Re: more about serious
everyone
Thanks for the initial feedback, and even the flaming (OUCH!). And as for
clarifying things (requested by more than a few of you), I will try and do
some of that.
It seems that some people have taken offense at my suggesting that there are
other things that this most excellent language can be used for than it
currently is. I was not belittling anyone out there who uses Eu on
Microsoft or Linux (as I do both myself, too). It is just my opinion,
personal and professional business-wise, that the use of programming
language directed towards PCs of all types, has hit its high-water mark, and
will soon become second-tier to the combined might of other, lesser thought
of devices. If one looks at the total amount of memory sold right now,
embedded devices take the cake. This will only accelerate over the next few
years. Consoles (game machines) are a case in point. The Sega Dreamcast,
for example, is a proper 128 bit machine (64 X 2 data; 128 X 1 graphics),
and has a two proper operating systems. One of these is Windows CE, said by
it's Master to be especially tweaked for the Sega box. The other OS is
Sega's own primitive Game OS, though it still is a legitimate system. Both
of these stink, of course, to put it bluntly. Especially the CE, as it is
only a 32-bit setup. The tools that one would use here are 'C' or
assembler, though CE will allow for use of Visual Basic and DirectX 7.X.
The cpu for the Dreamcast is a Hitachi Super-H, commonly referred to as the
SH-4, and it is a very powerful RISC chip. Metawerks CodeWarrior and
Greenhills 'C' compilers and toolkits have been 'bent' towards programming
this particular chip; both with Assembler and C/C++. The official status
TDK, licensed from Sega, giving one the right to design for the Dreamcast is
8000 dollars US. In contrast, the one for Sony's Playstation 2, which isn't
even on the shelves until well into next year, costs 20,000 US. These are
significant outlays of cash, the minimum needed to even sit down at the
poker table with the rest of the production houses.
Specifically to Bernie: As to APIs, well, you tell me. They do, of course,
but not in the way that we are commonly used to looking at. Almost all
cpu's are built from the start with 'C' in mind (btw, don't get me wrong
here-- I don't care for 'C') and anything from the assembler on up, into the
next-up compilers, is built on and around 'C'. This is one of the
'commonalities' about the RISC family (though it is a very tenuous one) that
can be exploited if you are very clever. And this is where I wish that
Euphoria could break away a bit, and be directed towards something other
than the constant drain and strain of Win and Lin.
And may I say something back to Everett Williams here: you accuse me (and I
don't really take offence; I know you mean well for everyone who EU's) of
'recruiting', and I should take it off-line. I am a legitimate programmer
who makes a living writing code. I consider Euphoria to be a serious
language, and I use it as such. As to 'sucking away talent and time to a
commercial project', all I did was state MY OWN CASE where I have put my own
butt on the line for what I think is the not-to-distant future of computing.
And if I remember rightly, Euphoria IS a programming language, and those who
use it are programmers, not dilettantes. It never was my intention to draw
people away from the furthering of EU; and likewise I will reiterate that
discussing about hardware (RISC; Game Consoles) is certainly a valid subject
for discussion... the only problem is that people take offense at talk of
Change. In this sense, this is Change happening right now. I mentioned
that this would be all 'Open System'; and I will be spending over 30,000
dollars to even get allowed to do it legitimately (and a lot more than that
besides) so that others can get it FREE. This must mean something to some
of you out there. Everett, I am old enough to also remember Mme. Lee, so
that makes two of us the same somewhat. 
(Back to Bernie) About creating a common library. It seems that at a
certain level, it is possible to do this, even high language enough into
'C'. And as this can be shown to be the case, then it would be also
theoretically possible to cobble a restricted portion (at first) of EU to do
the same. But what this would mean would be for several capable people to
try and forget about how EU exists in the conceptual world of Win API, and
visualize how a completely different environment might look. RISC is very
much not Microsoft territory, for one thing, and EU has demostrated that it
can make the transition from there to Linux. But these are still using the
same Intel x86 base, so nothing has changed much there. So the fact is that
the cpu's (CISC vs. RISC) have nothing in common at all, except this
connection through 'C'.
And yes, I do have propriety info about the Hardware.
The various players (nintendo, sega, sony) do NOT have an 'intended' common
interface, but as I mentioned above, this very much depends on a
purposefully carried out difference on the propriety level-- but an awful
lot has been overlooked about this being the same on an 'unintended' level.
Much food for thought in this...
As to there existing a common specific OS, the answer would, once again,
seem to be 'certainly not'.
And finally Bernie, your last question, about there being a common low level
instruction set... the tantalizing answer is YES, but I will not go into
that because of considerations with my partners. Perhaps I should clarify
that a bit: the consoles do not, but the chips do, and this has been not
been forgotten, just overlooked.
And one of the reasons I would like to see EU there is... it has garbage
collection (which takes out 'C' any day in my humble opinion).
Sorry if I have bored anyone, or enraged others, but that is the way that I
am. I will try and answer whatever I can (or am allowed to under my
contract), so keep it coming! Just remember that sometimes Food For Thought
needs a bit more chewing than as usual.
Regards,
Norm
|
Not Categorized, Please Help
|
|
