OpenEuphoria

1. Missing library

• Posted by Tommy Carlier <tommy.carlier at pandora.be> Jul 12, 2004
• 926 views

You sometimes download a program or library, just to find out some library is
missing.

Wouldn't it be nice if there was some kind of search engine where you type in a
filename and you get a link to the ZIP-file(s) (in the recent user
contributions/archive) where you can find the library?

--
tommy online: http://users.pandora.be/tommycarlier
Euphoria Message Board: http://uboard.proboards32.com

Tommy Carlier wrote:
> 
> You sometimes download a program or library, just to find out some library is
> missing.
> 
> Wouldn't it be nice if there was some kind of search engine where you type in
> a filename
> and you get a link to the ZIP-file(s) (in the recent user
> contributions/archive) where
> you can find the library?

Yes.
I'll think about this after the release.
I guess you could locate the .zips (.tars, etc.) that contain
a certain file. You'd then have to use your judgment
to determine which zip had the definitive, latest and
greatest version of a library.

Regards,
   Rob Craig
   Rapid Deployment Software
   http://www.RapidEuphoria.com

3. Re: Missing library

• Posted by rudy toews <rltoews at ilos.net> Jul 12, 2004
• 770 views

Robert Craig wrote:
> 
> Tommy Carlier wrote:
> > 
> > You sometimes download a program or library, just to find out some library
> > is missing.
> > 
> > Wouldn't it be nice if there was some kind of search engine where you type
> > in a filename
> > and you get a link to the ZIP-file(s) (in the recent user
> > contributions/archive) where
> > you can find the library?
> 
> Yes.
> I'll think about this after the release.
> I guess you could locate the .zips (.tars, etc.) that contain
> a certain file. You'd then have to use your judgment
> to determine which zip had the definitive, latest and
> greatest version of a library.
> 
> Regards,
>    Rob Craig
>    Rapid Deployment Software
>    <a href="http://www.RapidEuphoria.com">http://www.RapidEuphoria.com</a>
> 

recent attempts to find updates for other software made me think(again).
my anti-virus i use , has a download button to get updates.
other software have sites showing static lists of dll's available. you must
choose the right one of course.
a trouble shooter program for my video card can profile the system and send back
to tech of that company.
the idea:
a: 
a user can profile their system, send it to the archive which reads it and sends
back the latest versions of libs. or at least a list of links the user can do at
one's convience. but not all latest versions would work with older/useful
software. so generations of libs would have to be kept.
or at least the profile of generations available on ones own system.

b:
an archive representing an include folder on an imaginary system. where one can
browse for what is needed. along with a map(profile?) of the archive
contents showing the relationship of app with the needed libs?
the profile could simply end up being a static list/map of links toclick.

easier said than done, i know. but it is something that certain o.s. don't even
do when needed patches are somewhere. only on static lists, not knowing which one
to get, without a lot of reading.

later
rudy

rudy toews wrote:

> recent attempts to find updates for other software made me think(again).
> my anti-virus i use , has a download button to get updates.
> other software have sites showing static lists of dll's available. you must
> choose
> the right one of course.
> a trouble shooter program for my video card can profile the system and send
> back to
> tech of that company.
> the idea:
> a: 
> a user can profile their system, send it to the archive which reads it and
> sends back
> the latest versions of libs. or at least a list of links the user can do at
> one's convience.
> but not all latest versions would work with older/useful software. so
> generations of
> libs would have to be kept.
> or at least the profile of generations available on ones own system.
> 
> b:
> an archive representing an include folder on an imaginary system. where one
> can browse
> for what is needed. along with a map(profile?) of the archive
> contents showing the relationship of app with the needed libs?
> the profile could simply end up being a static list/map of links toclick.
> 
> easier said than done, i know. but it is something that certain o.s. don't
> even do
> when needed patches are somewhere. only on static lists, not knowing which one
> to get,
> without a lot of reading.

A nice idea, but impossible to implement until and unless there 
is a naming and versioning standard which all contributions are required 
to follow. 

As it stands, not even Euphoria can programatically retrieve its own 
version, can it?

