1. Euphoria will be Free and Open Source!
Big News!
I woke up this morning, the sun was shining, the birds
were singing, and ...
After considering various ways to make a big impact
on the future of Euphoria for v3.0, including various schemes
to partially open up the source while still retaining some
income, I have finally decided to make Euphoria completely
free of charge, and completely open source.
This will cost me money, but I can't see the current
system going on much longer, where a whole programming
language community is dependent on one guy to add features,
fix bugs etc. The amount of code that I have to maintain
has been steadily growing over the years, and I have to
admit that my progress has been slowing.
I'd like to make everything Public Domain, but if
anyone feels that the GNU license is a better way to go,
speak up.
I'm not going anywhere, but I expect that I will do
somewhat less low-level coding and testing, and more coordinating
and integrating of code that others develop. I will keep
the Web site going as usual, and keep a usable version
of Euphoria, that has my "blessing", on it at all times.
(I'll allow other non-blessed versions as well.)
Hopefully we can move away from the 1.5 years between
releases model, to something where releases occur on
a much shorter time interval. Certainly, it will be easier
to do short-interval releases when there isn't money involved.
Other advantages:
- Euphoria will be ported to more platforms
- since it's free it will gain more users
- since lots of people will have the source, and will be
familiar with it, there will be no long-term
risk from RDS "disappearing"
- features will be added by smart people that will go
beyond what RDS was likely to ever do
- I won't have to waste time on marketing, advertising,
processing registrations, sending new download instructions
to people who lost them etc.
- I (we) won't have to maintain both free and registered versions
of things
- people who may have wanted to contribute to Euphoria,
but did not like the idea of giving their time free
to RDS, will now be less inhibited
What I plan to do is put aside the feature list for 3.0
for now (I've only completed a few more small items lately
while wrestling with this open source decision),
freeze the code as it is today on my disk, and put out a totally
free release. I'll call it 3.0 alpha. The download packages
(DOS/Windows and Linux/FreeBSD) will contain the registered
translator and binder, and the full source code
(including C backend code). It may take me a few weeks to
get all this organized. I'll have to make a lot of changes
to the Web site as well, since we won't be selling anything
anymore. (We'll still be getting a buck or two a day from Google ads!)
Regards,
Rob Craig
Rapid Deployment Software
http://www.RapidEuphoria.com
2. Re: Euphoria will be Free and Open Source!
That is awesome news!
Don't throw away a donation link, though. I'll still give you money (even though
I haven't yet...)
Maybe another thread should be started to discuss your licensing options.
I don't think that "Public Domain" is your best bet. Maybe BSD or MIT if you
don't want to use GPL.
--
"Any programming problem can be solved by adding a level of indirection."
--anonymous
"Any performance problem can be solved by removing a level of indirection."
--M. Haertel
"Premature optimization is the root of all evil in programming."
--C.A.R. Hoare
j.
3. Re: Euphoria will be Free and Open Source!
Robert Craig wrote:
>
> Big News!
>
> I woke up this morning, the sun was shining, the birds
> were singing, and ...
>
> After considering various ways to make a big impact
> on the future of Euphoria for v3.0, including various schemes
> to partially open up the source while still retaining some
> income, I have finally decided to make Euphoria completely
> free of charge, and completely open source.
>
> This will cost me money, but I can't see the current
> system going on much longer, where a whole programming
> language community is dependent on one guy to add features,
> fix bugs etc. The amount of code that I have to maintain
> has been steadily growing over the years, and I have to
> admit that my progress has been slowing.
>
> I'd like to make everything Public Domain, but if
> anyone feels that the GNU license is a better way to go,
> speak up.
>
> I'm not going anywhere, but I expect that I will do
> somewhat less low-level coding and testing, and more coordinating
> and integrating of code that others develop. I will keep
> the Web site going as usual, and keep a usable version
> of Euphoria, that has my "blessing", on it at all times.
> (I'll allow other non-blessed versions as well.)
> Hopefully we can move away from the 1.5 years between
> releases model, to something where releases occur on
> a much shorter time interval. Certainly, it will be easier
> to do short-interval releases when there isn't money involved.
>
> Other advantages:
>
> - Euphoria will be ported to more platforms
>
> - since it's free it will gain more users
>
> - since lots of people will have the source, and will be
> familiar with it, there will be no long-term
> risk from RDS "disappearing"
>
> - features will be added by smart people that will go
> beyond what RDS was likely to ever do
>
> - I won't have to waste time on marketing, advertising,
> processing registrations, sending new download instructions
> to people who lost them etc.
>
> - I (we) won't have to maintain both free and registered versions
> of things
>
> - people who may have wanted to contribute to Euphoria,
> but did not like the idea of giving their time free
> to RDS, will now be less inhibited
>
> What I plan to do is put aside the feature list for 3.0
> for now (I've only completed a few more small items lately
> while wrestling with this open source decision),
> freeze the code as it is today on my disk, and put out a totally
> free release. I'll call it 3.0 alpha. The download packages
> (DOS/Windows and Linux/FreeBSD) will contain the registered
> translator and binder, and the full source code
> (including C backend code). It may take me a few weeks to
> get all this organized. I'll have to make a lot of changes
> to the Web site as well, since we won't be selling anything
> anymore. (We'll still be getting a buck or two a day from Google ads!)
>
> Regards,
> Rob Craig
> Rapid Deployment Software
> <a href="http://www.RapidEuphoria.com">http://www.RapidEuphoria.com</a>
Hi Rob,
Wow ok, well then dont worry about the EUforum window being too small
then 
Take care,
Al
E boa sorte com sua programacao Euphoria!
My bumper sticker: "I brake for LED's"
From "Black Knight":
"I can live with losing the good fight,
but i can not live without fighting it".
"Well on second thought, maybe not."
4. Re: Euphoria will be Free and Open Source!
WOW! I am absolutely stunned... let me bestow my best wishes
for the success of the open source venture.
I'm very glad to hear that you will continue to maintain, develop,
and/or sanction an official RDS version of Euphoria. I don't know
what objection(s) you might have to the GNU license, but I hope
you will seriously consider it.
Also, I urge you not to be to quick
to ditch the option of selling your official version of Euphoria -
or at least accepting donations.
I feel as though I should congratulate you on the birth of a new
child. Whereas once you had one, Euphoria, now you will have twins
RDS-Euphoria and Open Euphoria, identical twins now but who knows how
they will develop from this point on.
Best wishes,
Ken
Ken Rhodes
Folding at Home: http://folding.stanford.edu/
100% MicroSoft Free
SuSE Linux 10.0
No AdWare, SpyWare, or Viruses!
Life is Good,
5. Re: Euphoria will be Free and Open Source!
It just occurred to me that soon Euphoria might be distributed with
other open source languages in various Linux distributions!
Ken Rhodes
Folding at Home: http://folding.stanford.edu/
100% MicroSoft Free
SuSE Linux 10.0
No AdWare, SpyWare, or Viruses!
Life is Good,
6. Re: Euphoria will be Free and Open Source!
Kenneth Rhodes wrote:
>
> WOW! I am absolutely stunned... let me bestow my best wishes
> for the success of the open source venture.
>
> I'm very glad to hear that you will continue to maintain, develop,
> and/or sanction an official RDS version of Euphoria. I don't know
> what objection(s) you might have to the GNU license, but I hope
> you will seriously consider it.
>
> Also, I urge you not to be to quick
> to ditch the option of selling your official version of Euphoria -
> or at least accepting donations.
>
> I feel as though I should congratulate you on the birth of a new
> child. Whereas once you had one, Euphoria, now you will have twins
> RDS-Euphoria and Open Euphoria, identical twins now but who knows how
> they will develop from this point on.
>
>
> Best wishes,
> Ken
>
>
> Ken Rhodes
> Folding at Home: <a
> href="http://folding.stanford.edu/">http://folding.stanford.edu/</a>
> 100% MicroSoft Free
> SuSE Linux 10.0
> No AdWare, SpyWare, or Viruses!
> Life is Good,
Good point -- a lot of projects such as Qt and MySQL sell commercial versions
alongside their open-source version.
They are the same version, just different licensing.
One idea would be to go the Qt route and GPL the code. If anyone wants to use
your code for a non-GPL project then they have to pay a license fee.
--
"Any programming problem can be solved by adding a level of indirection."
--anonymous
"Any performance problem can be solved by removing a level of indirection."
--M. Haertel
"Premature optimization is the root of all evil in programming."
--C.A.R. Hoare
j.
7. Re: Euphoria will be Free and Open Source!
Holy Cow!!!! Maybe I'll finally be able to justify porting Euphoria to i5/OS!
Anyway, I'd like to echo the opinions of others...I'd be willing to pay for an
"official" version of Euphoria, even though it's open source.
Jonas Temple
http://www.yhti.net/~jktemple
8. Re: Euphoria will be Free and Open Source!
Robert Craig wrote:
>
> Big News!
>
> I woke up this morning, the sun was shining, the birds
> were singing, and ...
>
> After considering various ways to make a big impact
> on the future of Euphoria for v3.0, including various schemes
> to partially open up the source while still retaining some
> income, I have finally decided to make Euphoria completely
> free of charge, and completely open source.
Wow! My first impulse was to look at the calendar to make sure
we didn't just finish the month of March.
> I'd like to make everything Public Domain, but if
> anyone feels that the GNU license is a better way to go,
> speak up.
I'm personally a big fan of the LGPL license. That way, any improvements
or changed to the code needs to be distributed, but it doesn't place
restrictions on using the code (i.e., you can link to it with
non-GPL code).
