OpenEuphoria

Re: Detecting the Eu version

• Posted by "Igor Kachan" <kinz at peterlink.ru> Dec 13, 2004
• 573 views

Juergen Luethje wrote:

> 
> Igor Kachan wrote:
> 
> > Hi, Juergen!
> >
> > You wrote:
> >
> >> Hi all,
> >>
> >> recently Derek and Pete (L) posted here some useful code, that allows
> >> a program to detect the current Eu version at runtime. I think it is
> >> especially helpful to use such a functionality in libraries, that
> >> require at least a particular Eu version.
> >>
> >> Concerning Eu 2.5, it can look like this:
> >> }}}
<eucode>
> >> include machine.e
> >> if routine_id("crash_routine") = -1 then       -- crash_routine() was
> >>    puts(1, "Euphoria 2.5 or later required."   -- introduced in v2.5
> >>          & "\n\nPress Enter ...")
> >>    if getc(0) then end if
> >>    abort(1)
> >> end if
> 
> My previous post begins with an "introduction", that ends with the word
> "OK". _Thereafter_ follows the description of the problem that I see.
> What you quoted here, is only a part of the "introduction".

Ok, I do understand this.

> > There is some universal method - all ex.exes, exw.exes, exus, ec.exes 
etc
> > have the unique lengths.
> >
> > So, you can detect the version with something like to:
> >
> > }}}
<eucode>
> > global function version(sequence name, atom EXE_Length)
> >  name = machine_func(22, name) -- dir info
> >     if name[1][3]  =   EXE_Length then
> >           return 1
> >     else
> >           return 0
> >    end if
> > end fubction
> > </eucode>
{{{

> >
> > [snip]
> >
> > Just pass the name of the needed interpreter and
> > its known length and you'll get an answer is it yours one
> > or no, it is not.
> 
> That will not solve the problem that I described. If I had expressed
> myself ambiguously or otherwise unclear in my original post, please tell
> me what you didn't understand.

Described way, author can detect *any* concrete version of Euphoria, where
his program *can not run*.
Then it is just an author's problem - to stop his program with a warning
message or to give user a standard crash message without any additional
explanations.

So, I just didn't see some "gap", as you say in the part of your message,
that I have snipped off.
I snipped that part, where I have nothing to say or comment, sorry, that
was just usual practice, I think.

Regards,
Igor Kachan
kinz at peterlink.ru