1. Prior Releases
- Posted by jmduro May 08, 2015
- 2111 views
Hello,
I don't see versions between 2.0 and 3.11 on the Prior Releases Page.
I have still my old copies of 2.1, 2.2, 2.3, 2.4, 2.5, 3.0 and 3.1.
Could they be uploaded and added to the page?
Regards
Jean-Marc
2. Re: Prior Releases
- Posted by _tom (admin) May 08, 2015
- 2098 views
Hello,
I don't see versions between 2.0 and 3.11 on the Prior Releases Page.
I have still my old copies of 2.1, 2.2, 2.3, 2.4, 2.5, 3.0 and 3.1.
Could they be uploaded and added to the page?
Regards
Jean-Marc
This is a great idea. Please use the "Contact Admin" feature and flag your message Jim Brown: Prior Releases, since Jim Brown is needed for updates and uploads to the Euphoria form.
_tom
3. Re: Prior Releases
- Posted by fizzpopsoft May 10, 2015
- 2048 views
Hello,
if anybody wants them I have releases 2.0/2.1a/2.2/2.3a/2.3_pd/2.3b/2.3final/2.4/2.4b/2.5a/2.5b/2.5final . Licensed and public domain (limited statements)
Interestingly, one of these was a "mistake" where Rob Craig allowed for routines to be used before specified, probably as the parser is two-pass anyway.
He corrected that quickly as he believed that define-before-use was his philosophy for Euphoria. I'll check which one if anyone is interested.
Regards,
Alan
4. Re: Prior Releases
- Posted by jmduro May 10, 2015
- 2028 views
I have put a lot of missing Euphoria Prior Releases on my own Cloud page. I must say that a lot of Euphoria 2.x files are detected as containing a virus (I don't know which one), so I don't know if they will be available for download.
I sent an invite to download at openeuphoria@gmail.com.
We are still missing a few versions: 1.1 (if existing), 1.2-CE (broken link), 2.2-CE linux version.
Regards
Jean-Marc
5. Re: Prior Releases
- Posted by fizzpopsoft May 10, 2015
- 2016 views
Ok,
Do you want the beta's as well?
BTW, what is the status of Rob's source code as far as copyright is concerned?
I also have legit source for 2.3/2.4/2.5
Does anyone have v3.0?
6. Re: Prior Releases
- Posted by jmduro May 10, 2015
- 2022 views
Thank you Alan. I didn't notice Euphoria 3.0 files were missing too. I uploaded them.
I don't know the legal status of all those files. Some complete editions are yet available since monthes and Rob knows about that, so I suppose he agrees with that or the files would not appear in the Prior Releases page. I dont' give access to CE editions to anyone else as the OpenEuphoria team Rob is part of.
Regards
Jean-Marc
7. Re: Prior Releases
- Posted by Shian_Lee May 10, 2015
- 2023 views
Interestingly, one of these was a "mistake" where Rob Craig allowed for routines to be used before specified, probably as the parser is two-pass anyway.
He corrected that quickly as he believed that define-before-use was his philosophy for Euphoria.
It's not Rob's exclusive philosophy. It's fundamental. I guess Rob knows that very well...
It simply makes a better code and better coders. And it's a fundamental principle in most areas in life, physics, mechanics, martial-arts - almost anything. i.e.: you cannot use something that is not already exists. period.
Or, you cannot move an object without a source of energy. i.e. simple logic must follow the simplicity of nature itself.
I would be very very careful before I criticize Rob's work. Version 3.1.1 is still my favorite, because of its perfection. (my personal opinion).
8. Re: Prior Releases
- Posted by jimcbrown (admin) May 10, 2015
- 2014 views
Thank you Alan. I didn't notice Euphoria 3.0 files were missing too. I uploaded them.
Where? I checked but no one has sent me anything via the Contact Admin feature yet.
9. Re: Prior Releases
- Posted by jmduro May 10, 2015
- 2040 views
I shared the files once again 2 minutes ago. I hope you got an invitation on openeuphoria@gmail.com. It is the only mail address I know and I need one to share files with someone.