> What I plan to do is put aside the feature list for 3.0
> for now (I've only completed a few more small items lately
> while wrestling with this open source decision),
> freeze the code as it is today on my disk, and put out a totally
> free release. I'll call it 3.0 alpha. The download packages
> (DOS/Windows and Linux/FreeBSD) will contain the registered
> translator and binder, and the full source code
> (including C backend code). It may take me a few weeks to
> get all this organized. I'll have to make a lot of changes
> to the Web site as well, since we won't be selling anything
> anymore. (We'll still be getting a buck or two a day from Google ads!)
Can't wait! Thanks, Robert
Matt Lewis
9. Re: Euphoria will be Free and Open Source!
- Posted by akusaya at gmx.net
Sep 19, 2006
HURRAAAAAAAAAAYYYYYYYY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Just two questions (originally one though...)
1. When will it be released?
2. Does it mean that we can see how shroud/bind encryption work?
> posted by: Robert Craig <rds at RapidEuphoria.com>
> Big News!
> I woke up this morning, the sun was shining, the birds
> were singing, and ...
> After considering various ways to make a big impact
> on the future of Euphoria for v3.0, including various schemes
> to partially open up the source while still retaining some
> income, I have finally decided to make Euphoria completely
> free of charge, and completely open source.
> This will cost me money, but I can't see the current
> system going on much longer, where a whole programming
> language community is dependent on one guy to add features,
> fix bugs etc. The amount of code that I have to maintain
> has been steadily growing over the years, and I have to
> admit that my progress has been slowing.
> I'd like to make everything Public Domain, but if
> anyone feels that the GNU license is a better way to go,
> speak up.
> I'm not going anywhere, but I expect that I will do
> somewhat less low-level coding and testing, and more coordinating
> and integrating of code that others develop. I will keep
> the Web site going as usual, and keep a usable version
> of Euphoria, that has my "blessing", on it at all times.
> (I'll allow other non-blessed versions as well.)
> Hopefully we can move away from the 1.5 years between
> releases model, to something where releases occur on
> a much shorter time interval. Certainly, it will be easier
> to do short-interval releases when there isn't money involved.
> Other advantages:
> - Euphoria will be ported to more platforms
> - since it's free it will gain more users
> - since lots of people will have the source, and will be
> familiar with it, there will be no long-term
> risk from RDS "disappearing"
> - features will be added by smart people that will go
> beyond what RDS was likely to ever do
> - I won't have to waste time on marketing, advertising,
> processing registrations, sending new download instructions
> to people who lost them etc.
> - I (we) won't have to maintain both free and registered versions
> of things
> - people who may have wanted to contribute to Euphoria,
> but did not like the idea of giving their time free
> to RDS, will now be less inhibited
> What I plan to do is put aside the feature list for 3.0
> for now (I've only completed a few more small items lately
> while wrestling with this open source decision),
> freeze the code as it is today on my disk, and put out a totally
> free release. I'll call it 3.0 alpha. The download packages
> (DOS/Windows and Linux/FreeBSD) will contain the registered
> translator and binder, and the full source code
> (including C backend code). It may take me a few weeks to
> get all this organized. I'll have to make a lot of changes
> to the Web site as well, since we won't be selling anything
> anymore. (We'll still be getting a buck or two a day from Google ads!)
> Regards,
> Rob Craig
> Rapid Deployment Software
> http://www.RapidEuphoria.com
10. Re: Euphoria will be Free and Open Source!
Kenneth Rhodes wrote:
> It just occurred to me that soon Euphoria might be distributed with
> other open source languages in various Linux distributions!
That would be cool -- Euphoria has deserved it.
And people who want an easy to use yet powerful programming language have
deserved it, too.
Regards, Juergen
11. Re: Euphoria will be Free and Open Source!
Robert Craig wrote:
> Big News!
>
> I woke up this morning, the sun was shining, the birds
> were singing, and ...
>
> After considering various ways to make a big impact
> on the future of Euphoria for v3.0, including various schemes
> to partially open up the source while still retaining some
> income, I have finally decided to make Euphoria completely
> free of charge, and completely open source.
<snip>
WOW!! Great news, Rob! I'm very curious about how things will develop ...
Many greetings to your Canadian birds.
Regards, Juergen
12. Re: Euphoria will be Free and Open Source!
Robert Craig wrote:
> Other advantages:
>
> - Euphoria will be ported to more platforms
>
> - since it's free it will gain more users
>
> - since lots of people will have the source, and will be
> familiar with it, there will be no long-term
> risk from RDS "disappearing"
>
> - features will be added by smart people that will go
> beyond what RDS was likely to ever do
>
> - I won't have to waste time on marketing, advertising,
> processing registrations, sending new download instructions
> to people who lost them etc.
>
> - I (we) won't have to maintain both free and registered versions
> of things
>
> - people who may have wanted to contribute to Euphoria,
> but did not like the idea of giving their time free
> to RDS, will now be less inhibited
More advantages:
- Euphoria will qualify for the free software directory.
- Programs written in Euphoria will qualify for the free software directory.
Free Software Directory
http://directory.fsf.org/
13. Re: Euphoria will be Free and Open Source!
Woah! That is huge news.
This will change everything.
First I'd like to say it shouldn't be opened up as Public Domain, where some
company could just aquire it as their own. There needs to be an open-source
license to keep it open-source. I think the LGPL would be a decent license like
Matt said. But people are going to have to vote for which license they want. How
about a poll people?
This is also the chance to give Euphoria the features it really needs!
1) Direct variable assignment
2) Pre-emptive thread safety
4) POSIX compliant threading API
5) 64 bit integers; 32 bit integers
6) 64 bit interpreters; compilers
7) Variable_id(), version() routines
8) Expression evalution features
9) Microsoft .NET port for Vista
10) Better interfacing with C/C++
As for RDS. They can still make money!
1) Proffessional Euphoria support
2) Contract programming services
3) Donations to pay domain costs
and living expensives.
4) Hosting more ads (not banners)
on the Euphoria webpage and
EUForum.
5) Continue providing ListFilter
products and services.
The Euphoria Wiki was a great inititive as well. Most open-source projects have
wikis to accompany official documentation.
Great move Rob!
Regards,
Vincent
14. Re: Euphoria will be Free and Open Source!
Rob,
This news is unexpected. I am glad that you made the decision. Thank you.
How will the various attendant decisions be made. I know that you are
already asking for input on the license to follow. How about things like
where will the code repository and so forth be? Now you provide for the
hosting of such things. Will you continue to do so? Will some things be
hosted by you and some at other sites such as SourceForge? The EUforum?
. . .?
Will there be some sort of oversite committee? Will you provide overall
oversite? I am sure that you have already been a bit overwhelmed by
considering such things. I certainly do not expect a complete proposal
now. But, do you have a time table in mind? Some things already thought
out? Some things to be decided, perhaps with user input?
I am not pressuring you. I just have a bunch of questions. I am sure, as
you alluded to in your message, that your decision was not easy. I do
want you to know that I (and I think most if not all users) THANK YOU
for your decision.
I look forward to working with you and your child (EUPHORIA) and all
users in the new and upcoming open source community environment.
Terry
Robert Craig wrote:
>
>
> posted by: Robert Craig <rds at RapidEuphoria.com>
>
> Big News!
>
> I woke up this morning, the sun was shining, the birds
> were singing, and ...
>
> After considering various ways to make a big impact
> on the future of Euphoria for v3.0, including various schemes
> to partially open up the source while still retaining some
> income, I have finally decided to make Euphoria completely
> free of charge, and completely open source.
>
> This will cost me money, but I can't see the current
> system going on much longer, where a whole programming
> language community is dependent on one guy to add features,
> fix bugs etc. The amount of code that I have to maintain
> has been steadily growing over the years, and I have to
> admit that my progress has been slowing.
>
> I'd like to make everything Public Domain, but if
> anyone feels that the GNU license is a better way to go,
> speak up.
>
> I'm not going anywhere, but I expect that I will do
> somewhat less low-level coding and testing, and more coordinating
> and integrating of code that others develop. I will keep
> the Web site going as usual, and keep a usable version
> of Euphoria, that has my "blessing", on it at all times.
> (I'll allow other non-blessed versions as well.)
> Hopefully we can move away from the 1.5 years between
> releases model, to something where releases occur on
> a much shorter time interval. Certainly, it will be easier
> to do short-interval releases when there isn't money involved.
>
> Other advantages:
>
> - Euphoria will be ported to more platforms
>
> - since it's free it will gain more users
>
> - since lots of people will have the source, and will be
> familiar with it, there will be no long-term
> risk from RDS "disappearing"
>
> - features will be added by smart people that will go
> beyond what RDS was likely to ever do
>
> - I won't have to waste time on marketing, advertising,
> processing registrations, sending new download instructions
> to people who lost them etc.
>
> - I (we) won't have to maintain both free and registered versions
> of things
>
> - people who may have wanted to contribute to Euphoria,
> but did not like the idea of giving their time free
> to RDS, will now be less inhibited
>
> What I plan to do is put aside the feature list for 3.0
> for now (I've only completed a few more small items lately
> while wrestling with this open source decision),
> freeze the code as it is today on my disk, and put out a totally
> free release. I'll call it 3.0 alpha. The download packages
> (DOS/Windows and Linux/FreeBSD) will contain the registered
> translator and binder, and the full source code
> (including C backend code). It may take me a few weeks to
> get all this organized. I'll have to make a lot of changes
> to the Web site as well, since we won't be selling anything
> anymore. (We'll still be getting a buck or two a day from Google ads!)
