin) Feb 28, 2013
• 2521 views

Maybe getting the look&feel of an Android app?

Yes. I have Debian and Android on a Nook Color.

4. Re: Ubuntu on tabets

• Posted by EUWX Feb 28, 2013
• 2512 views

Does Linux version of Euphoria run on this installation?

6. Re: Ubuntu on tabets

• Posted by EUWX Feb 28, 2013
• 2506 views

If you read the statement and treat people presuming they do know quite a bit when they come to this kind of a forum, then you would not digress from the thrust of my statement...... which was

"With the introduction of Ubuntu on tablets, there should not be a need for separate version of Euphoria for android tablets, unless , of course, you do not want to install Ubuntu on your tablet."

8. Re: Ubuntu on tabets

• Posted by EUWX Feb 28, 2013
• 2490 views

I will reply at length.
"You" in the following refers to the developer community and not necessarily to "Matt Lewis."
"Tablets" in the following refers to mainly the ARM processor based devices, which are gradually replacing the laptops. Specifically I am not including Windows tablets very recently introduced by Microsoft.

You have a Windows and Linux version of Euphoria (and a Mac version).
Tablets came roaring into the picture, with the Android OS.
You created a separate Android version of Euphoria.
As somebody pointed out earlier in this thread, there is a Debian Linux available on tablets, but I doubt if it (i.e. "Debian on tablets")can run Euphoria.

Most of the Tablets come with ARM processors. The Linux developers have had to work hard to create separate distros for each of the versions of ARM processor. That is the only way they could give Linux to the tablets.

I have repeatedly tried to draw your attention to the announcement by Linus of kernel version 3.7. The latest stable version is 3.7.9. This kernel is designed to merge all the Arm version kernels into one and generally make Linux usability on tablets a "fait accompli". In the discussions on Raspberry PI, (which uses Arm v6), I tried to alert you all about Arch Linux now using (I think) kernel 3.7.5, which would theoretically be the distro to work on to get Euphoria on Raspberry Pi, and (with due respect to the efforts of RKD and ..... ) NOT with Raspbian, which is still not using kernel 3.7.x.

Since you, Matt, are very much at home with Ubuntu and/or Ubuntu derivatives, it might be worth your looking at:
http://ubuntuarena.wordpress.com/2013/02/19/installupgrade-to-linux-kernel-3-7-9-in-ubuntulinux-mint/
If euphoria works comfortably on modified kernel of Ubuntu or Mint, then you probably have a Linux/Euphoria for all x86, and Arm processor based devices - one common Linux and Linux/Euphoria.

Coming back to the current statement at the start of this thread, the Ubuntu people have announced a version of Ubuntu on 25-28th February, 2013 which will work on ALL tablets. It probably is a kernel 3.7.9 based or even Kernel 3.8.x based version. The latter will drop i386 support. It is only announced. If you follow my Url, they are asking you to sign in to be kept informed of the progress.

You all have limited amount of time, and instead of spending a lot of time on the older Linuxes based on kernel 3.6 and lower, it might be prudent to focus on Kernel 3.7.9 based distros. Tablets are taking over the whole IT market at the lower level of expenditure. Some other time, I will talk about the multi-CPU or multi-SOC boards that are coming out and will become available even at hobby level. There also Euphoria is well suited to be a language of choice, instead of Python.

Having made a carefully worded statement based on current progress in the Linux kernels and relationship to ARM fired tablets, I did not expect to be talked down with statements like, "We have an Android version of Euphoria" .... This so called Android version will only work on Andriod device x, but not on y, etc etc. For Euphoria implementation, the direction I would suggest is to get a Linux version that works as Linux whether or not the underlying processor is ARM or Intel/AMD. In that context, it would worth keeping an eye on what the Ubuntu people come up with.

10. Re: Ubuntu on tabets

• Posted by jimcbrown (admin) Mar 01, 2013
• 2450 views

Yes, that's what I said. (Well, Android-IA/Android-x86 tablets could run the x86 version of Euphoria... but the point is that they all run the same binaries that'd be run on a purely non-Android Linux/GNU installation. Nearly all Android tablets are ARM-based though (and the image used by the installer that BRyan pointed out is a version of Linux/GNU for ARM), so it probably needs to be an ARM platform build of the Linu/GNU version of Euphoria to work.)