Irv

5. Re: Missing library

• Posted by Pete Lomax <petelomax at blueyonder.co.uk> Jul 13, 2004
• 793 views

On Mon, 12 Jul 2004 14:23:49 -0700, irv mullins
<guest at RapidEuphoria.com> wrote:

>As it stands, not even Euphoria can programatically retrieve its own 
>version, can it?

This has been discussed before. You can try opening a %EUINC% file,
should start with eg "-- Euphoria 2.4". But in general you are right,
there is no way to properly do this.

Pete

On Mon, 12 Jul 2004 16:21:35 -0700, rudy toews
<guest at RapidEuphoria.com> wrote:

>Robert Craig wrote:
>> Tommy Carlier wrote:
>> > You sometimes download a program or library, just to find out some library
>> > is missing.
>> > Wouldn't it be nice if there was some kind of search engine where you type
>> > in a filename
>> Yes.
>> I'll think about this after the release.
>> I guess you could locate the .zips (.tars, etc.) that contain
>> a certain file. You'd then have to use your judgment
>> to determine which zip had the definitive, latest and
>> greatest version of a library.
That will be handy.

<snip>
>the idea:
>a: 
>a user can profile their system, 
<snip>
Thinking out loud here, I'd like to see a program self-verify it has
the correct/expected/supported include files.

I'm thinking eg:

	constant validate_self=0, checksum=#00000000
	procedure validate()
	integer c
		c=read_file_and_build_checksum()
		if validate_self then
			if c!=(checksum) then
				error("wrong version of ...")
				abort(1)
			end if
		else
			seek(24?)
			printf(1,"1,checksum=#%08x",c)
			puts(1,"new checksum generated")
		end if
	end procedure
	validate()

The idea is that the programmer (manually) edits validate_self to 0,
tests the program, then ships the automatically-self-modified files.

Thoughts anyone?
Pete

PS You could also ([1] see below) have eg:

include selftest.e
--nclude w0591.ew
include w0592.ew
--nclude w0600.ew
--nclude win32lib.ew

and each time it runs it patches a "--" with "in" at random, except
for the final release when it leaves it as win32lib.ew
Admittedly, in the case of win32lib, checking the value of
Win32LibVersion (against a table of allowed values) is obviously much
better than a crc, but you don't necessarily have that luxury on all
third party components your app uses.

 [1] I don't really rate the idea of supporting multiple versions of a
lib, but this self-verify idea may need to be a bit more general
purpose than my or anyone else's specific needs. I daresay this random
patching could easily cause severe programmer difficulties, such is
the burden of supporting multiple lib versions.

7. Re: Missing library

• Posted by "Kat" <gertie at visionsix.com> Jul 13, 2004
• 783 views

On 12 Jul 2004, at 16:21, rudy toews wrote:

> 
> 
> posted by: rudy toews <rltoews at ilos.net>
> 
> Robert Craig wrote:
> > 
> > Tommy Carlier wrote:
> > > 
> > > You sometimes download a program or library, just to find out some library
> > > is missing.
> > > 
> > > Wouldn't it be nice if there was some kind of search engine where you type
> > > in a filename and you get a link to the ZIP-file(s) (in the recent user
> > > contributions/archive) where you can find the library?
> > 
> > Yes.
> > I'll think about this after the release.
> > I guess you could locate the .zips (.tars, etc.) that contain
> > a certain file. You'd then have to use your judgment
> > to determine which zip had the definitive, latest and
> > greatest version of a library.
> > 
> > Regards,
> >    Rob Craig
> >    Rapid Deployment Software
> >    <a href="http://www.RapidEuphoria.com">http://www.RapidEuphoria.com</a>
> > 
> 
> recent attempts to find updates for other software made me think(again).
> my anti-virus i use , has a download button to get updates.
> other software have sites showing static lists of dll's available. you must
> choose the right one of course. a trouble shooter program for my video card
> can
> profile the system and send back to tech of that company. the idea: a: a user
> can profile their system, send it to the archive which reads it and sends back
> the latest versions of libs. or at least a list of links the user can do at
> one's convience. but not all latest versions would work with older/useful
> software. so generations of libs would have to be kept. or at least the
> profile
> of generations available on ones own system.
> 
> b:
> an archive representing an include folder on an imaginary system. where one
> can
> browse for what is needed. along with a map(profile?) of the archive contents
> showing the relationship of app with the needed libs? the profile could simply
> end up being a static list/map of links toclick.
> 
> easier said than done, i know. but it is something that certain o.s. don't
> even
> do when needed patches are somewhere. only on static lists, not knowing which
> one to get, without a lot of reading.