>
> Regards,
> Rob Craig
> Rapid Deployment Software
> http://www.RapidEuphoria.com
>
>
>
>
15. Re: Euphoria will be Free and Open Source!
- Posted by Jason Gade <jaygade at yahoo.com>
Sep 19, 2006
-
Last edited Sep 20, 2006
Vincent, a poll sounds like a great idea!
I was going to start an argument about features, but then I decided not to. None
of those sound bad, really.
I think RDS should keep a trademark on the name "Euphoria Programming Lanugage"
and still hopefully be a benevolent dictator when it comes to what is included
and what isn't.
Almost everyone has complained in the past about their pet features not being
included; however I still think a dozen forks of the code would be worse.
--
"Any programming problem can be solved by adding a level of indirection."
--anonymous
"Any performance problem can be solved by removing a level of indirection."
--M. Haertel
"Premature optimization is the root of all evil in programming."
--C.A.R. Hoare
j.
16. Re: Euphoria will be Free and Open Source!
- Posted by Vincent <darkvincentdude at yahoo.com>
Sep 19, 2006
-
Last edited Sep 20, 2006
Jason Gade wrote:
>
> Vincent, a poll sounds like a great idea!
>
> I was going to start an argument about features, but then I decided not to.
> None of those sound bad, really.
>
> I think RDS should keep a trademark on the name "Euphoria Programming
> Lanugage"
> and still hopefully be a benevolent dictator when it comes to what is included
> and what isn't.
>
> Almost everyone has complained in the past about their pet features not being
> included; however I still think a dozen forks of the code would be worse.
>
> --
> "Any programming problem can be solved by adding a level of indirection."
> --anonymous
> "Any performance problem can be solved by removing a level of indirection."
> --M. Haertel
> "Premature optimization is the root of all evil in programming."
> --C.A.R. Hoare
> j.
Yes either a benevolent dictator or a steering committee. Robert makes good
decisions about which features are implemented but he'll need to become more
liberal about user source submissions and be willing to accept great ideas.
A bug tracking system like Bugzilla also needs to be implemented inorder to keep
track of bugs.
Whatever happens, we can't let Euphoria suffer the same fate as Bach and those
other clones.
Regards,
Vincent
17. Re: Euphoria will be Free and Open Source!
- Posted by cklester <cklester at yahoo.com>
Sep 19, 2006
-
Last edited Sep 20, 2006
Robert Craig wrote:
>
> Big News!
>
> I have finally decided to make Euphoria completely
> free of charge, and completely open source.
I can't believe how many people are falling for this. You have to remember
that Canada uses a different calendar, and today is April 1 up there.
HAHAHAHA! Good one, Rob!!! :D
-=ck
"Programming in a state of Euphoria."
http://www.cklester.com/euphoria/
18. Re: Euphoria will be Free and Open Source!
- Posted by jacques deschênes <desja at globetrotter.net>
Sep 19, 2006
-
Last edited Sep 20, 2006
Hi Robert,
I'm sure it was not an easy decision, but sooner or later you would have to
come to it.
I wish the best to open-euphoria.
regards,
Jacques Deschênes
19. Re: Euphoria will be Free and Open Source!
- Posted by "Kat" <kat12 at coosahs.net>
Sep 19, 2006
-
Last edited Sep 20, 2006
>
>
> posted by: Robert Craig <rds at RapidEuphoria.com>
>
> Big News!
>
> I woke up this morning, the sun was shining, the birds
> were singing, and ...
>
> After considering various ways to make a big impact
> on the future of Euphoria for v3.0, including various schemes
> to partially open up the source while still retaining some
> income, I have finally decided to make Euphoria completely
> free of charge, and completely open source.
I can see OOEU going head-to-head with Lisp / Prolog / Ruby /
PHP / etc now. Only minus the RPN and those(all()).
So,, what of all those microeconomy dollars not yet spent?
Kat
20. Re: Euphoria will be Free and Open Source!
- Posted by Vincent <darkvincentdude at yahoo.com>
Sep 19, 2006
-
Last edited Sep 20, 2006
Kat wrote:
> I can see OOEU going head-to-head with Lisp / Prolog / Ruby /
> PHP / etc now. Only minus the RPN and those(all()).
>
> So,, what of all those microeconomy dollars not yet spent?
>
> Kat
I sincerely pray that Euphoria doesnt go Object-Oriented now. That would really
add a new level of complexity to the language. An Object-Oriented fork by Matt
would be fine but can we leave the official one procedural?
Regards,
Vincent
21. Re: Euphoria will be Free and Open Source!
- Posted by Jason Gade <jaygade at yahoo.com>
Sep 19, 2006
-
Last edited Sep 20, 2006
Vincent wrote:
>
> Kat wrote:
>
> > I can see OOEU going head-to-head with Lisp / Prolog / Ruby /
> > PHP / etc now. Only minus the RPN and those(all()).
> >
> > So,, what of all those microeconomy dollars not yet spent?
> >
> > Kat
>
> I sincerely pray that Euphoria doesnt go Object-Oriented now. That would
> really
> add a new level of complexity to the language. An Object-Oriented fork by Matt
> would be fine but can we leave the official one procedural?
>
>
> Regards,
> Vincent
It's like with the features that you listed in your post above but that I
disagreed with -- don't use them. Plus now is not the time to be arguing about
new features. It's still too early.
--
"Any programming problem can be solved by adding a level of indirection."
--anonymous
"Any performance problem can be solved by removing a level of indirection."
--M. Haertel
"Premature optimization is the root of all evil in programming."
--C.A.R. Hoare
j.
22. Re: Euphoria will be Free and Open Source!
- Posted by Al Getz <Xaxo at aol.com>
Sep 19, 2006
-
Last edited Sep 20, 2006
Vincent wrote:
>
> Kat wrote:
>
> > I can see OOEU going head-to-head with Lisp / Prolog / Ruby /
> > PHP / etc now. Only minus the RPN and those(all()).
> >
> > So,, what of all those microeconomy dollars not yet spent?
> >
> > Kat
>
> I sincerely pray that Euphoria doesnt go Object-Oriented now. That would
> really
> add a new level of complexity to the language. An Object-Oriented fork by Matt
> would be fine but can we leave the official one procedural?
>
>
> Regards,
> Vincent
Hi there Vincent,
Well Eu already has namespaces, so it's partly oo already right?
I guess you dont want to see it get actual classes?
Im not sure what i will do with 'my' version once i guess the
source...geeze, the sky is the limit here...this requires some
real thought now.
Before, if i wanted something really really (i mean really) fast,
i had to create a dll written in C++ and link/call it from EU.
This worked good, but now we will have the ability to compile
a real C++ dll (code that is) right in with the interpreter :)
Binary files could be included too wow without too much
trouble.
This now requires some days or even weeks of thought.
There's no limit now to what can be done using Eu.
We have to have the right to sell our programs though, or
it's not worth fooling with. With a note in an about
box mentioning that we used (all or in part) the Eu source code
of course, that's a must.
First a beer, then some more thought on this...
Take care,
Al
E boa sorte com sua programacao Euphoria!
My bumper sticker: "I brake for LED's"
From "Black Knight":
"I can live with losing the good fight,
but i can not live without fighting it".
"Well on second thought, maybe not."
23. Re: Euphoria will be Free and Open Source!
- Posted by Al Getz <Xaxo at aol.com>
Sep 19, 2006
-
Last edited Sep 20, 2006
Jason Gade wrote:
>
> Vincent wrote:
> >
> > Kat wrote:
> >
> > > I can see OOEU going head-to-head with Lisp / Prolog / Ruby /
> > > PHP / etc now. Only minus the RPN and those(all()).
> > >
> > > So,, what of all those microeconomy dollars not yet spent?
> > >
> > > Kat
> >
> > I sincerely pray that Euphoria doesnt go Object-Oriented now. That would
> > really
> > add a new level of complexity to the language. An Object-Oriented fork by
> > Matt
> > would be fine but can we leave the official one procedural?
> >
> >
> > Regards,
> > Vincent
>
> It's like with the features that you listed in your post above but that I
> disagreed
> with -- don't use them. Plus now is not the time to be arguing about new
> features.
> It's still too early.
>
> --
> "Any programming problem can be solved by adding a level of indirection."
> --anonymous
> "Any performance problem can be solved by removing a level of indirection."
> --M. Haertel
> "Premature optimization is the root of all evil in programming."
> --C.A.R. Hoare
> j.
Hi again,
The way i see it, now we will have a way to add features we want
in our own personal 'versions', so why go back to depending on
someone else to put in what 'we' each want? That doesnt seem
to work very well because there are always conflicts of interests
and philosophies.
Of course if you dont have the time that's a different story.
Gee, now i can make classes that can be included more than once
using the same file but a different namespace (or the same namespace
in a different include file). Wow, i always wanted to be able
to do that with Eu
Take care,
Al
E boa sorte com sua programacao Euphoria!
My bumper sticker: "I brake for LED's"
From "Black Knight":
"I can live with losing the good fight,
but i can not live without fighting it".
"Well on second thought, maybe not."
24. Re: Euphoria will be Free and Open Source!
- Posted by Jason Gade <jaygade at yahoo.com>
Sep 19, 2006
-
Last edited Sep 20, 2006
Al Getz wrote:
>
> Jason Gade wrote:
> >
> > Vincent wrote:
> > >
> > > Kat wrote:
> > >
> > > > I can see OOEU going head-to-head with Lisp / Prolog / Ruby /
> > > > PHP / etc now. Only minus the RPN and those(all()).
> > > >
> > > > So,, what of all those microeconomy dollars not yet spent?
> > > >
> > > > Kat
> > >
> > > I sincerely pray that Euphoria doesnt go Object-Oriented now. That would
> > > really
> > > add a new level of complexity to the language. An Object-Oriented fork by
> > > Matt
> > > would be fine but can we leave the official one procedural?