Regards
Jean-Marc
10. Re: Prior Releases
- Posted by jmduro May 10, 2015
- 2015 views
This is what I sent at 10:33 CET this morning:
11. Re: Prior Releases
- Posted by jimcbrown (admin) May 10, 2015
- 1976 views
I shared the files once again 2 minutes ago. I hope you got an invitation on openeuphoria@gmail.com. It is the only mail address I know and I need one to share files with someone.
Regards
Jean-Marc
Still not seeing it, several hours later. ChrisB, can you figure out what's happening here?
12. Re: Prior Releases
- Posted by jmduro May 10, 2015
- 2003 views
I think it is because of virus detected in PD files. I uploaded all files in a big all-in-one 7-zip archive and resent an invitation to download. Hopefully it will work now.
If not I will have to upload on the Rapideuphoria site.
Regards
Jean-Marc
13. Re: Prior Releases
- Posted by jimcbrown (admin) May 10, 2015
- 1990 views
I think it is because of virus detected in PD files. I uploaded all files in a big all-in-one 7-zip archive and resent an invitation to download. Hopefully it will work now.
If not I will have to upload on the Rapideuphoria site.
Regards
Jean-Marc
Try sending it directly to jimcbrown at openeuphoria dot org
I logged directly into gmail to get at the invite, but the website is in French (share.orange.fr) and it seems flakey (the connection keeps getting reset), so I'm having a hard time trying to get access to the files this way.
Better if you just email the files as an attachment to me.
14. Re: Prior Releases
- Posted by fizzpopsoft May 11, 2015
- 1979 views
I would be very very careful before I criticize Rob's work. Version 3.1.1 is still my favorite, because of its perfection. (my personal opinion).
I am not criticizing Rob's work, the 3.11 release is also my favorite for efficiency. In Rob's source code comments, you can see the LOTS of effort made to make Euphoria fast and efficient. That also caused Euphoria to be small.
But - when I write my own Euphoria code, it is structured something like this as its easier to follow for me:
a) Define global and public variables
b) Initialize variables
c) Define GUI
d) Open files
e) Main loop
f) Close files
g) Subroutines, procedures and functions
This structure is not allowed in earlier Euphoria versions, so procedures and functions were all over the place (kinda backwards) and it was difficult to follow - as a programmer, I spent a lot of time repeatedly going up and down in my own source.
The time spent to write, and especially to debug, which takes about 4 times longer than to write IMHO, is something that Rob was saying is faster/easier in Euphoria. Maybe. ;)
For me, its definitely faster to write and debug using my own structure, not enforced "define before use".
My program with the most customers is 9850 lines of source, even with a couple of my own includes so it would be just about impossible for me to maintain using "define before use". Perhaps I am a unskilled programmer, but why suffer if the recent Euphoria parser versions permit?
If you want to write your own Euphoria program in "define before use" structure you can - just like you can use GOTO if you want. (I don't BTW) but at least you have the choice now in later versions.
15. Re: Prior Releases
- Posted by Shian_Lee May 11, 2015
- 1935 views
But - when I write my own Euphoria code, it is structured something like this as its easier to follow for me:
a) Define global and public variables
b) Initialize variables
c) Define GUI
d) Open files
e) Main loop
f) Close files
g) Subroutines, procedures and functions
When I first joined this forum I said that Euphoria needs a rapid and serious IDE.
See, you don't need to adopt the language for each user preferences, because if you do so, the language will look like a supermarket. Instead, you must supply a good IDE where each user can change its view to support his own way of doing things.
A language must remain simple - specially Euphoria. An IDE is what was missing here. You could then debug and find your code very very quickly and easily.
People really underestimated my first post about the necessity of IDE, but even if you'll take the most rapid programming language - without a rapid IDE you're going nowhere.
16. Re: Prior Releases
- Posted by Shian_Lee May 11, 2015
- 1945 views
fizzpopsoft...