Just be sure the author has included all the needed files in the zip in the 
archive?

Kat

Pete Lomax wrote:
> <guest at RapidEuphoria.com> wrote:
> >As it stands, not even Euphoria can programatically retrieve its own 
> >version, can it?
> 
> This has been discussed before. You can try opening a %EUINC% file,
> should start with eg "-- Euphoria 2.4". But in general you are right,
> there is no way to properly do this.

I have an idea for an easy-to-use/easy-to-implement versioning system for the
next version(s) of Euphoria: have the interpreter set an environment variable
with its version, like EUVER="2.5 beta". That way, programmers can easily access
the version-info and no new function has to be created. If the variable can't be
found, the program knows its version 2.4 or earlier. No extra function means
backward compatibility.

--
tommy online: http://users.pandora.be/tommycarlier
Euphoria Message Board: http://uboard.proboards32.com

9. Re: Missing library

• Posted by Tommy Carlier <tommy.carlier at pandora.be> Jul 13, 2004
• 827 views

Kat wrote:
> Just be sure the author has included all the needed files in the zip in the 
> archive?

Sure, then we'll all have big ZIP-files to add a little functionality to
Win32Lib, we'll have 30 copies of (usually the same version of) Win32Lib. Hey,
but why stop there: why don't we all include the Euphoria interpreter and base
libraries, so that you're sure you've got the right version to run your
application.

--
tommy online: http://users.pandora.be/tommycarlier
Euphoria Message Board: http://uboard.proboards32.com

irv mullins wrote:

> A nice idea, but impossible to implement until and unless there 
> is a naming and versioning standard which all contributions are required 
> to follow. 

Thanks, i thought the same as it has not yet been done.

i was trying to picture a outline /tree at the moment.

a. program name
    version number
      b: first include statement from program
          c: - version of include lib
          d: -- html link to internet version
          e: -- path to local disk /back up copy (1 verion/gen backwards)
          f: -- number of prgram using this include
      b: second include statement

or a program that manages the euphoria include folder. as a univeral include
folder for all programs.
putting all programs needed include files in it and tracking where they belong
to(owner). then manual maintenance of include folder would have data to work with
so as not to delete incorrect files if they are needed elsewhere.
using euphoria's own include folder , one might have needed includes already. 
also overwrite with wrong file 

still pondering on it.
ideas welcome.

later
rudy

11. Re: Missing library

• Posted by rudy toews <rltoews at ilos.net> Jul 13, 2004
• 813 views

Pete Lomax wrote:
 Thinking out loud here, I'd like to see a program self-verify it has
> the correct/expected/supported include files.
> 
> I'm thinking eg:
> 
> 	constant validate_self=0, checksum=#00000000
> 	procedure validate()
> 	integer c
> 		c=read_file_and_build_checksum()
> 		if validate_self then
> 			if c!=(checksum) then
> 				error("wrong version of ...")
> 				abort(1)
> 			end if
> 		else
> 			seek(24?)
> 			printf(1,"1,checksum=#%08x",c)
> 			puts(1,"new checksum generated")
> 		end if
> 	end procedure
> 	validate()
> 
> The idea is that the programmer (manually) edits validate_self to 0,
> tests the program, then ships the automatically-self-modified files.
> 
> Thoughts anyone?
> Pete
> 
> PS You could also ([1] see below) have eg:
> 
> include selftest.e
> --nclude w0591.ew
> include w0592.ew
> --nclude w0600.ew
> --nclude win32lib.ew
> 
> and each time it runs it patches a "--" with "in" at random, except
> for the final release when it leaves it as win32lib.ew
> Admittedly, in the case of win32lib, checking the value of
> Win32LibVersion (against a table of allowed values) is obviously much
> better than a crc, but you don't necessarily have that luxury on all
> third party components your app uses.
> 
>  [1] I don't really rate the idea of supporting multiple versions of a
> lib, but this self-verify idea may need to be a bit more general
> purpose than my or anyone else's specific needs. I daresay this random
> patching could easily cause severe programmer difficulties, such is
> the burden of supporting multiple lib versions.
> 

i like this self checking idea. thinking outloud here too ...
maybe as a constant, a sequence of all the include statements.
can be looked for in the binary code or interpreted source.
with the line number they should be on, or memory address?