> > >
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Vincent
> >
> > It's like with the features that you listed in your post above but that I
> > disagreed
> > with -- don't use them. Plus now is not the time to be arguing about new
> > features.
> > It's still too early.
> >
> > --
> > "Any programming problem can be solved by adding a level of indirection."
> > --anonymous
> > "Any performance problem can be solved by removing a level of indirection."
> > --M. Haertel
> > "Premature optimization is the root of all evil in programming."
> > --C.A.R. Hoare
> > j.
>
> Hi again,
>
> The way i see it, now we will have a way to add features we want
> in our own personal 'versions', so why go back to depending on
> someone else to put in what 'we' each want? That doesnt seem
> to work very well because there are always conflicts of interests
> and philosophies.
> Of course if you dont have the time that's a different story.
>
> Gee, now i can make classes that can be included more than once
> using the same file but a different namespace (or the same namespace
> in a different include file). Wow, i always wanted to be able
> to do that with Eu
>
>
> Al
>
> E boa sorte com sua programacao Euphoria!
>
>
> My bumper sticker: "I brake for LED's"
>
Well of course you can always modify the source to meet your specific needs.
That's the whole idea behind open source! You can even share it freely.
However I would hate to see the "official version" split into a dozen different
dialects or (less likely) have a few hundred archive entries that say "requires
Al Getz's version of Euphoria v3.12a".
--
"Any programming problem can be solved by adding a level of indirection."
--anonymous
"Any performance problem can be solved by removing a level of indirection."
--M. Haertel
"Premature optimization is the root of all evil in programming."
--C.A.R. Hoare
j.
25. Re: Euphoria will be Free and Open Source!
- Posted by Jason Gade <jaygade at yahoo.com>
Sep 19, 2006
-
Last edited Sep 20, 2006
I guess my point is that we are all correct to be excited because we all may see
our own pet features (or mis-features) implemented. However I think it is too
soon to be worried about that. We should just be happy that it's going to happen!
(I've got my own list of features that I would prefer but I doubt whether I can
implement them myself...)
--
"Any programming problem can be solved by adding a level of indirection."
--anonymous
"Any performance problem can be solved by removing a level of indirection."
--M. Haertel
"Premature optimization is the root of all evil in programming."
--C.A.R. Hoare
j.
26. Re: Euphoria will be Free and Open Source!
- Posted by Vincent <darkvincentdude at yahoo.com>
Sep 19, 2006
-
Last edited Sep 20, 2006
Jason Gade wrote:
> It's like with the features that you listed in your post above but that I
> disagreed
> with -- don't use them. Plus now is not the time to be arguing about new
> features.
> It's still too early.
Fair enough. I think it will have to be decided whether or not Open Euphoria
will retain its reputation for simplicity.
Anyway. We'll learn more in the coming weeks as Rob changes the webpage and
uploads Euphoria 3.0 Alpha.
Kat did bring up a good point about the Micro-economy though. Perhaps they will
just serve as an indication of popularity.
Regards,
Vincent
27. Re: Euphoria will be Free and Open Source!
- Posted by Al Getz <Xaxo at aol.com>
Sep 19, 2006
-
Last edited Sep 20, 2006
Jason Gade wrote:
>
> Al Getz wrote:
> >
> > Jason Gade wrote:
> > >
> > > Vincent wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Kat wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > I can see OOEU going head-to-head with Lisp / Prolog / Ruby /
> > > > > PHP / etc now. Only minus the RPN and those(all()).
> > > > >
> > > > > So,, what of all those microeconomy dollars not yet spent?
> > > > >
> > > > > Kat
> > > >
> > > > I sincerely pray that Euphoria doesnt go Object-Oriented now. That would
> > > > really
> > > > add a new level of complexity to the language. An Object-Oriented fork
> > > > by Matt
> > > > would be fine but can we leave the official one procedural?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Regards,
> > > > Vincent
> > >
> > > It's like with the features that you listed in your post above but that I
> > > disagreed
> > > with -- don't use them. Plus now is not the time to be arguing about new
> > > features.
> > > It's still too early.
> > >
> > > --
> > > "Any programming problem can be solved by adding a level of indirection."
> > > --anonymous
> > > "Any performance problem can be solved by removing a level of
> > > indirection."
> > > --M. Haertel
> > > "Premature optimization is the root of all evil in programming."
> > > --C.A.R. Hoare
> > > j.
> >
> > Hi again,
> >
> > The way i see it, now we will have a way to add features we want
> > in our own personal 'versions', so why go back to depending on
> > someone else to put in what 'we' each want? That doesnt seem
> > to work very well because there are always conflicts of interests
> > and philosophies.
> > Of course if you dont have the time that's a different story.
> >
> > Gee, now i can make classes that can be included more than once
> > using the same file but a different namespace (or the same namespace
> > in a different include file). Wow, i always wanted to be able
> > to do that with Eu
> >
> >
> > Al
> >
> > E boa sorte com sua programacao Euphoria!
> >
> >
> > My bumper sticker: "I brake for LED's"
> >
>
> Well of course you can always modify the source to meet your specific needs.
> That's the whole idea behind open source! You can even share it freely.
>
> However I would hate to see the "official version" split into a dozen
> different
> dialects or (less likely) have a few hundred archive entries that say
> "requires
> Al Getz's version of Euphoria v3.12a".
>
> --
> "Any programming problem can be solved by adding a level of indirection."
> --anonymous
> "Any performance problem can be solved by removing a level of indirection."
> --M. Haertel
> "Premature optimization is the root of all evil in programming."
> --C.A.R. Hoare
> j.
Hi again,
Yeah i see what you mean. What do we all do then?
Perhaps work together on a public version that has the basic
updates (like real integers, strings, whatever) while making
ourselves our own personal versions?
Hmmm....more thought...
Take care,
Al
E boa sorte com sua programacao Euphoria!
My bumper sticker: "I brake for LED's"
From "Black Knight":
"I can live with losing the good fight,
but i can not live without fighting it".
"Well on second thought, maybe not."
28. Re: Euphoria will be Free and Open Source!
- Posted by Pete Stoner <stoner.pete at gmail.com>
Sep 19, 2006
-
Last edited Sep 20, 2006
Robert Craig wrote:
>
> Big News!
>
> I woke up this morning, the sun was shining, the birds
> were singing, and ...
The birds are singing here also now!!
> After considering various ways to make a big impact
> on the future of Euphoria for v3.0, including various schemes
> to partially open up the source while still retaining some
> income, I have finally decided to make Euphoria completely
> free of charge, and completely open source.
My opinion (for whats it's worth) is that you are doing the 'right thing'. I
really think that now the baby you have nurtured and protected for so long could
really grow and take off (next step world domination!).
> I'm not going anywhere, but I expect that I will do
> somewhat less low-level coding and testing, and more coordinating
> and integrating of code that others develop. I will keep
> the Web site going as usual, and keep a usable version
> of Euphoria, that has my "blessing", on it at all times.
> (I'll allow other non-blessed versions as well.)
I (like the majority of other users it seems) would not want to see it fragment
into a multitude of variations (that, I think, would be a 'death of a thousand
cuts'). There are bound to be some specific versions (like oop maybe), but for it
to really start growing there must be an 'official' version so I'm in favour of a
version that has your 'blessing' however I hope that blessing will not be
withheld on features that the majority want but you would have rejected in the
past..
Looking forward to some exciting times!!
regards PeteS
29. Re: Euphoria will be Free and Open Source!
- Posted by Jeremy Peterson <ptl99 at hotmail.com>
Sep 19, 2006
-
Last edited Sep 20, 2006
cklester wrote:
>
> Robert Craig wrote:
> >
> > Big News!
> >
> > I have finally decided to make Euphoria completely
> > free of charge, and completely open source.
>
> I can't believe how many people are falling for this. You have to remember
> that Canada uses a different calendar, and today is April 1 up there.
>
> HAHAHAHA! Good one, Rob!!! :D
>
> -=ck
> "Programming in a state of Euphoria."
> <a
> href="http://www.cklester.com/euphoria/">http://www.cklester.com/euphoria/</a>
Lol, that would be so evil if it was true, CK! :) Uh-oh... :O
Kinda strange though that so many want Rob to be a benevolent dictator or
something similar. But nvm.
IF it's true I'm very happy about the decision.
Jeremy
30. Re: Euphoria will be Free and Open Source!
- Posted by "Kat" <kat12 at coosahs.net>
Sep 19, 2006
-
Last edited Sep 20, 2006
>
>
> posted by: Jason Gade <jaygade at yahoo.com>
>
> Al Getz wrote:
> >
> > Jason Gade wrote:
> > >
> > > Vincent wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Kat wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > I can see OOEU going head-to-head with Lisp / Prolog / Ruby /
> > > > > PHP / etc now. Only minus the RPN and those(all()).
> > > > >
> > > > > So,, what of all those microeconomy dollars not yet spent?
> > > > >
> > > > > Kat
> > > >
> > > > I sincerely pray that Euphoria doesnt go Object-Oriented now.
> > > > That would really add a new level of complexity to the language.
> > > > An Object-Oriented fork by Matt would be fine but can we leave
> > > > the official one procedural?
You are not *required* to use Matt's objects, and you can still
program in a procedural fashion. It's like "goto", don't use it if you
don't want to!
Kat
31. Re: Euphoria will be Free and Open Source!
Kat wrote:
> You are not *required* to use Matt's objects, and you can still
> program in a procedural fashion. It's like "goto", don't use it if you
> don't want to!