If you knew as much as you claimed about this topic, you would have realized the importance and usefulness of my reply and you would not have made the above statement. My conclusion - you understand very little about ARM vs Intel or Android vs Linux/GNU.

12. Re: Ubuntu on tabets

• Posted by mattlewis (admin) Mar 01, 2013
• 2466 views

Euphoria itself is not terribly low level as far as working with hardware and the kernel. I think that perhaps the old version of multi-tasking was broken eventually by stack smashing protection, and maybe that came from the kernel, but for the most part, kernel version doesn't really matter.

What matters is that ARM devices use a totally different instruction set and have significantly different behaviors in some places. Notably, we have to worry about alignment of data when we read floating point numbers and some instances where casting behaves differently than it does on x86.

When your code has run for so long on a particular architecture, it can take a lot of effort and testing just to find all of the places where you have made assumptions about behavior on that architecture, and even longer to fix. We've recently found places where we were relying on implementation details of x86 for things that are undefined in the C standard.

I started down that road a couple of years ago when I started porting euphoria to x86-64. I think that x86-64 support is pretty solid, but ARM hasn't received nearly as much attention, and has more work to get it right. There are also OSX issues, which are difficult to fix since none of the active developers have access to OSX.

So, as Jim has emphasized multiple times, the biggest problem is just getting the ARM implementation solid. Then we should be good to go on any Linux distro running on ARM, assuming that there aren't any major differences between various ARM processors.

Matt

14. Re: Ubuntu on tabets

• Posted by EUWX Mar 01, 2013
• 2405 views

1. http://jiggawatt.org/badc0de/android/eu/
2. I have on my hard drive: android-eu-4.0a3.zip
3. a also have eubin-arm-cortex-a8-2012-01-13-ee49c6b8a340.tar.gz
4. AND I also have an interesting cnversation where a mod by the name of "jimcbrown" corrected a very knowledgeable person by the name "Ira" in that thread, which I am sure you would find an interesting reread. http://openeuphoria.org/forum/m/117399.wc

16. Re: Ubuntu on tabets

• Posted by mattlewis (admin) Mar 01, 2013
• 2426 views

I'm not really sure what you're trying to say here. We have a single code base. All architectures and platform support are in the same files.

I don't think you grok what's going on there. The big issue is how the OS talks to the hardware, which is handled by the kernel in Linux. For a user space developer not targeting anything hardware specific, we only really care about stuff like the instruction set and how well the compiler supports that. So long as a single binary can work among various versions of ARM processors, euphoria is fine. The hardware stuff is abstracted for us by the kernel.

The kernel stuff you're linking to is talking about simply getting the OS to work on a particular device. On x86, they can simply throw everything in the kernel, and then ask your computer what it has and go from there. They can't do that on ARM, so a lot of customization needed to be done. As I read this news, it means they have some workarounds for ARM as far as figuring out which hardware stuff they need to load, so that people can distribute a single blob that loads up the right stuff instead of having a blob for each widget and making sure widget owners use the correct blob. Again, this is all much lower level than we need to worry about.

Matt

18. Re: Ubuntu on tabets

• Posted by EUWX Mar 01, 2013
• 2360 views

It seems you do agree with Linus to the extent that he has given you "a single ARM kernel image that is able to boot multiple hardware" and you like "a single binary can work among various versions of ARM processors".

20. Re: Ubuntu on tabets

• Posted by jimcbrown (admin) Mar 22, 2013
• 2335 views

Yes.

Ok, fair point. A linux-arm version is required to do a native Android version (except for Android-x86), and since the ARM platforms that were easiest to access were probably Android devices, it was easy (even for a dev like myself) to call the linux-arm version an Android version.

However, you seemed to argue that there is a distinction below:

I first read this as meaning that there should not be a separate version of Euphoria for linux-arm and another for native Android. (By "native Android" I mean a version that can be installed via an APK manager, and which uses the Android SDK (like android.widgets) to provide a native look a feel.)

You've sinced clarified what you meant, but other devs have agreed that what we have is still not a native Android and a distinction exists between an Android app and a plain linux-arm binary that lacks such integration (even though a liux-arm binary can, under the right conditions, run on an Android platform).

Therefore, I'll reiterate what I said:

My understanding was that this was (despite the name) a port of the Linux/GNU version to the ARM platform, not a native Android port.

Other than in the sense of the lack of multiarch support in a single binary, we do not have different versions of Euphoria for x86 and ARM. It's all the same thing.