i i have also been pondering how to add a little AI to programs to self
validate. an alternate form of anti-virus protection. instead of having to
maintain a list of virus programs, simplify by having program check itself for
flaws.
'picking oneself up by ones own bootstraps'
so virus programs would fail to infect in the first place, some randomness must
be used to do this. yet still be recognized by the program and yet ignored by the
virus.
no concrete outline of idea yet, still bouncing it around inside my head.
i work 8pm- 4a.m., so it takes a lot of bouncing to get thoughts straight.
later
rudy

Kat wrote:
 
> Just be sure the author has included all the needed files in the zip in the 
> archive?
> 
> Kat
> 
it is certainly good programming practice to do so.

maybe a x-ref of libs in an online file for all programmers to view.
so they can check what is out there already and not include it again.
if they want to try and keep zip files small.
A: libname (ext)  e ,ew,eu
   B: owner programs
   C: or used by following programs:

this would not be a definitive method though.. no version checking

thanks
later
rudy

13. Re: Missing library

• Posted by Johnny L Noble <jlnoble at frontiernet.net> Jul 13, 2004
• 808 views

irv mullins wrote:

> As it stands, not even Euphoria can programatically retrieve its own 
> version, can it?
> 
> Irv
> 

Hello Irv,I think Rob posted this a while back.

------------------------Get Version Info of Euphoria--------------------- include Win32lib.ew include wildcard.e object path,key integer lp,lv,fn sequence version

with trace trace(1) path=lower(command_line()) if equal(path[1],path[2]) then

if program is bound, we don't care what version or even whether euphoria is installed or not. puts(1,"bound?") if getc(0) then end if abort(0) end if path=getenv("EUDIR") if atom(path) then path=command_line() path=lower(path[1]) lp=length(path) if lp>7 and equal(path[lp-6..lp],"exw.exe") then lp-=7 elsif lp>6 and equal(path[lp-5..lp],"ex.exe") then lp-=6 elsif lp>2 and equal(path[lp-1..lp],"eu") then untested lp-=2 else puts(1,"unknown executable\n") if getc(0) then end if abort(0) end if if lp<5 or not find(path[lp],"
/") or not equal(path[lp-3..lp-1],"bin") or not find(path[lp-4],"
/") then puts(1,"bin dir not recognised\n") if getc(0) then end if abort(0) end if path=path[1..lp-5] end if path&="
include
get.e" fn=open(path,"r") if fn=-1 then printf(1,"error opening %s\n",{path}) if getc(0) then end if abort(0) end if version=gets(fn) close(fn) lv=length(version) while find(version[lv],"\r\n") do lv-=1 end while trace(1) version=version[lv-2..lv] if not equal(version,"2.4") then printf(1,"Version is:%s\n",{version}) puts(1,"upgrade required\n") if getc(0) then end if abort(0) end if printf(1,"Euphoria Version %s\n",{version}) key=wait_key() </eucode

Johnny :)

jln }}}

Not Categorized, Please Help

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

Johnny L Noble wrote:
 
> Hello Irv,I think Rob posted this a while back.

<snipped bunches o'code>

Good grief! While no doubt that works, I have to wonder why there 
isn't just a simple function, euversion() as one of the built-ins?
I mean, we have platform(), that's got to be more complicated than 
just returning a hard-coded number.

Irv

15. Re: Missing library

• Posted by Robert Craig <rds at RapidEuphoria.com> Jul 13, 2004
• 942 views

Johnny L Noble wrote:
> Hello Irv,I think Rob posted this a while back.

That isn't my code.

Regards,
   Rob Craig
   Rapid Deployment Software
   http://www.RapidEuphoria.com

On Tue, 13 Jul 2004 13:07:53 -0700, Johnny L Noble
<guest at RapidEuphoria.com> wrote:

>Hello Irv,I think Rob posted this a while back.
<snip>
I'm afraid to admit that bit of nonsense was mine...