Wouldn't that depend on the libraries I use within my programs? What if I needed
to use an Eu library but was written in an OO way? I would likely need to use a
OO programming style to interface with it, correct?
In that case, I would be required to program in that style or re-invent the
wheel by creating a procedural style library. But since I dont understand object
oriented concepts (no matter how hard I to learn) I wouldnt be able port the
library.
Euphoria would become a multi-paradigm language and there would need to be
libraries for each style of programming. This is the kind of bloat that keeps
many of us away from languages like C++ and how alternatives like Bach have
largely faltered.
Regards,
Vincent
32. Re: Euphoria will be Free and Open Source!
- Posted by ags <eu at 531pi.co.nz>
Sep 20, 2006
Vincent wrote:
> Wouldn't that depend on the libraries I use within my programs? What if I
> needed
> to use an Eu library but was written in an OO way? I would likely need to use
> a OO programming style to interface with it, correct?
>
> In that case, I would be required to program in that style or re-invent the
> wheel by creating a procedural style library. But since I dont understand
> object
> oriented concepts (no matter how hard I to learn) I wouldnt be able port the
> library.
Hi Vincent
It seems to be like the difference between C and C++ when that occurred. Plenty
of people use C++ objects intermixed in a procedural program (like cout).
And since I wasn't going to comment on this thread... someone else mentioned the
namespace thing, well Perl has very similar idea to this. The difference being
that you can create an object in an 'include' and 'bless' it to be part of that
class. So if you deal with an object in the include you can tell if it one of
your objects (or some derivation of it).
I also agree that it is way too early to be talking about it, hence why I'm not
commenting.
Gary
33. Re: Euphoria will be Free and Open Source!
>
>
> posted by: Vincent <darkvincentdude at yahoo.com>
>
> Kat wrote:
>
> > You are not *required* to use Matt's objects, and you can still
> > program in a procedural fashion. It's like "goto", don't use it if
> > you don't want to!
>
> Wouldn't that depend on the libraries I use within my programs? What
> if I needed to use an Eu library but was written in an OO way? I would
> likely need to use a OO programming style to interface with it,
> correct?
>
> In that case, I would be required to program in that style or
> re-invent the wheel by creating a procedural style library. But since
> I dont understand object oriented concepts (no matter how hard I to
> learn) I wouldnt be able port the library.
>
> Euphoria would become a multi-paradigm language and there would need
> to be libraries for each style of programming. This is the kind of
> bloat that keeps many of us away from languages like C++ and how
> alternatives like Bach have largely faltered.
Have you even looked at OOEU?
Kat
34. Re: Euphoria will be Free and Open Source!
Robert Craig wrote:
>
>
> I'd like to make everything Public Domain, but if
> anyone feels that the GNU license is a better way to go,
> speak up.
>
I strongly discourage using the GPL or LGPL for a variety of reasons. Public
domain, X11, or either BSD license would be the best I think. A good compromise
might be the Mozilla Public License (MPL) because you only need to open source
the code that was changed then.
35. Re: Euphoria will be Free and Open Source!
akusaya wrote:
> Just two questions (originally one though...)
>
> 1. When will it be released?
I'm guessing it will take me a few weeks, maybe less,
to tidy things up and do an alpha release.
> 2. Does it mean that we can see how shroud/bind encryption work?
I will probably have to (eventually) remove the code that knows how to
decrypt bound and shrouded programs. If I open that small bit of
source, it will become useless, and will offend people who thought
their programs would be highly secure.
Even without this added encryption, programs are fairly hard to figure out,
since in 2.5 it's just a bunch of IL, and in earlier releases it's
code with variables renamed, comments stripped, etc.
I guess I'll have to "deprecate" that feature (i.e. maybe support it
using a non-open subroutine for this release, but eventually
discontinue it. I'm open to suggestion on this.
Regards,
Rob Craig
Rapid Deployment Software
http://www.RapidEuphoria.com
36. Re: Euphoria will be Free and Open Source!
D. Newhall wrote:
>
> Robert Craig wrote:
> >
> >
> > I'd like to make everything Public Domain, but if
> > anyone feels that the GNU license is a better way to go,
> > speak up.
> >
>
> I strongly discourage using the GPL or LGPL for a variety of reasons. Public
> domain, X11, or either BSD license would be the best I think. A good
> compromise
> might be the Mozilla Public License (MPL) because you only need to open source
> the code that was changed then.
It might help if you would cite several specific reasons
why you oppose the GPL or LGPL.
Ken Rhodes
Folding at Home: http://folding.stanford.edu/
100% MicroSoft Free
SuSE Linux 10.0
No AdWare, SpyWare, or Viruses!
Life is Good,
37. Re: Euphoria will be Free and Open Source!
Terry Constant wrote:
> How will the various attendant decisions be made. I know that you are
> already asking for input on the license to follow. How about things like
> where will the code repository and so forth be? Now you provide for the
> hosting of such things. Will you continue to do so? Will some things be
> hosted by you and some at other sites such as SourceForge? The EUforum?
> . . .?
I intend to continue operating the RapidEuphoria.com web site
just as before, including EUforum and the file Archive.
If there are advantages to putting the source code on SourceForge
then that's what we'll do. I haven't thought about it yet.
> Will there be some sort of oversite committee? Will you provide overall
> oversite? I am sure that you have already been a bit overwhelmed by
> considering such things. I certainly do not expect a complete proposal
> now. But, do you have a time table in mind? Some things already thought
> out? Some things to be decided, perhaps with user input?
I haven't thought things out in great detail.
I haven't been an open source developer before.
Obviously a "political" process will be necessary,
but I don't know if it will be carefully designed
or will simply evolve. It is not my intention to act as
a dictator, nor will I have that power once the source is out.
I imagine new features will be discussed on EUforum, and if
there is a consensus, and if there is someone willing to do the
work, then things will move ahead. I won't have a veto, but I
imagine that if I make a big enough stink about a feature,
people will tread carefully. I could refuse to put my "blessing"
on a version of the language, or even ban it from my site,
but that version could be offered via another Web site. People
will be able to add features to their own copies of the code,
and try to convince others of the value of those features.
If a feature proves to be popular it would then be likely to
be added to some official version. A dozen different flavors of
Euphoria might emerge, but people generally want to stick with
the mainstream, rather than being the only person using a particular
obscure version of a programming language.
Regards,
Rob Craig
Rapid Deployment Software
http://www.RapidEuphoria.com
38. Re: Euphoria will be Free and Open Source!
Kat wrote:
> So,, what of all those microeconomy dollars not yet spent?
I think we can continue the system, though there is no
longer anything to buy with those dollars. Also,
the concept of a "registered user" will have to change.
Maybe anyone who registers for EUforum will be allowed to vote
"dollars" each month.
Regards,
Rob Craig
Rapid Deployment Software
http://www.RapidEuphoria.com
39. Re: Euphoria will be Free and Open Source!
An open source Euphoria don't means RDS can't make money.
You can make money:
- Selling ads in webpage or mail messages in the forum.
- Selling the "Official" books about euphoria programming.
- Selling "Official" release. This may include non open
source things as encripted binds, support, an enhaced version of the manual,
enhaced IDE, enhaced non open source library functions.
- Keep a non open version of the translator for the enhaced library functions.
- Contributions from user or institutions that support free software projects.
- Programming services to companies
- Partial open source version with "standar" library functions and an
registtered
version with full optimized functions. May be similar to the current scheme.
An euphoria source code. An open version non optimiced of the C library and an
official version of the library...
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Marco A. Achury
Caracas, Venezuela
40. Re: Euphoria will be Free and Open Source!
Kenneth Rhodes wrote:
>
>
> It might help if you would cite several specific reasons
> why you oppose the GPL or LGPL.
Here's a few reasons off the top of my head:
Viral nature:
The GPL "infects" any code it touches. This can even be expanded to code created
after viewing GPLed code in some cases. Think one of the memory allocation
algorithms Rob uses is nice? Well, you can't use it unless you want whatever you
use it in to be GPLed. Many projects and businesses don't allow their programmers
to even view GPLed code unless they know what they're doing. FreeBSD for example
has "tainted programmers" whose sole job is to simply look at GPLed code and then
design the specs for the other designers to keep everything completely open.
Distribution:
The GPL requires you to publish your *complete* source code so if you change a
single line you need to publish everything. This creates a burden on developers
because they need to front any costs due to distributing everything. Granted, the
source will most likely be small and we do have the Archives but it's going to
get redundant with every Euphoria modification repeating the exact same files
over and over again.
Lack of freedom:
Due mostly to its viral nature GPLed code is more restrictive than almost all
other open source licenses. Eric S. Raymond, the co-founder of the Open Source
Initiative, said last year that the GPL is in some cases restricting innovation
and advocated using the BSD license instead of the GPL.
Job restrictions:
Some companies forbid their programmers from working on GPLed programs due to
what they perceive (whether rightly or wrongly) as legal issues regarding their
code. One example I've heard of is that they feared that if their programmer
reused his code and he had previously distributed it as GPL then their product
could be endangered. Usually these companies only specify the GPL and similar
licenses and allow BSD and X11 licensed work. It would suck if someone couldn't
contribute to Euphoria due to where they work.
Legal issues:
While so far the GPL has won in the few court cases revolving around it I feel
that its still untested. If you read the GPL and then other license agreements
you're shocked by the text of the GPL. The GPL simply does not read like a
legally binding license which may in fact be a detriment to it.
Moral rights (Legal issues part 2)
Also, the GPL could possibly be broken easily if it was ruled that creators have
"moral rights" (in the legal sense) in regards to their source code. If they do
then it would most likely render the GPL completely useless since then you'd be
able to sue anyone who uses your work in a manner you disagree with.