I don't see any contradiction. Other than the link itself, the term Android is not even used in that thread.

22. Re: Ubuntu on tabets

• Posted by mattlewis (admin) Mar 22, 2013
• 2282 views

And the problem with you, Mr EUWX, is that you seem to think that this has some sort of bearing on euphoria. Or any other userland program, for that matter.

Why? What difference does a 3.7 kernel make to a euphoria developer? You keep going on about this, and have yet to tell us why we should care about this new kernel. This is important for people who build linux distributions. This is not important for people who build linux applications.

To get a native android port of euphoria, we probably would need to target euphoria on the JVM (or, I guess, Dalvik, but it ought to be about the same thing). It might be kinda cool to be able to write android apps using euphoria instead of java, but I don't see this happening any time soon. And it's completely totally absolutely categorically positively unequivocally unrelated to the version of the linux kernel.

Matt

24. Re: Ubuntu on tabets

• Posted by DerekParnell (admin) Mar 23, 2013
• 2146 views

I'm not a Linux person so excuse any mistaken comments here ... however could you please explain exactly what is in KERNEL 3.7.9 that prevents the current Linux edition of Euphoria from running on Linux releases that are based on that kernel?

26. Re: Ubuntu on tabets

• Posted by DerekParnell (admin) Mar 23, 2013
• 2125 views

Thank you for your response, and I have no idea why someone deleted it as it was not offensive.

Firstly I don't think you answered my question at all.

Secondly, I'm confused as to what your issue is? Is it simply that you'd like to see Euphoria as a development platform for Android apps? If so, yes that would be great but I fail to see why specific Linux kernels are an issue as Euphoria's implementation does not rely on kernel specifics. So long as the host operation system's API is callable etc ... Euphoria should be able to be ported to any flavor of Linux.

28. Re: Ubuntu on tabets

• Posted by DerekParnell (admin) Mar 24, 2013
• 2168 views

Well, if was up for a vote, this doesn't seem compelling enough for me to vote for deletion. This instance isn't, per se, being disruptive and stupidity by itself is no reason for discrimination.

I'm not seeing 'troll' behaviour here, just a mild form of thick-headedness.

30. Re: Ubuntu on tabets

• Posted by jimcbrown (admin) Mar 24, 2013
• 2175 views

I suppose you're right. I feel that care must be taken to prevent this sort of thing from turning into flooding (which I believe would be disruptive), but I may have my meter calibrated too high.

I am - perhaps not in this instance, but in general.

We are talking about a poster who has tried to raise this topic on virtually every recent ARM thread, after all.

Also, I feel that, if the poster was an idiot but sincere, then my question would have been answered straightforwardly, as opposed to being given a vague description as a response and then ignored.

32. Re: Ubuntu on tabets

• Posted by mattlewis (admin) Mar 24, 2013
• 2067 views

Maybe. I built a mostly working version of euphoria that used the MS CLR. I'm not familiar with the JVM or Dalvik, but I think it could be done. The biggest problem I had was performance. We use some low level details to keep integers, atoms and sequences straight, and I hadn't figured out a good way to deal with that.

But I was able to translate euphoria IL into the asm that the CLR uses. I would think that something similar could be done with Java, though I admit I'm not at all familiar with Java bytecode. Of course, you also have to write the runtime library, which probably isn't terribly difficult, though that's another place where the Java code probably won't be as efficient as the current C code.

Matt

34. Re: Ubuntu on tabets

• Posted by EUWX Mar 24, 2013
• 2115 views

I DO NOT report trivialities nor do I report irrelevant items.

The stuff I WROTE above about new Linux kernels has EVERYTHING to do with Euphoria.

I beg to differ on that very fundamental understanding of Linux and trends in Linux.
I am definitely not a practical Linux or Euphoria developer, but my understanding of various OSes and language level software is quite deep.
I certainly will NOT post any more news in this area as there is reluctance to accept something new or different.

One day it will dawn upon you that Euphoria (like any software) under changing Kernels of Linux usually implies some problem and reworking and modifications, but as I tried to convince you in this discussion, that when the Kernel changes to 3.7.9 and above it will make it SIMPLER to rework or to address problems with Raspberry Pi and Android versions. Till that understanding comes you will find that you will not succeed bringing Euphoria COMFORTABLY to RP and tablets.