Strategy and Human engineering are not words in the dictionary. It's reality. It has been a reality for thousands of years already.
The famous Hangul alphabet is a good historical example for Human engineering. And it's also a good example for realistic and brave strategy, by that king.
As a result of that brave strategy (against China), the Hangul alphabet is also the modern alphabet of Korea.
Now tell me if Euphoria don't need both Strategy and Human engineering to survive.
17. Re: Prior Releases
- Posted by jimcbrown (admin) May 11, 2015
- 1922 views
The famous Hangul alphabet is a good historical example for Human engineering. And it's also a good example for realistic and brave strategy, by that king.
As a result of that brave strategy (against China), the Hangul alphabet is also the modern alphabet of Korea.
This shows a serious lack of understanding of history. Hangul is the modern alphabet of both Koreas, and it was invented/designed by King Sejong, but that's all you have correct. It was invented by King Sejong to improve literacy rates for commoners, but it failed to be adopted for hundreds of years. When it finally was adopted, it was for entirely different reasons (as part of the process of modernization).
Now tell me if Euphoria don't need both Strategy and Human engineering to survive.
Actually, I feel that your argument is closer to this. If you prefer 3.1.1, there is absolutely nothing wrong with that, but it almost seems like all changes made since then have only been a step down for you. Your strategy seems to be "no change at all", which requires little to no engineering.
If I have misunderstood you, then please enumerate the specific changes that you'd like to see in 3.1.2 or 3.2
18. Re: Prior Releases
- Posted by Shian_Lee May 11, 2015
- 1943 views
It was invented by King Sejong to improve literacy rates for commoners, but it failed to be adopted for hundreds of years.
Hangul failed to be adopted because of the extremely cruel and not human hierarchy in those dynasties, where people were treated worse then dogs and human lives were much cheaper then handful of rice. That is tightly related to China and Confucianism as well.
If I have misunderstood you, then please enumerate the specific changes that you'd like to see in 3.1.2 or 3.2
Not much. Of course it should support modern platforms, and as I said before: it should include the expected tools for creating applications: Good documentation, essential libraries and wrappers, good IDE and good setup programs for each OS.
By "Not much" I mean few keywords, such as public and export and probably I forgot something else.
19. OT: Re: Prior Releases
- Posted by jimcbrown (admin) May 11, 2015
- 1918 views
It was invented by King Sejong to improve literacy rates for commoners, but it failed to be adopted for hundreds of years.
Hangul failed to be adopted because of the extremely cruel and not human hierarchy in those dynasties,
Possibly. The literate at that time spent a lot of time, effort, and wealth to obtain that status, and many did not relish the idea of giving up what was perceived to be an elite status. Of course, there are plently of examples of the elite wanting to lock out the common folk in America today, so this can hardly be said to be unique to a partiulcar time or place.
where people were treated worse then dogs and human lives were much cheaper then handful of rice. That is tightly related to China and Confucianism as well.
While it's true that Confucianism is strongly hierarchial, the extraordinarily high value it placed on human life is well understood.
20. Re: Prior Releases
- Posted by jmduro May 11, 2015
- 1918 views
Try sending it directly to jimcbrown at openeuphoria dot org
Done. I have to check viruses for remaining files, mostly Linux versions before I can send them.
Regards
Jean-Marc
21. Re: Prior Releases
- Posted by jimcbrown (admin) May 11, 2015
- 1912 views
Try sending it directly to jimcbrown at openeuphoria dot org
Done. I have to check viruses for remaining files, mostly Linux versions before I can send them.
Regards
Jean-Marc
How annoying. GNU/Linux viruses are a rare breed after all...
22. OT: Re: Prior Releases
- Posted by Shian_Lee May 11, 2015
- 1914 views
Possibly.
Where did you get this word from? (possibly).
Confucianism
Confucianism in reality is 'lack of humanity'.
23. OT: Re: Prior Releases
- Posted by jimcbrown (admin) May 11, 2015
- 1907 views
Possibly.