41. Re: Euphoria will be Free and Open Source!
Robert Craig wrote:
>> 2. Does it mean that we can see how shroud/bind encryption work?
>
> I will probably have to (eventually) remove the code that knows how to
> decrypt bound and shrouded programs. If I open that small bit of
> source, it will become useless, and will offend people who thought
> their programs would be highly secure.
> Even without this added encryption, programs are fairly hard to figure out,
> since in 2.5 it's just a bunch of IL, and in earlier releases it's
> code with variables renamed, comments stripped, etc.
> I guess I'll have to "deprecate" that feature (i.e. maybe support it
> using a non-open subroutine for this release, but eventually
> discontinue it. I'm open to suggestion on this.
I'm quite happy to pay a fee just for that one feature ...
--
Craig
42. Re: Euphoria will be Free and Open Source!
>
>
> posted by: Al Getz <Xaxo at aol.com>
>
> Hi again,
>
> Yeah i see what you mean. What do we all do then?
> Perhaps work together on a public version that has the basic
> updates (like real integers, strings, whatever) while making
> ourselves our own personal versions?
I vote for gently and politely nagging Matt to put strings into OOEU!
)
Kat
43. Re: Euphoria will be Free and Open Source!
Kat wrote:
>
> >
> > posted by: Al Getz <Xaxo at aol.com>
> >
> > Hi again,
> >
> > Yeah i see what you mean. What do we all do then?
> > Perhaps work together on a public version that has the basic
> > updates (like real integers, strings, whatever) while making
> > ourselves our own personal versions?
>
> I vote for gently and politely nagging Matt to put strings into OOEU!
>
> )
>
> Kat
>
>
I really like OOEU (but not for class-based OO which I hate) because of the
integrated WX debugger. I like the idea of a graphical debugger that
automatically downgrades to a text debugger when needed. I think that it should
be a standard feature.
Strings, while important, can be added later. A few features before 'goto' ! :)
--
"Any programming problem can be solved by adding a level of indirection."
--anonymous
"Any performance problem can be solved by removing a level of indirection."
--M. Haertel
"Premature optimization is the root of all evil in programming."
--C.A.R. Hoare
j.
44. Re: Euphoria will be Free and Open Source!
Just to clarify: I really like prototyped-based OO better than class-based. I've
been studying JavaScript and IO lately...
--
"Any programming problem can be solved by adding a level of indirection."
--anonymous
"Any performance problem can be solved by removing a level of indirection."
--M. Haertel
"Premature optimization is the root of all evil in programming."
--C.A.R. Hoare
j.
45. Re: Euphoria will be Free and Open Source!
Robert Craig wrote:
> I'd like to make everything Public Domain, but if
> anyone feels that the GNU license is a better way to go,
> speak up.
I heard a rumor that Public Domain has no legal meaning in some countries. This
would mean that it would fail in its purpose.
46. Re: Euphoria will be Free and Open Source!
Kat wrote:
> Have you even looked at OOEU?
Yes I have. Matt has implemented an impressive GUI debugger and expression
evaluation system. I didnt understand the object-oriented examples though.
Regards,
Vincent
47. Re: Euphoria will be Free and Open Source!
Robert Craig wrote:
>
> Big News!
>
> I woke up this morning, the sun was shining, the birds
> were singing, and ...
>
> After considering various ways to make a big impact
> on the future of Euphoria for v3.0, including various schemes
> to partially open up the source while still retaining some
> income, I have finally decided to make Euphoria completely
> free of charge, and completely open source.
[snip]
Ok, very well!
Rob, feel free to open the bilingual Euphoria too.
Some people like it.
Good Luck in New Life!
Regards,
Igor Kachan
kinz at peterlink.ru
48. Re: Euphoria will be Free and Open Source!
Robert Craig wrote:
>
> akusaya wrote:
> .. ..
> > 2. Does it mean that we can see how shroud/bind encryption work?
>
> I will probably have to (eventually) remove the code that knows how to
> decrypt bound and shrouded programs. If I open that small bit of
> source, it will become useless, and will OFFEND people who thought
> their programs would be highly secure.
> Even without this added encryption, programs are fairly hard to figure out,
>
> since in 2.5 it's just a bunch of IL, and in earlier releases it's
> code with variables renamed, comments stripped, etc.
> I guess I'll have to "deprecate" that feature (i.e. maybe support it
> using a non-open subroutine for this release, but eventually
> discontinue it. I'm open to suggestion on this.
>
> Regards,
> Rob Craig
> Rapid Deployment Software
> <a href="http://www.RapidEuphoria.com">http://www.RapidEuphoria.com</a>
Not only offend, but provoke a potential great damage.
The security of the compiled EU programs was a guarantee that you
expressly gave to the user on purchasing your product, not just a think.
I have made a three years investment on a procedure written
in Euphoria on such basis; what should I expect now?
Antonio Alessi
49. Re: Euphoria will be Free and Open Source!
>
>
> posted by: Vincent <darkvincentdude at yahoo.com>
>
> Kat wrote:
>
> > Have you even looked at OOEU?
>
> Yes I have. Matt has implemented an impressive GUI debugger and
> expression evaluation system. I didnt understand the object-oriented
> examples though.
Matt, Vincent wants more examples also.
Kat
50. Re: Euphoria will be Free and Open Source!
Vincent wrote:
>
> Kat wrote:
>
> > You are not *required* to use Matt's objects, and you can still
> > program in a procedural fashion. It's like "goto", don't use it if you
> > don't want to!
>
> Wouldn't that depend on the libraries I use within my programs? What if I
> needed
> to use an Eu library but was written in an OO way? I would likely need to use
> a OO programming style to interface with it, correct?
>
> In that case, I would be required to program in that style or re-invent the
> wheel by creating a procedural style library. But since I dont understand
> object
> oriented concepts (no matter how hard I to learn) I wouldnt be able port the
> library.
Not necessarily. OOEU currently has the ability to preprocess code that
uses the OO features of OOEU into standard RDS Euphoria. Basically, all
the OO stuff is implemented in the front end, and only outputs standard
Euphoria IL code. The names look a little messier, since you get to see
the name decoration (which uses a pretty simple scheme, BTW). I suspect
that I'd keep this feature to maintain easier compatibility with other
Euphoria implementations.
In any case, the OO aspects of OOEU are somewhat limited. There are no
virtual functions, for instance (which some purists would say make OOEU
not really OO). Perhaps the greatest benefit is that it allows you to
use more complex, defined data structures in the place of sequences with
constants defined as accessors. And I think that if I were to add getters
and setters, you could have a more seamless use of memory structures.
Matt Lewis
51. Re: Euphoria will be Free and Open Source!
Robert Craig wrote:
>
> akusaya wrote:
> > 2. Does it mean that we can see how shroud/bind encryption work?
>
> I will probably have to (eventually) remove the code that knows how to
> decrypt bound and shrouded programs. If I open that small bit of
> source, it will become useless, and will offend people who thought
> their programs would be highly secure.
> Even without this added encryption, programs are fairly hard to figure out,
>
> since in 2.5 it's just a bunch of IL, and in earlier releases it's
> code with variables renamed, comments stripped, etc.
> I guess I'll have to "deprecate" that feature (i.e. maybe support it
> using a non-open subroutine for this release, but eventually
> discontinue it. I'm open to suggestion on this.
I don't mind if you don't open up the encryption. It's just the ability
to create il files and run them that I'm interested in.
Matt Lewis
52. Re: Euphoria will be Free and Open Source!
- Posted by ags <eu at 531pi.co.nz>
Sep 20, 2006
Robert Craig wrote:
[shrouding]
> I guess I'll have to "deprecate" that feature (i.e. maybe support it
> using a non-open subroutine for this release, but eventually
> discontinue it. I'm open to suggestion on this.
I think a shared library which only you control is fair enough, as long as it is
supported on all the platforms that Euphoria is supported on.
I think it is needed for backward compatibility, but then I guess Euphoria would
need some sort of plug-in system where you can link things into the front end (or
whatever).
Gary
53. Re: Euphoria will be Free and Open Source!
Jason Gade wrote:
>
> Kat wrote:
> > I vote for gently and politely nagging Matt to put strings into OOEU!
>
> I really like OOEU (but not for class-based OO which I hate) because of the
> integrated WX debugger. I like the idea of a graphical debugger that
> automatically
> downgrades to a text debugger when needed. I think that it should be a
> standard
> feature.
I've thought about this, and I think that once I get the source to Rob's
debugger, that's exactly what it will do. It will try to load the
graphical debugger, but will default to the text-based debugger we
currently have. Of course, there will have to be some work to get the
euphoria-based debugger working with the backend C code, since things
are handled a bit differently.
> Strings, while important, can be added later. A few features before 'goto' !
> :)
Here's my problem with adding strings (note, it's not a philosophical
issue--although I *do* find the simplicity of datatypes in Eu to be
attractive). There are currently three datatypes, and all parts of the
code have to know how to handle those types. Adding another basic type
is no simple thing.
Also, Rob has created a very optimized way to handle three data types,
and to tell them apart. Adding a fourth is not simple. I suppose that
for a string, the way to go might be to add some additional field in the
sequence struct that determines whether each element is 4-bytes or 1-byte.
Hmmm. More thought required.
Matt Lewis
54. Re: Euphoria will be Free and Open Source!
Thanks, Rob, a great decision! I only hope it's not too late. jiri
55. Re: Euphoria will be Free and Open Source!
Rob:
In my opinion making Euphoria open-source is a BIG mistake.
I think that Euphoria full source code should be made available
without restriction for a FEE that allows a purchaser to develop
it or sell it in any way that the purchaser desires. The only
requirement being that the purchaser sign a non-discloser agreement
and that RDS be given credit for it's work somewhere in the about box.