In my research, I did come across an interesting phenomenon about Linux developers. Those who work with and understand the Kernel are very different from those who use a distro and modify it or to create software working under the distros. You are distro user and i am talking about the Kernel.

Best of British luck to you, as they say.

36. Re: Ubuntu on tabets

• Posted by mattlewis (admin) Mar 25, 2013
• 1977 views

It won't mean a thing as far as euphoria development goes. I'll try one more time: the 3.7 changes make it easier for those building Linux distributions, since they don't have to custom build a kernel based on the hardware of the target device, but can follow something like the x86 PnP model where the kernel can ship with the kitchen sink and just query the hardware to figure out what it needs. This capability wasn't there before for ARM.

Perhaps you are right, and this will revolutionize application development, but you're the first person to have this insight. If someone were trying to build a device based on euphoria, you would have a point, but it still wouldn't have anything to do with euphoria. It's all about the hardware and building the abstraction layer between the hardware and rest of the system. This is one job of the Linux kernel.

Uh, yes, I've never claimed to be a kernel hacker. And that would certainly give you a different view of the world. Of course, as Raymond Chen has pointed out, seeing the world through kernel colored glasses isn't necessarily a good thing. The neat thing about the 3.7 kernel is not how it makes it easier to make software work with distros. That hasn't changed. It's easier to make distros work with different ARM devices and whatever hardware comes with them.

You are talking about the kernel, but you don't understand what you are saying.

Matt

38. Re: Ubuntu on tabets

• Posted by mattlewis (admin) Mar 25, 2013
• 1949 views

LOL. Sure, you have the right to say all of these things, and the rest of us have the right to laugh at you when you insist that that 2+2=5. While I'm not an expert at the internals of the Linux kernel, I can read and understand the english language, and I have read about the changes to the kernel and think they are a very good thing, and will probably make the life of people who produce devices using ARM processors a lot easier.

So when Linus, et. al. say that the changes in the 3.7+ kernels will allow the kernel to autodetect hardware on ARM devices, I can be confident that this is what is going on. I /am/ an expert on euphoria development, and I am completely confident that we do not have any role in informing the kernel about hardware that is present on the device.

I am uncertain why you are so certain that we do. Perhaps you have knowledge that Linus himself does not. I am relatively confident, however, that you do not. Have you ever met anyone anywhere on the internet that agrees with you in this ridiculous belief of yours?

In other words: I am intrigued by your ideas and would like to subscribe to your newsletter.

Matt

PS: I would rather play with a harmless kook than outright ban him, but others are probably less fond of kookery. And this obsession of yours with low level kernel details and their imagined applicability to something like euphoria is entering kook territory.

40. Re: Ubuntu on tabets

• Posted by jimcbrown (admin) Mar 26, 2013
• 1891 views

Popular Electronics, Janurary 1975.

Having worked with many Systems Analysts, I don't understand why you would havehad such knowledge of OS and language development - that's the specialty of the programmer. In any case, I'll note that your professional knowledge on this matter is out of date (1988!).

Again, I can't the inconsistency between your claims to such knowledge (even back then) and what you have claimed in this thread about the relation between Euphoria and the Linux kernel (which individuals such as rkdavis, jaygade, and mattlewis have throughly refuted).

Why not spell out what in your "very fundamental understanding" leads you to think that this relationship exists? Or perhaps you already did, and found your arguments thoroughly refuted.

Ah, to go from Project Leader to a reporter...

Well, you raised an idea, and then I stated that this was already the case, that it already worked ( http://openeuphoria.org/forum/m/120997.wc ) So far, so good...

Then you derailed your own thread by:

Bringing up irrelevant points about Linux 3.7 and stating that they were relevant, backed only by your "very fundamental understanding of Linux and trends in Linux".

Falsely claiming that I had contradicted myself.

Asking that the community take on a non-existent problem! ( http://openeuphoria.org/forum/m/121183.wc )

This greatly outweighed any help you could have provided by starting this thread.

My point in responding to this is to make it clear that this community does not have a problem with accepting help, or acknowledging new members. Any issues EUWX has had in attempting to work with us are self-inflicted. Hopefully, newbies can learn from this thread what NOT to do.

It has this now - http://wiki.nars2000.org/index.php/System_Function_Native_Files - looks like it was only added within the last year or so.

Gambas? xbasic?

Get a blog?

More excellent reasons to start a blog.

Forked into: Various languages for practical use