1. ver 4.0 question
Where is the feature list posted that describes all of the features
that will be included in 4.0 ?
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
2. Re: ver 4.0 question
Bernie Ryan wrote:
>
> Where is the feature list posted that describes all of the features
> that will be included in 4.0 ?
>
I do not think an exhaustive list exists as of yet.
http://openeuphoria.org/wiki/euwiki.cgi?NewFeatures40
http://openeuphoria.org/wiki/euwiki.cgi?Roadmap40
http://openeuphoria.org/wiki/euwiki.cgi?Organizing40
are a few starting points but nothing consolidated and complete.
--
Jeremy Cowgar
http://jeremy.cowgar.com
3. Re: ver 4.0 question
Jeremy Cowgar wrote:
>
> Bernie Ryan wrote:
> >
> > Where is the feature list posted that describes all of the features
> > that will be included in 4.0 ?
> >
>
> I do not think an exhaustive list exists as of yet.
>
> <a
> href="http://openeuphoria.org/wiki/euwiki.cgi?NewFeatures40">http://openeuphoria.org/wiki/euwiki.cgi?NewFeatures40</a>
> <a
> href="http://openeuphoria.org/wiki/euwiki.cgi?Roadmap40">http://openeuphoria.org/wiki/euwiki.cgi?Roadmap40</a>
> <a
> href="http://openeuphoria.org/wiki/euwiki.cgi?Organizing40">http://openeuphoria.org/wiki/euwiki.cgi?Organizing40</a>
>
> are a few starting points but nothing consolidated and complete.
>
> --
> Jeremy Cowgar
> <a href="http://jeremy.cowgar.com">http://jeremy.cowgar.com</a>
Don't forget large file support! I think Jim Brown is working on that.
--
A complex system that works is invariably found to have evolved from a simple
system that works.
--John Gall's 15th law of Systemantics.
"Premature optimization is the root of all evil in programming."
--C.A.R. Hoare
j.
4. Re: ver 4.0 question
Jason Gade wrote:
>
> Jeremy Cowgar wrote:
> >
> > Bernie Ryan wrote:
> > >
> > > Where is the feature list posted that describes all of the features
> > > that will be included in 4.0 ?
> > >
> >
> > I do not think an exhaustive list exists as of yet.
> >
> > <a
> > href="http://openeuphoria.org/wiki/euwiki.cgi?NewFeatures40">http://openeuphoria.org/wiki/euwiki.cgi?NewFeatures40</a>
> > <a
> > href="http://openeuphoria.org/wiki/euwiki.cgi?Roadmap40">http://openeuphoria.org/wiki/euwiki.cgi?Roadmap40</a>
> > <a
> > href="http://openeuphoria.org/wiki/euwiki.cgi?Organizing40">http://openeuphoria.org/wiki/euwiki.cgi?Organizing40</a>
> >
> > are a few starting points but nothing consolidated and complete.
> >
> > --
> > Jeremy Cowgar
> > <a href="http://jeremy.cowgar.com">http://jeremy.cowgar.com</a>
>
> Don't forget large file support! I think Jim Brown is working on that.
Ok, how about this:
A Eu download, such that, like some other software, you check what portions you
want to install. Even windoze installs like this. So you can check what you want,
and not check PCRE, or goto, or map, or find, or large file support, or etc..
Then you click ok, and the exe on your computer is made using only what you
checked. This might be handy even when making non-cross-OS apps.
Kat
5. Re: ver 4.0 question
Kat wrote:
>
> A Eu download, such that, like some other software, you check what portions
> you want to install. Even windoze installs like this. So you can check what
> you want, and not check PCRE, or goto, or map, or find, or large file support,
> or etc.. Then you click ok, and the exe on your computer is made using only
> what you checked. This might be handy even when making non-cross-OS apps.
OMG, sorry Kat that's a colossally bad idea, and not just in my opinion I would
bet.
