Re: Why Euphoria's great and why we need a Mac port.
Vincent wrote:
>
> D. Newhall wrote:
> >
> > My friend and I were talking earlier and it struck me how much Euphoria
> > rocks and that
> > we need an official Mac OS X port.
> >
> > At work he came up with a very nice idea for an application designed to
> > teach languages.
> > After discussing this for a while and agreeing that yes, this could be a
> > very cool
> > (and profitable) product we decided to see if we could actually go about
> > making it.
> > Me, being the nuts-and-bolts guy I am, brought up the issue of what
> > language(s) should
> > we use for this. We'll need something that can do text processing, lexical
> > analysis,
> > graphics, and (this is the most important thing) work on a Mac. He suggested
> > we use
> > C (or one of it's offshoots) potentially with SDL for graphics and an
> > embeded scripting
> > language because C usually isn't the top choice for text processing and
> > language analysis.
> > We looked at the "mainstream" languages commonly used as an embeded
> > scripting language
> > (Python, Perl, Ruby, TCL, LISP, and Lua) and this was our consensus:
> >
> > Perl - Excellent text processing language but doesn't scale well in big
> > projects.
> >
> > TCL - Much better when using in a large project but doesn't have the same
> > power as
> > Perl that we need.
> >
> > Python - Pretty much the same as TCL.
> >
> > Ruby - Good for representing abstract data but lacked the power/efficiency
> > of Perl.
> >
> > Lua - Easy to read and write large portions of it but wasn't powerful
> > enough.
> >
> > LISP - Excellent and both extracting and representing abstract lexical data
> > and scales
> > up and down very well. The only problem is that the syntax isn't everyone's
> > cup of
> > tea and can be quirky.
> >
> > While we were discussing these languages I kept thinking to myself "Heck, if
> > Euphoria
> > was available for the Mac we probably wouldn't even need to embed a
> > language, we could
> > just use Euphoria entirely" since Euphoria's fast enough that the overhead
> > is negligible
> > in most cases. In fact so far all the algorithms we've discussed I've
> > initially described
> > in Euphoria since it gives LISP's power with BASIC-y syntax.
> >
> >
> > Pleeeease, please Rob port Euphoria to the Mac. I don't want to go back to
> > Perl! It
> > would open up a whole new arena of coders and make Euphoria more of a
> > "legitimate"
> > product. I would buy the source and port it myself but, sadly, I'm a poor
> > college student
> > without a Mac. However, if money/hardware is an issue I would be willing to
> > donate
> > some money for the developement of a Mac version. I doubt it would be that
> > hard since
> > Mac OS X uses liberal amounts of FreeBSD code.
> >
> > Oh yeah, in case anyone's wondering what we're using for the time being,
> > we're using
> > (I think) Objective-C to interface with graphics and such and Guile (the GNU
> > projects
> > version of Scheme for embeding stuff) for our hardcore data mangling.
> > I miss Euphoria already. :(
> >
>
> Hi guys, just droping in:
>
> This is probably not to big of an issue, assuming Robert modifies any x86
> inline-ASM
> in his C code to PowerPC ASM instructions (when Apples switches to Intel CPUs
> in 2006,
> this shouldnt be an issue).
>
> I think Robert can use GCC v3.6 or GCC v4.x to compile the code for MacOS X
> 10.x and
> produce Mach-O executables? For sure there are some 100% ANSII compliant C
> compilers
> for MacOS X.
>
> Then you guys can do bare-bones interfacing with the Carbon API (until you get
> somthing
> like Win32Lib), which is a complete C style procedural API for MacOS X
> development.
> Carbon is as complete as the Cocoa (Objective C) and the Java APIs. Although
> Cocoa
> is the perfered API, Carbon can do everything Cocoa can (I believe).
>
> As far as I'm concerned, there shouldnt be much hassle getting Euphoria onto
> MacOS
> X, and earlier.
>
> Ofcourse there is plenty of issues getting support for WinFX (.NET), but I
> dont want
> to go there again ;).
>
I guess the biggest challenge would be that Robert would first have to go buy a
new Mac in order to port it and/or do extensive bug & regression testing. But
then again he might already have one.
Macs are fairly expensive in general, but he can get a cute Mac mini that comes
with MacOS X 10.4 Tiger installed for as little as $499! I might do the same,
hehe.
http://store.apple.com/1-800-MY-APPLE/WebObjects/AppleStore.woa/71702/wo/6m2FIZncRj7K34deuiU5ipOWtE7/0.0.11.1.0.6.23.1.3.1.0.0.0.1.0
Regards,
Vincent
----------------------------------------------
___ __________ ___
/__/\ /__________\ |\ _\
\::\'\ //::::::::::\\ |'|::|
\::\'\ //:::_::::_:::\\ |'|::|
\::\'\ //::/ |::| \::\\ |'|::|
\::\'\ //::/ |::| \::\\|'|::|
\::\'\__//::/ |::| \::\|'|::|
\::\','/::/ |::| \::\\|::|
\::\_/::/ |::| \::\|::|
\::,::/ |::| \:::::|
\___/ |__| \____|
.``.
',,'
|
Not Categorized, Please Help
|
|