RDS would still keep a public domain version available for the
general hobbiest or users that don't have the ability to modify
the code. I'am sure that some developer's would be willing to share
some of their ideas with RDS to add to public domain version which
would take the pressure off RDS to add this feature and that feature
because a user could purchase a version developed by another user.
This would keep Euphoria from becoming a run away train.
It protects the users that already have time invested in Euphoria.
It allows Euphoria development to proceed in an orderly way.
A far as I'am concern I don't think anyone should be able to vote
on any direction of Euphoria that hasn't purchased it.
Bernie
My files in archive:
WMOTOR, XMOTOR, W32ENGIN, MIXEDLIB, EU_ENGIN, WIN32ERU, WIN32API
Can be downloaded here:
http://www.rapideuphoria.com/cgi-bin/asearch.exu?dos=on&win=on&lnx=on&gen=on&keywords=bernie+ryan
56. Re: Euphoria will be Free and Open Source!
On Fri, 22 Sep 2006 22:38:47 +0100, the dimwit Pete Lomax
<petelomax at blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
>See http:\\www.palacebuilders.co.uk\Positive.htm for more details.
when he should have said
See http://palacebuilders.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/positive.htm
Sorry about that.
Pete
57. Re: Euphoria will be Free and Open Source!
On Fri, 22 Sep 2006 16:58:51 -0700, Al Getz <guest at RapidEuphoria.com>
wrote:
>Hi there Pete,
>
>Sounds very interesting. Are you saying you dont want to go
>open source with your interpreter?
Half-and-half. The front end is open source, the back end is not,
which is not entirely dissimilar to other open source compilers that
cannot change the x86 instruction set underneath them.
You can add eg goto but can only share it as open source.
Registering a modified open source compiler (so that executables
generated can be distributed) would be no different to registering the
standard freeware version, in fact recompilation would keep any
existing status intact, I think.
While this empowers the user to get the job done, it does not grant
the ability to make money from modifying the sources, at least not
without keeping me in the loop somewhere.
>Just wondering, what kind of license do you want for Open Eu ?
Something similar, perhaps. If Rob stops making money from Eu, how
long are www.rapideuphoria , EUforum, and the archives going to last?
I am not saying that Rob has any such intentions right now, but think
about it: why would anyone remove a money-making millstone from around
their neck but keep the much-less-money-making one going?
>Also, couldnt get to your link,,,something wrong maybe?
Fixed, sorry about that.
Regards,
Pete
58. Re: Euphoria will be Free and Open Source!
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------070107030303030503030201
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Pete's comment was the catalyst for my current comment.
Perhaps we could learn from the Rexx Language Association (RexxLa).
The main site is: http://www.rexxla.org/
They have been around and been very useful for years. About 2 years ago
IBM released their very fine and powerful Object Rexx to RexxLa for
release as an open source project.
RexxLa renamed the product to Open Object Rexx (ooRexx) andstarted the
site: http://www.oorexx.org/.
They also use SourceForge:
http://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=119701.
Most of the RexxLa home site is open to the public. Some of it is
available only to dues paying members ($25 per year). The forum for
members is excellent, very professional. Most people in the forum are
professional programmers around the world. Discussions are always on
point and useful.
In general, they have some working policies and procedures.
My point? IBM recently did something like what Rob is doing. We could
probably learn from that experience. The RexxLa has already dealt with
the kinds of licensing issues (and other issues) that are coming up on
the EUforum. If their model is good and I think that it is, then lets
look at them, and see what we can learn.
Terry
Pete Lomax wrote:
>> Just wondering, what kind of license do you want for Open Eu ?
>>
> Something similar, perhaps. If Rob stops making money from Eu, how
> long are www.rapideuphoria , EUforum, and the archives going to last?
> I am not saying that Rob has any such intentions right now, but think
> about it: why would anyone remove a money-making millstone from around
> their neck but keep the much-less-money-making one going?
>
--------------070107030303030503030201
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
<title></title>
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
Pete's comment was the catalyst for my current comment.<br>
<br>
Perhaps we could learn from the Rexx Language Association (RexxLa).<br>
The main site is: <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://www.rexxla.org/">http://www.rexxla.org/</a><br>
<br>
They have been around and been very useful for years. About 2 years ago
IBM released their very fine and powerful Object Rexx to RexxLa for
release as an open source project.<br>
<br>
RexxLa renamed the product to Open Object Rexx (ooRexx) andstarted the
site: <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://www.oorexx.org/">http://www.oorexx.org/</a>. <br>
<br>
They also use SourceForge:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=119701">http://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=119701</a>.<br>
<br>
Most of the RexxLa home site is open to the public. Some of it is
available only to dues paying members ($25 per year). The forum for
members is excellent, very professional. Most people in the forum are
professional programmers around the world. Discussions are always on
point and useful.<br>
<br>
In general, they have some working policies and procedures.<br>
<br>
My point? IBM recently did something like what Rob is doing. We could
probably learn from that experience. The RexxLa has already dealt with
the kinds of licensing issues (and other issues) that are coming up on
the EUforum. If their model is good and I think that it is,
then
lets look at them, and see what we can learn.<br>
<br>
Terry <br>
<br>
Pete Lomax wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid622186920-1463747838-1159009180 at boing.topica.com"
type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Just wondering, what kind of license do you want for Open Eu ?
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->Something similar, perhaps. If Rob stops making money from
Eu, how
long are <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated"
href="http://www.rapideuphoria">www.rapideuphoria</a> , EUforum, and the archives
going to last?
I am not saying that Rob has any such intentions right now, but think
about it: why would anyone remove a money-making millstone from around
their neck but keep the much-less-money-making one going?
</pre>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>
--------------070107030303030503030201--
59. Re: Euphoria will be Free and Open Source!
- Posted by Chris Burch <chriscrylex at aol.com>
Sep 23, 2006
-
Last edited Sep 24, 2006
Pete Lomax wrote:
>
> On Fri, 22 Sep 2006 16:58:51 -0700, Al Getz <guest at RapidEuphoria.com>
> wrote:
>
> >Hi there Pete,
> >
> >Sounds very interesting. Are you saying you dont want to go
> >open source with your interpreter?
> Half-and-half. The front end is open source, the back end is not,
> which is not entirely dissimilar to other open source compilers that
> cannot change the x86 instruction set underneath them.
>
> You can add eg goto but can only share it as open source.
> Registering a modified open source compiler (so that executables
> generated can be distributed) would be no different to registering the
> standard freeware version, in fact recompilation would keep any
> existing status intact, I think.
>
> While this empowers the user to get the job done, it does not grant
> the ability to make money from modifying the sources, at least not
> without keeping me in the loop somewhere.
>
> >Just wondering, what kind of license do you want for Open Eu ?
> Something similar, perhaps. If Rob stops making money from Eu, how
> long are www.rapideuphoria , EUforum, and the archives going to last?
> I am not saying that Rob has any such intentions right now, but think
> about it: why would anyone remove a money-making millstone from around
> their neck but keep the much-less-money-making one going?
This is one of my major concerns too. Even when the license issue is finalised,
I see a year or two of instability ahead for euphoria.
>
> >Also, couldnt get to your link,,,something wrong maybe?
> Fixed, sorry about that.
>
> Regards,
> Pete
>
>
Chris
http://euallegro.wikispaces.com
http://members.aol.com/chriscrylex/euphoria.htm
http://uboard.proboards32.com/
http://members.aol.com/chriscrylex/EUSQLite/eusql.html
60. Re: Euphoria will be Free and Open Source!
- Posted by Robert Craig <rds at RapidEuphoria.com>
Sep 23, 2006
-
Last edited Sep 24, 2006
Pete Lomax wrote:
> If Rob stops making money from Eu, how
> long are www.rapideuphoria , EUforum, and the archives going to last?
The buck or two per day that I make from Google ads easily
covers the cost of shared hosting and domain name registration
for RapidEuphoria.com and ListFilter.com. Actually, RapidEuphoria.com
is all paid up until August 2010 as far as the domain name is concerned.
> I am not saying that Rob has any such intentions right now, but think
> about it: why would anyone remove a money-making millstone from around
> their neck but keep the much-less-money-making one going?
Fame? Glory?
Regards,
Rob Craig
Rapid Deployment Software
http://www.RapidEuphoria.com
61. Re: Euphoria will be Free and Open Source!
Robert Craig wrote:
>
> Pete Lomax wrote:
> > If Rob stops making money from Eu, how
> > long are www.rapideuphoria , EUforum, and the archives going to last?
>
> The buck or two per day that I make from Google ads easily
> covers the cost of shared hosting and domain name registration
> for RapidEuphoria.com and ListFilter.com. Actually, RapidEuphoria.com
> is all paid up until August 2010 as far as the domain name is concerned.
>
> > I am not saying that Rob has any such intentions right now, but think
> > about it: why would anyone remove a money-making millstone from around
> > their neck but keep the much-less-money-making one going?
>
> Fame? Glory?
>
> Regards,
> Rob Craig
> Rapid Deployment Software
> <a href="http://www.RapidEuphoria.com">http://www.RapidEuphoria.com</a>
Just think, in the year 2160 somebody puts a note in their
world renown Eu interpreter debug about box and docs...
"Original Interpreter Design by Robert Craig of RDS"
Take care,
Al
E boa sorte com sua programacao Euphoria!
My bumper sticker: "I brake for LED's"
From "Black Knight":
"I can live with losing the good fight,
but i can not live without fighting it".
"Well on second thought, maybe not."