Where did you get this word from? (possibly).
I think it's still a bit of a leap go from from 'elite wanting to block access' to 'extremely cruel and not human'
Confucianism in reality is 'lack of humanity'.
This is just plain wrong. Humanity is one of the virtues that Confucians are suppose to strive for.
24. Re: Prior Releases
- Posted by jmduro May 11, 2015
- 1929 views
How annoying. GNU/Linux viruses are a rare breed after all...
+1 
It may also be false positives. I need to check this evening (it's 2PM here).
25. OT: Re: Prior Releases
- Posted by Shian_Lee May 11, 2015
- 1906 views
Jim, excuse me, while I respect you as a very knowledgeable person, it is clear to me that your knowledge about this subject is plain shallow.
When I say 'not human' I mean the worse of the worse kind of slavery and mental and physical torture.
There is a terrible lack of understanding between West & East... terrible.
26. Re: Prior Releases
- Posted by jimcbrown (admin) May 11, 2015
- 1909 views
How annoying. GNU/Linux viruses are a rare breed after all...
+1 It may also be false positives. I need to check this evening (it's 2PM here).
After reading your email, I now imagine that it was Orange (the French website) checking those files for Windoze viruses ....
27. OT: Re: Prior Releases
- Posted by jimcbrown (admin) May 11, 2015
- 1914 views
Jim, excuse me, while I respect you as a very knowledgeable person, it is clear to me that your knowledge about this subject is plain shallow.
When I say 'not human' I mean the worse of the worse kind of slavery and mental and physical torture.
There is a terrible lack of understanding between West & East... terrible.
I admit to not being an expert historian on the topic, but even still.
This is getting too far off topic. You still haven't explained how you went from "alphabet failed to be adopted" to "worse of the worse kind of slavery and mental and physical torture".
Rather than fill up a programming forum with a long running debate on East Asian history, I'm going to take this offline. Further posts to this topic about this E.A. topic will be summarily deleted.
28. OT: Re: Prior Releases
- Posted by Shian_Lee May 11, 2015
- 1986 views
Rather than fill up a programming forum with a long running debate on East Asian history, I'm going to take this offline. Further posts to this topic about this E.A. topic will be summarily deleted.
You may as well delete my membership in this forum, if you don't mind - please.
29. OT: Re: Prior Releases
- Posted by jimcbrown (admin) May 11, 2015
- 1913 views
Rather than fill up a programming forum with a long running debate on East Asian history, I'm going to take this offline. Further posts to this topic about this E.A. topic will be summarily deleted.
You may as well delete my membership in this forum, if you don't mind - please.
No problem. Done.
30. Re: Prior Releases
- Posted by jimcbrown (admin) May 11, 2015
- 1915 views
This is what I sent at 10:33 CET this morning:
I've updated the PriorRleases page with the new files. Thank you for your contribution!
31. Re: Prior Releases
- Posted by ne1uno May 11, 2015
- 1903 views
This is what I sent at 10:33 CET this morning:
I've updated the PriorRleases page with the new files. Thank you for your contribution!
32. Re: Prior Releases
- Posted by jmduro May 11, 2015
- 1863 views
Thank you Jim,
I've sent you the 2.1 CE version which is still missing. As it is detected containing a DOS virus named Helforia (maybe not a real one), I had to encrypt it with ccrypt to get it forwarded by Orange.
Regards
Jean-Marc
33. Re: Prior Releases
- Posted by jmduro May 11, 2015
- 1878 views
Be careful, Helforia seems to be a dangerous Trojan. In doubt, maybe better delete the file. Sorry Jean-Marc
34. Re: Prior Releases
- Posted by fizzpopsoft May 11, 2015
- 1857 views
I will mail my copy of v2.1 CE as an attachment to openeuphoria@gmail.com
35. OT: Re: Prior Releases
- Posted by fizzpopsoft May 11, 2015
- 1888 views
Rather than fill up a programming forum with a long running debate on East Asian history, I'm going to take this offline. Further posts to this topic about this E.A. topic will be summarily deleted.