Pete

17. Re: Missing library

• Posted by Pete Lomax <petelomax at blueyonder.co.uk> Jul 13, 2004
• 802 views

On Tue, 13 Jul 2004 13:07:48 -0700, irv mullins
<guest at RapidEuphoria.com> wrote:

>I mean, we have platform(), that's got to be more complicated than 
>just returning a hard-coded number.
LOL. Re-read the refman: ex.exe has a hard-coded 1, exw.exe has a
hard-coded 2, and exu has a hard-coded 3. (good eh?)

Pete

On 13 Jul 2004, at 13:07, Tommy Carlier wrote:

> 
> 
> posted by: Tommy Carlier <tommy.carlier at pandora.be>
> 
> Pete Lomax wrote:
> > <guest at RapidEuphoria.com> wrote:
> > >As it stands, not even Euphoria can programatically retrieve its own 
> > >version, can it?
> > 
> > This has been discussed before. You can try opening a %EUINC% file,
> > should start with eg "-- Euphoria 2.4". But in general you are right,
> > there is no way to properly do this.
> 
> I have an idea for an easy-to-use/easy-to-implement versioning system for the
> next version(s) of Euphoria: have the interpreter set an environment variable
> with its version, like EUVER="2.5 beta". That way, programmers can easily
> access
> the version-info and no new function has to be created. If the variable can't
> be
> found, the program knows its version 2.4 or earlier. No extra function means
> backward compatibility.

Jeeze, you might as well say everyone hasto write code in their program to 
check all the stuff you write to the envvars, and then update all their 
contributions in the archives! Why not go further, and say they haveto include 
the interpreter that their app was written to use??

Can two play this game?
Kat

19. Re: Missing library

• Posted by irv mullins <irvm at ellijay.com> Jul 14, 2004
• 797 views

Pete Lomax wrote:
> 
> On Tue, 13 Jul 2004 13:07:48 -0700, irv mullins
> <guest at RapidEuphoria.com> wrote:
> 
> >I mean, we have platform(), that's got to be more complicated than 
> >just returning a hard-coded number.
> LOL. Re-read the refman: ex.exe has a hard-coded 1, exw.exe has a
> hard-coded 2, and exu has a hard-coded 3. (good eh?)

So that's why platform() can't tell the diff between Linux and BSD. 
Come to think of it, since the BSD interpreter comes as a separate
download, why does it return the same number as the Linux version?

Irv

Kat wrote:
> On 13 Jul 2004, at 13:07, Tommy Carlier wrote:
> > posted by: Tommy Carlier <tommy.carlier at pandora.be>
> > Pete Lomax wrote:
> > > <guest at RapidEuphoria.com> wrote:
> > > >As it stands, not even Euphoria can programatically retrieve its own 
> > > >version, can it?
> > > 
> > > This has been discussed before. You can try opening a %EUINC% file,
> > > should start with eg "-- Euphoria 2.4". But in general you are right,
> > > there is no way to properly do this.
> > 
> > I have an idea for an easy-to-use/easy-to-implement versioning system for
> > the
> > next version(s) of Euphoria: have the interpreter set an environment
> > variable
> > with its version, like EUVER="2.5 beta". That way, programmers can easily
> > access
> > the version-info and no new function has to be created. If the variable
> > can't be
> > found, the program knows its version 2.4 or earlier. No extra function means
> > backward compatibility.
> 
> Jeeze, you might as well say everyone hasto write code in their program to 
> check all the stuff you write to the envvars, and then update all their 
> contributions in the archives! Why not go further, and say they haveto include
>
> the interpreter that their app was written to use??
> 
> Can two play this game?
> Kat

:D
I really enjoyed this one. But it's not quite the same.

I wrote my sarcastic comments on your message, because you were attacking me
while I had done nothing wrong.

You are *attempting* to write an equally sarcastic comment on my innocent
message that is not attacking anybody, just suggesting something.

There is a big difference between your:
> Perhaps not all the required files are included in the .zip file?
> (*They should be*, else ...)

And my:
> *I have an idea* for an easy-to-use/easy-to-implement versioning system for...