62. Re: Euphoria will be Free and Open Source!
Robert Craig wrote:
> The buck or two per day that I make from Google ads easily
> covers the cost of shared hosting and domain name registration
> for RapidEuphoria.com and ListFilter.com. Actually, RapidEuphoria.com
> is all paid up until August 2010 as far as the domain name is concerned.
Bah you can still make money with:
A) A cash donation button
B) Listfilter subscriptions
C) Contract programming
D) Professional support
E) Additional page ads
F) All of the above
Regards,
Vincent
63. Re: Euphoria will be Free and Open Source!
Hi everybody,
Kudos to Rob and all that stuff.
If Rob is willing to make the source PD, then I don't see why anybody
should have a problem with that.
If someone wants to apply some crazy eula on their code, then they can do so.
That's the beauty of opensource, IMO. Once you apply restrictions that can never
be undone, it's not 'open' source anymore is it?
Who has the capital to enforce it anyway?
64. Re: Euphoria will be Free and Open Source!
------=_Part_8789_1842326.1159070934052
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Hi folks,
I haven't written to this list for a looong time... actually I haven't
written any new Euphoria programs for many years now, but I still
occasionally check the list and website to see how things are going.
Open-sourcing Euphoria is a great decision; I just might go back to playing
with the open Eu someday. Congratulations and thanks, Rob!
Just a thought on this binder/shrouder thing: distributing a closed-source
module or shared library to be linked with the open-source code seems like a
bad idea to me. If the module only performs the decryption, since it would
have to give the decrypted IL for the open-source part to execute, it would
be possible to create a program that feeds the encrypted code into the
module and outputs the corresponding plain code. So, to really protect the
shrouded code, it would be necessary for the module to contain an
independent, closed interpreter for running it, which doesn't look like an
interesting option and would cause all sorts of problems.
So I believe the most feasible and secure option is that running shrouded
code should continue to be possible only via closed executables distributed
by RDS. Since such executables are already available for the most recent
Euphoria version and all existing shrouded code can be run with them, maybe
support for them could simply be dropped from future releases. Registered
users who want to use their code with new Euphoria versions can use the
compilers or distribute normal IL files (which should be hard enough to
decompile already - maybe this will create a new market for Euphoria IL
obfuscators, similar to what happens in the Java world).
Depending on the license chosen for the open-source Eu, mantaining a closed
version of Euphoria incorporating other people's code might be possible, or
it may require special steps, such as requiring contributors to assign
copyright on their code to RDS or to license it separately to RDS for
inclusion in the closed software. If this is too much trouble but Rob
doesn't want to abandon his registered users completely, he could create a
final 3.0 closed version with the modifications he has made so far to give
them more time to adapt to the new situation.
Of couse, since I've been away for so long, there may have been changes that
make what I'm saying irrelevant or just plain wrong...
Best wishes,
Davi
On 9/20/06, ags <guest at rapideuphoria.com> wrote:
>
>
> posted by: ags <eu at 531pi.co.nz>
>
> Robert Craig wrote:
> [shrouding]
> > I guess I'll have to "deprecate" that feature (i.e. maybe support it
> > using a non-open subroutine for this release, but eventually
> > discontinue it. I'm open to suggestion on this.
>
> I think a shared library which only you control is fair enough, as long as
> it is supported on all the platforms that Euphoria is supported on.
>
> I think it is needed for backward compatibility, but then I guess Euphoria
> would need some sort of plug-in system where you can link things into the
> front end (or whatever).
>
> Gary
>
>
------=_Part_8789_1842326.1159070934052
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Hi folks,<br><br>I haven't written to this list for a looong time... actually I
haven't written any new Euphoria programs for many years now, but I still
occasionally check the list and website to see how things are going.
Open-sourcing Euphoria is a great decision; I just might go back to playing with
the open Eu someday. Congratulations and thanks, Rob!
<br><br>Just a thought on this binder/shrouder thing: distributing a
closed-source module or shared library to be linked with the open-source code
seems like a bad idea to me. If the module only performs the decryption, since it
would have to give the decrypted IL for the open-source part to execute, it would
be possible to create a program that feeds the encrypted code into the module and
outputs the corresponding plain code. So, to really protect the shrouded code, it
would be necessary for the module to contain an independent, closed interpreter
for running it, which doesn't look like an interesting option and would cause all
sorts of problems.
<br><br>So I believe the most feasible and secure option is that running
shrouded code should continue to be possible only via closed executables
distributed by RDS. Since such executables are already available for the most
recent Euphoria version and all existing shrouded code can be run with them,
maybe support for them could simply be dropped from future releases. Registered
users who want to use their code with new Euphoria versions can use the compilers
or distribute normal IL files (which should be hard enough to decompile already -
maybe this will create a new market for Euphoria IL obfuscators, similar to what
happens in the Java world).
<br><br>Depending on the license chosen for the open-source Eu, mantaining a
closed version of Euphoria incorporating other people's code might be possible,
or it may require special steps, such as requiring contributors to assign
copyright on their code to RDS or to license it separately to RDS for inclusion
in the closed software. If this is too much trouble but Rob doesn't want to
abandon his registered users completely, he could create a final
3.0 closed version with the modifications he has made so far to give them more
time to adapt to the new situation.<br><br>Of couse, since I've been away for so
long, there may have been changes that make what I'm saying irrelevant or just
plain wrong...
<br><br>Best wishes,<br>Davi<br><br><br><div><span class="gmail_quote">On
9/20/06, <b class="gmail_sendername">ags</b> <<a href="mailto:guest at
rapideuphoria.com">guest at rapideuphoria.com</a>> wrote:</span><blockquote
class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt
0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
============ The Euphoria Mailing List ============<br><br><br>posted by: ags
<eu at <a href="http://531pi.co.nz">531pi.co.nz</a>><br><br>Robert Craig
wrote:<br>[shrouding]<br>> I guess I'll have to "deprecate" that
feature (
i.e. maybe support it<br>> using a non-open subroutine for this release, but
eventually<br>> discontinue it. I'm open to suggestion on this.<br><br>I think
a shared library which only you control is fair enough, as long as it is
supported on all the platforms that Euphoria is supported on.
<br><br>I think it is needed for backward compatibility, but then I guess
Euphoria would need some sort of plug-in system where you can link things into
the front end (or whatever).<br><br>Gary<br><br></blockquote></div><br>
------=_Part_8789_1842326.1159070934052--
65. Re: Euphoria will be Free and Open Source!
On Sat, 23 Sep 2006 16:36:06 -0700, Robert Craig
<guest at RapidEuphoria.com> wrote:
>Pete Lomax wrote:
>> If Rob stops making money from Eu, how
>> long are www.rapideuphoria , EUforum, and the archives going to last?
>
>The buck or two per day
...is not exactly a strong incentive...
>that I make from Google ads easily
>covers the cost of shared hosting and domain name registration
>for RapidEuphoria.com and ListFilter.com. Actually, RapidEuphoria.com
>is all paid up until August 2010 as far as the domain name is concerned.
>
>> I am not saying that Rob has any such intentions right now, but think
>> about it: why would anyone remove a money-making millstone from around
>> their neck but keep the much-less-money-making one going?
>
>Fame? Glory?
You may joke but... Nice to know we have 4 years "in the kitty"...
I still think there is a huge divide between the front and back ends,
as you obviously felt when 2.5 was released. It is only the front end
that actually empowers users, assuming of course that the back end is
turing-complete, and that you have a method of allowing an open source
front end to use a closed source back end, which I guess you don't.
Looking back at the 2.3 source licence, comparing it to 2.5 (both of
which I felt were too restrictive), now this, seems you are throwing
in the towel, but I guess I have to accept it is your choice.
Regards,
Pete
66. Re: Euphoria will be Free and Open Source!
On Sat, 2006-09-23 at 17:28 -0700, Al Getz wrote:
> Just think, in the year 2160 somebody puts a note in their
> world renown Eu interpreter debug about box and docs...
>
> "Original Interpreter Design by Robert Craig of RDS"
>
>
> Al
You planning on living to see 2160?? by that time, programs will
be writing themselves...
lol
Euman
67. Re: Euphoria will be Free and Open Source!
Euman wrote:
> You planning on living to see 2160?? by that time, programs will
> be writing themselves...
By that time they will have invented the Star trek holodeck. You will tell it in
spoken English what scenario to create and it will create it and then say
"Program is complete. Enter when ready.".
68. Re: Euphoria will be Free and Open Source!
Maybe this will make me sound like a Luddite, but I hope that the 'blessed'
official version of Euphoria stays close to it's
'roots' of simplicity and doesn't succumb to feature creep.
The minimalistic nature of the language was the main attraction for me when I
discovered it 6 years ago. (that, and it's flexibility). Less is more!
My 2 cents.
69. Re: Euphoria will be Free and Open Source!
Jules Davy wrote:
>
> Maybe this will make me sound like a Luddite, but I hope that the 'blessed'
> official version of Euphoria stays close to it's
> 'roots' of simplicity and doesn't succumb to feature creep.
> The minimalistic nature of the language was the main attraction for me when
> I
> discovered it 6 years ago. (that, and it's flexibility). Less is more!
>
> My 2 cents.
Hi there,
Good Point. That's one of the things i liked too, because as
long as i used a little discretion when writing the code i could
understand it rather quickly again two years later, after not
having looked at it for all that time.
I guess there will have to be a trade off sooner or later.
Either you have more functionality or you have super simple
syntax.
Take care,
Al
E boa sorte com sua programacao Euphoria!
My bumper sticker: "I brake for LED's"
From "Black Knight":
"I can live with losing the good fight,
but i can not live without fighting it".
"Well on second thought, maybe not."