You may as well delete my membership in this forum, if you don't mind - please.
No problem. Done.
What do they say... "Be careful of what you wish for..." ;)
Sorry, could not resist! :)
36. Re: Prior Releases
- Posted by jimcbrown (admin) May 11, 2015
- 1890 views
Be careful, Helforia seems to be a dangerous Trojan. In doubt, maybe better delete the file. Sorry Jean-Marc
I've posted it up for now. If anyone reports problems, I'll take it down.
I will mail my copy of v2.1 CE as an attachment to openeuphoria@gmail.com
Thanks! I've posted this alternate version as well, just in case we have problems with the other download.
37. Re: Prior Releases
- Posted by fizzpopsoft May 11, 2015
- 1855 views
The missing dates in the download list are as follows:
2.1 = 1999
2.2 = 2001
2.3 = 2002
2.4 = 2003
2.5 = 2005
38. Re: Prior Releases
- Posted by jimcbrown (admin) May 11, 2015
- 1868 views
The missing dates in the download list are as follows:
2.1 = 1999
2.2 = 2001
2.3 = 2002
2.4 = 2003
2.5 = 2005
Thanks! I've fixed the dates. Now only the date for 3.0 is missing.
39. Re: Prior Releases
- Posted by Spock May 11, 2015
- 1858 views
If I have misunderstood you, then please enumerate the specific changes that you'd like to see in 3.1.2 or 3.2
Not much. Of course it should support modern platforms, and as I said before: it should include the expected tools for creating applications: Good documentation, essential libraries and wrappers, good IDE and good setup programs for each OS.
By "Not much" I mean few keywords, such as public and export and probably I forgot something else.
I agree with Shian in that, as regards the language, not much more was required to improve it. The main thing I would have wanted was forward routine calls (which I had been emulating using routine_id()). I never added the additional keywords public, export, override to Orac yet I get mostly the same control over exported/exposed symbols as does 4.0
I realize now, though, that this text based way of programming can be quite cumbersome when fundamental changes need to be made to large interconnected programs (includes). Anyway..
The other main change I would have wanted was genuine 32-bits integer. So many data conventions are based on the full bit depth that it would have made sense to accomodate them natively.
A wish list is a bit late now, I suppose. Even if someone did add these things to 3.2 what about any important bug fixes that went into 4.0 that later programs require? No. Too much work for someone.
Spock
40. Re: Prior Releases
- Posted by jmduro May 12, 2015
- 1865 views
A wish list is a bit late now, I suppose. Even if someone did add these things to 3.2 what about any important bug fixes that went into 4.0 that later programs require? No. Too much work for someone.
You have probably noticed that a lot of routines of 4.0 standard libraries are written in Euphoria and thus are portable to 3.1.
3.2 could be a 3.11 with standardized libraries as of 4.0. That would not be too much work and even I can do it. I have my own set of libraries I put in all my contributions, but I would update my programs if we could agree on a 4.0 based standard library.
Regards
Jean-Marc
41. Re: Prior Releases
- Posted by Spock May 12, 2015
- 1812 views
A wish list is a bit late now, I suppose. Even if someone did add these things to 3.2 what about any important bug fixes that went into 4.0 that later programs require? No. Too much work for someone.
You have probably noticed that a lot of routines of 4.0 standard libraries are written in Euphoria and thus are portable to 3.1.
3.2 could be a 3.11 with standardized libraries as of 4.0. That would not be too much work and even I can do it. I have my own set of libraries I put in all my contributions, but I would update my programs if we could agree on a 4.0 based standard library.
Regards
Jean-Marc
Hi Jean-Marc,
Yes. Many of the standard libraries in 4.0 could easily be ported to 3.2 but the changes I referred to would require significant changes to the parser and back end, ie, to the language itself as opposed to any standard include files. And, as noted, any internal bug fixes would also be missed. Still, nice try.
Spock
