1. binded wxEuphoria files
- Posted by Jerry Story <jstory at ocii.com>
Jun 27, 2005
-
Last edited Jun 28, 2005
First I bindu a wxEuphoria program, either a wxEuphoria demo or one of my own.
Then I type ./prog
I get the following message:
[quote]
Syntax error - expected to see an expression, not a procedure
return call_func(ctors[2][DD],{DC})
[/quote]
???
There is no "call_func" in the demo or in my program.
I'm running EU 2.4 and Mandrake 9.2
Did anyone succeed in getting a binded wxEuphoria program to run on Linux?
2. Re: binded wxEuphoria files
Jerry Story wrote:
>
> First I bindu a wxEuphoria program, either a wxEuphoria demo or one of my own.
>
> Then I type ./prog
> I get the following message:
>
> [quote]
> Syntax error - expected to see an expression, not a procedure
> return call_func(ctors[2][DD],{DC})
> [/quote]
>
> ???
> There is no "call_func" in the demo or in my program.
>
> I'm running EU 2.4 and Mandrake 9.2
>
> Did anyone succeed in getting a binded wxEuphoria program to run on Linux?
>
This error is coming from create() in wxEuphoria.e. I've bound programs
previously using 2.4, but I just tested it on Windows, and got the same
error. Looks like a bug with the binder.
Matt Lewis
3. Re: binded wxEuphoria files
- Posted by Jerry Story <jstory at ocii.com>
Jun 30, 2005
-
Last edited Jul 01, 2005
Matt Lewis wrote:
>
> Jerry Story wrote:
> >
> > First I bindu a wxEuphoria program, either a wxEuphoria demo
> > or one of my own.
> > Then I type ./prog
> > I get the following message:
> >
> > [quote]
> > Syntax error - expected to see an expression, not a procedure
> > return call_func(ctors[2][DD],{DC})
> > [/quote]
> >
> > ???
> > There is no "call_func" in the demo or in my program.
> >
> > I'm running EU 2.4 and Mandrake 9.2
> >
> > Did anyone succeed in getting a binded wxEuphoria program to
> > run on Linux?
>
> This error is coming from create() in wxEuphoria.e. I've bound programs
> previously using 2.4, but I just tested it on Windows, and got the same
> error. Looks like a bug with the binder.
>
> Matt Lewis
Does it work on Euphoria 2.5?
If not, will this bug with the binder get fixed?
4. Re: binded wxEuphoria files
- Posted by Matt Lewis <matthewwalkerlewis at gmail.com>
Jun 30, 2005
-
Last edited Jul 01, 2005
Jerry Story wrote:
>
> >
> > This error is coming from create() in wxEuphoria.e. I've bound programs
> > previously using 2.4, but I just tested it on Windows, and got the same
> > error. Looks like a bug with the binder.
> >
> > Matt Lewis
>
> Does it work on Euphoria 2.5?
>
> If not, will this bug with the binder get fixed?
>
I've had no trouble binding with 2.5. I can't speak for Rob, but I doubt
he'll want to maintain the 2.4 binder any more.
Matt Lewis
5. Re: binded wxEuphoria files
Matt Lewis wrote:
>
> Jerry Story wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > This error is coming from create() in wxEuphoria.e. I've bound programs
> > > previously using 2.4, but I just tested it on Windows, and got the same
> > > error. Looks like a bug with the binder.
> > >
> > > Matt Lewis
> >
> > Does it work on Euphoria 2.5?
> >
> > If not, will this bug with the binder get fixed?
> >
>
> I've had no trouble binding with 2.5. I can't speak for Rob, but I doubt
> he'll want to maintain the 2.4 binder any more.
... just got back on the Net after my DSL provider went down
yesterday ...
No, I won't be maintaining the 2.4 binder.
There are several, fairly rare bugs in it that I won't be fixing,
and there's secret stuff in the source so I can't release it.
The 2.5 binder is a completely new program, that has nothing
to do with the 2.4 binder, so there's no reason to think
that a 2.4 binder bug would also exist in 2.5. 2.5 works
fine on all platforms as far as I know. In fact, there haven't
been any bug reports against it so far. The 2.5 binder shares
the exact same parser as the interpreter. This is good because
the 2.4 binder had it's own parser that had slight incompatibilities
with the interpreter's parser.
Regards,
Rob Craig
Rapid Deployment Software
http://www.RapidEuphoria.com
6. Re: binded wxEuphoria files
On Fri, 01 Jul 2005 05:28:42 -0700, Robert Craig
<guest at RapidEuphoria.com> wrote:
>No, I won't be maintaining the 2.4 binder.
>There are several, fairly rare bugs in it that I won't be fixing,
>and there's secret stuff in the source so I can't release it.
Shame, there was definitely something nice about shrouding
a source and being able to include the shrouded file.
As you said though, few users took advantage of it.
If you ever wake up one morning and realize a way to release
whatever part made it magic [1] and which does not impact on your
commercial goals, (with or without support .... 
)
If not, so be it, worse things happen at sea.
Or, of course, re-invent the bit I miss in 2.6 )
Regards,
Pete
PS [1] It was never really, in my book anyway, the "secrecy"
thing, simply changing integer OpCode to integer bQ does the job
PPS Lest anyone think otherwise, I consider Rob made the right
decision re bind/shroud, even though it may have kicked me
harder than anyone else, but heck, I can stay with 2.4, for the
things that I think still need it.