If I download someone else's Euphoria code I want to know that I won't have to
recompile my Euphoria interpreter in order to run it.
It _is_ a good idea in terms of a configure option for people who want to
compile their own interpreter for their own use, in for example an embedded
application, but that's something that would be done by someone who already knows
what they are doing. Don't present options like that to the wider community, it
will cause mass confusion and abandonment of the language.
(If that sounds dire enough).
Gary
6. Re: ver 4.0 question
gshingles wrote:
>
> Kat wrote:
> >
> > A Eu download, such that, like some other software, you check what portions
> > you want to install. Even windoze installs like this. So you can check what
> > you want, and not check PCRE, or goto, or map, or find, or large file
> > support,
> > or etc.. Then you click ok, and the exe on your computer is made using only
> > what you checked. This might be handy even when making non-cross-OS apps.
>
> OMG, sorry Kat that's a colossally bad idea, and not just in my opinion I
> would
> bet.
>
> If I download someone else's Euphoria code I want to know that I won't have
> to recompile my Euphoria interpreter in order to run it.
>
> It _is_ a good idea in terms of a configure option for people who want to
> compile
> their own interpreter for their own use, in for example an embedded
> application,
> but that's something that would be done by someone who already knows what they
> are doing. Don't present options like that to the wider community, it will
> cause mass confusion and abandonment of the language.
> (If that sounds dire enough).
>
> Gary
I will disagree with both of you 
and therefore partially agree with both.
1/ The big issue with configuring the interpreter in a hardcoded way were
rightly underlined by Gary.
But it is an obvious truth, given the strong feelings that run across the users
of this list, that having a configurable Euphoria would make them feel safer,
rejecting any code that doesn't correspond to their liking, and being sure that
they don't get any speed-down due to a feature they didn"t want in the first
place.
I think Unix packages are able, when some option is not on a system and is
needed at some point, to prompt user about it and suggest to go feych it on the
Net and install it. After all, that's what happens when I happen to view web
pages in Traditional Chinese with IE, so this is not Unix related.
So.. a satisfactory solution would seem to be:
- have options at install time, and record them in some kind of .ini file
- When interpreter starts, it checks whether the contents are what he expects.
- on mismatch, interpreter asks user to confirm changes
- on executing a program that would require an uninstalled feature, same story
- If any change in interpreter config is validated, interpreter rebuilds itself
according to new config, updates ini file and restarts.
This would remove most of the confusion Gary is warning about, and would allow
... fanatics? no... diehards? neither, or not often... psychorigids? perhaps ...
to build Euphoria as they dream it should have remained for eternity. The end
result being that they would no longer feel threatened by progress on the
language if they see no use for themselves in them.
CChris
7. Re: ver 4.0 question
On Saturday 07 June 2008 7:06:11 am CChris wrote:
> So.. a satisfactory solution would seem to be:
> - have options at install time, and record them in some kind of .ini file
> - When interpreter starts, it checks whether the contents are what he
> expects...
Careful, you''re ending up awfully close to how MS implemented their .NET
security system. Instead of sandboxing the applications in general, each
application declares what sort of features it uses - file i/o, network
access - etc. You can then decide if you want the application to run, knowing
what sort of activities it's going to perform.
If the program attempts to access features beyond those set in it's
configuration, it's shut down. It also may be refused to run, if you don't
have those permissions yourself (such as admin privileges).
You wouldn't want the runtime overhead of checking each opcode, but you could
replace unauthorized opcodes with an "APP_PANIC" opcode, which would produce
the following error and halt:
This application attempted to perform a potentially dangerous function.
For your protection, this application has been halted.
Contact RDS about this naughty behavior?
Or even better, you could gather a list of banned opcodes the application
used, and present the user with warnings like:
This application makes use of the GOTO function.
'Kat' has not been certified by RDS as an authentic Euphoria coder.
Allowing this program to run could place your computer at risk.
Continue? (Not recommended)
-- David Cuny