--
tommy online: http://users.pandora.be/tommycarlier
Euphoria Message Board: http://uboard.proboards32.com

21. Re: Missing library

• Posted by Matt Lewis <matthewwalkerlewis at yahoo.com> Jul 14, 2004
• 800 views

irv mullins wrote:
> 
> So that's why platform() can't tell the diff between Linux and BSD. 
> Come to think of it, since the BSD interpreter comes as a separate
> download, why does it return the same number as the Linux version?
> 

Here's Rob's original post:
http://www.listfilter.com/cgi-bin/esearch.exu?thread=1&fromMonth=3&fromYear=7&toMonth=5&toYear=7&keywords=%22Euphoria+for+FreeBSD!%22
Search May 2002:
"Euphoria for FreeBSD!"

Also, Rob recently talked about it in a thread:
http://www.listfilter.com/cgi-bin/esearch.exu?thread=1&fromMonth=5&fromYear=9&toMonth=7&toYear=9&keywords=%222.5+Suggestion+(Bob+Craig)%22

You can search on May 2004 Jul 2004 to get the thread:
"2.5 Suggestion (Bob Craig)"

Matt Lewis

Robert Craig wrote:
> 
> Johnny L Noble wrote:
> > Hello Irv,I think Rob posted this a while back.
> 
> That isn't my code.
> 
> Regards,
>    Rob Craig
>    Rapid Deployment Software
>    <a href="http://www.RapidEuphoria.com">http://www.RapidEuphoria.com</a>
> 

Sorry Rob my memory isn't as good as i thought it was!

Johnny :(
jln

23. Re: Missing library

• Posted by "Kat" <gertie at visionsix.com> Jul 15, 2004
• 814 views

On 14 Jul 2004, at 6:18, Tommy Carlier wrote:

> 
> 
> posted by: Tommy Carlier <tommy.carlier at pandora.be>
> 
> Kat wrote:
> > On 13 Jul 2004, at 13:07, Tommy Carlier wrote:
> > > posted by: Tommy Carlier <tommy.carlier at pandora.be>
> > > Pete Lomax wrote:
> > > > <guest at RapidEuphoria.com> wrote:
> > > > >As it stands, not even Euphoria can programatically retrieve its own
> > > > >version, can it?
> > > > 
> > > > This has been discussed before. You can try opening a %EUINC% file,
> > > > should start with eg "-- Euphoria 2.4". But in general you are right,
> > > > there is no way to properly do this.
> > > 
> > > I have an idea for an easy-to-use/easy-to-implement versioning system for
> > > the next version(s) of Euphoria: have the interpreter set an environment
> > > variable with its version, like EUVER="2.5 beta". That way, programmers
> > > can
> > > easily access the version-info and no new function has to be created. If
> > > the
> > > variable can't be found, the program knows its version 2.4 or earlier. No
> > > extra function means backward compatibility.
> > 
> > Jeeze, you might as well say everyone hasto write code in their program to
> > check all the stuff you write to the envvars, and then update all their
> > contributions in the archives! Why not go further, and say they haveto
> > include
> > the interpreter that their app was written to use??
> > 
> > Can two play this game?
> > Kat
> 
> :D
> I really enjoyed this one. But it's not quite the same.
> 
> I wrote my sarcastic comments on your message, because you were attacking me
> while I had done nothing wrong.
> 
> You are *attempting* to write an equally sarcastic comment on my innocent
> message that is not attacking anybody, just suggesting something.
> 
> There is a big difference between your:
> > Perhaps not all the required files are included in the .zip file?
> > (*They should be*, else ...)

Ah, there's the bug. That isn't an attack, but it is a suggestion. Heck, 
consider it a strong suggestion. But it is not in any way a personal attack!

> And my:
> > *I have an idea* for an easy-to-use/easy-to-implement versioning system
> > for...

Well, looks the same to me. My idea... your idea, no attacks, just wasted 
bytes. I still abide by my suggestion, while i remember the thread about 
versioning systems people have propsed over the years, which usually 
required a extra include, and pretty much just crashed the application if the 
wrong include file (usually a win32lib version, no not an attack on Derek, this 
had been discussed before Derek took over win32lib) was not present. 
Rather like if the app had run without the versioning system. If all the code is
included in the original zip, there is no need for versioning each and every 
include (as if the author of the include complied with the mandate to supply a 
standard version line in their code they submitted 5 years ago).

Kat