SCOUG-Programming Mailing List Archives
Return to [ 12 |
January |
2006 ]
Content Type: text/plain
Sheridan, et al,
I would like to see us move forward. I would hope that the
last few months, not only within our SIG but in the
presentations of the general meeting, have illustrated why
more open source users have avoided roles as contributors. It
just shouldn't be that difficult.
No one appreciates more than I do, as I understand the
persistence, dedication, and effort our members like Greg and
others engaged in, what the current software development
environment, i.e. its tools, demand of their users. I respect
anyone who takes that hurdle and overcomes it.
In short we witnessed how orignally intended 45 minute
presentations ended up as 2 hours or more. If our "experts"
dutifully plod through these exercises, why should we not
also? If I have an argument with Steven Levine, it rests with
his presumption that this is normal. If you want to play, then
accept it.
Of course, I don't. Nothing so simple should end up this hard.
The simple act of programming, the writing and executing of
logically correct source code, should not have so many
diverse paths to distract us.
To make one slight correction to Sheridan's comments we did
not have to make a choice between compilers, either Watcom
or GCC. Instead we should find ourselves using either
interchangeably. Even if we don't get the same code
generated, we should get the same results. If we don't, then
one or both fail as a C compiler.
Now Watcom comes as a complete IDE, while GCC does not.
The difference lies in the supplied editor: Watcom has one,
GCC does not. Supposedly Watcom's editor uses a form of VIM
also available to the GCC user. Just when I thought we might
focus on an editor such a VIM up pops a presentation using
JEdit, a JAVA-based editor. Yet another reason for some
trepid user to hold off contributing.
Now I haven't pursued JEdit, but saw PL/I among the
languages its syntax checking supported. I didn't see that in
VIM. Thus I tend to favor JEdit at the moment...until we have
produced its "permanent" replacement.
So Sheridan correctly points out the expanded and complete
role the editor plays in my "scheme" of things. As my
"scheme's" normally executes interpretively and optionally in
compile mode, we should have a far greater interest in how
Python generates code than either of the two compilers we
have considered thus far.
[As a side note my ISP since the last rain has had his hands
full recovering. As a result my service has at best resembled
intermittent. Apparently it will take three days before they
schedule a technician to appear. Thus do not consider me as
non-responsive, but more in truth as helpless.]
Let us be clear on this point. Every IDE begins with an editor.
The most ambitious IDE underway, Eclipse, begins with an
editor. The Watcom IDE, for example, offers access to all
functions through the editor interface. So we introduce
nothing new in that respect. Therein on that point we cannot
argue.
I suggest then that we pick one open source editor, e.g. JEdit,
get comfortable with its internals, and use it as the starting
point. That should give us familiarity with GUI programming of
the user interface. We should have the confidence we need
at that point to go forward.
=====================================================
To unsubscribe from this list, send an email message
to "steward@scoug.com". In the body of the message,
put the command "unsubscribe scoug-programming".
For problems, contact the list owner at
"postmaster@scoug.com".
=====================================================
Return to [ 12 |
January |
2006 ]
The Southern California OS/2 User Group
P.O. Box 26904
Santa Ana, CA 92799-6904, USA
Copyright 2001 the Southern California OS/2 User Group. ALL RIGHTS
RESERVED.
SCOUG, Warp Expo West, and Warpfest are trademarks of the Southern California OS/2 User Group.
OS/2, Workplace Shell, and IBM are registered trademarks of International
Business Machines Corporation.
All other trademarks remain the property of their respective owners.
| 
