Thread: [ooc-compiler] Dead or just comatose?
Brought to you by:
mva
Menu
▾
▴
ooc-compiler
|
From: Frank H. <hr...@te...> - 2010-07-28 12:07:06
|
Upon my last post indicating a possible compiler error, which is a strong topic, but I received just 2 private emails and saw not one response on the list. Is this list dead or just comatose? Does anybody know about signs of Oberon lifeforms elsewere in webspace? A google seach yields a lot of hits of course, but I am curious about activity. -- Frank Hrebabetzky +55 / 48 / 3235 1106 Florianopolis, Brazil |
|
From: Treutwein B. <Ber...@Ve...> - 2010-07-28 13:08:46
|
hmm, > Does anybody know about signs of Oberon lifeforms > elsewere in webspace? ofcourse, there are the semaphores of Zürich, namely http://www.ocp.inf.ethz.ch/ and the quite active, but difficult to watch and digest sites in Russia http://oberoncore.ru and BlackBox http://oberon.ch/blackbox.html (it runs nicely under Linux/Wine) with its community http://zinnamturm.eu/ I do not know what happened to OOC/OO2C project founder Michael van Acken ... nor if any of the other admins (Jürgen Zimmermann, guenne, or Stewart Greenhill) are still active ... regards -- Bernhard PS: interestingly this list is configured to private responses by default (at least when replied with M$ Outlook) ... |
|
From: Michael v. A. <mic...@gm...> - 2010-07-28 13:50:30
|
On 28 July 2010 15:08, Treutwein Bernhard <Ber...@ve...> wrote: > [...] > I do not know what happened to OOC/OO2C project founder Michael van > Acken ... nor if any of the other admins (Jürgen Zimmermann, guenne, or > Stewart Greenhill) are still active ... Hi all, for myself I can say that I stopped working with Oberon several years ago. By now it's quite hard for me to even read and understand Oberon code. Go figure... Jürgen did not continue with this project after our university time. guenne I just gave access for some other work, unrelated to OOC. > PS: interestingly this list is configured to private responses by default (at > least when replied with M$ Outlook) ... Yes, I have to hit "reply to all" as well. -- mva |
|
From: Duke N. <duk...@ml...> - 2010-07-28 14:12:27
|
On Wed, 28 Jul 2010, Michael van Acken wrote: > On 28 July 2010 15:08, Treutwein Bernhard > <Ber...@ve...> wrote: > > [...] > > I do not know what happened to OOC/OO2C project founder Michael van > > Acken ... nor if any of the other admins (Jürgen Zimmermann, guenne, or > > Stewart Greenhill) are still active ... > > Hi all, > > for myself I can say that I stopped working with Oberon several > years ago. By now it's quite hard for me to even read and > understand Oberon code. Go figure... Well! You're no fun at all, are you! ;) Do you remember how mature ooc was when you were last involved with it? -- Duke |
|
From: Michael v. A. <mic...@gm...> - 2010-07-28 14:26:20
|
On 28 July 2010 16:05, Duke Normandin <duk...@ml...> wrote: > [...] >> for myself I can say that I stopped working with Oberon several >> years ago. By now it's quite hard for me to even read and >> understand Oberon code. Go figure... > > Well! You're no fun at all, are you! ;) Do you remember how mature ooc > was when you were last involved with it? Actually no, I don't remember. Nowadays I have fun with Clojure :-) -- mva |
|
From: Stewart G. <sgr...@ii...> - 2010-07-28 15:31:15
|
On 28/07/2010, at 10:26 PM, Michael van Acken <mic...@gm... > wrote: > On 28 July 2010 16:05, Duke Normandin <duk...@ml...> wrote: >> >> Well! You're no fun at all, are you! ;) Do you remember how mature >> ooc >> was when you were last involved with it? > > Actually no, I don't remember. Nowadays I have fun with Clojure :-) These days I'm mostly using Java though I have recently been looking into Python and Scala - don't have time to learn every new thing. I still have some semi-active code using OOC. I occasionally use C for embedded programming - still the most efficient for small machines. Cheers Stewart |
|
From: Michael v. A. <mic...@gm...> - 2010-07-28 16:22:00
|
On 28 July 2010 17:29, Stewart Greenhill <sgr...@ii...> wrote: > [...] > These days I'm mostly using Java though I have recently been looking into > Python and Scala - don't have time to learn every new thing. I still have > some semi-active code using OOC. I occasionally use C for embedded > programming - still the most efficient for small machines. Interesting that you mention Scala. I was considering to take a look at this language as well. But then I decided that one JVM based language like Clojure is more than enough for me. So Odersky's 750+ pages Scala book never found its way onto my bookshelf. Erlang is also tremendously interesting, but it's unlikely that I will encounter a problem in the near future where I can put its strengths to good use. It sure does provide a very different view on programming, and especially on how one can do reliable and/or distributed systems. When I started using Python years ago, I thought that it had a lot of appeal for an Oberon programmer like myself. I like how it evolved over time, the Python guys are a bunch of very bright folks. -- mva |
|
From: Stewart G. <sgr...@ii...> - 2010-07-29 02:58:42
|
Michael van Acken wrote: > On 28 July 2010 17:29, Stewart Greenhill <sgr...@ii...> wrote: >> [...] >> These days I'm mostly using Java though I have recently been looking into >> Python and Scala - don't have time to learn every new thing. I still have >> some semi-active code using OOC. I occasionally use C for embedded >> programming - still the most efficient for small machines. > > Interesting that you mention Scala. I was considering to take a look at > this language as well. But then I decided that one JVM based language > like Clojure is more than enough for me. So Odersky's 750+ pages Scala > book never found its way onto my bookshelf. > > Erlang is also tremendously interesting, but it's unlikely that I will > encounter a problem in the near future where I can put its strengths to > good use. It sure does provide a very different view on programming, and > especially on how one can do reliable and/or distributed systems. > > When I started using Python years ago, I thought that it had a lot of appeal > for an Oberon programmer like myself. I like how it evolved over time, the > Python guys are a bunch of very bright folks. It looks like there is quite a trend these days towards interpreted, dynamically typed code especially for things like web frameworks, which is where my interest in Python comes from. It looks like there is a great community and lots of libraries available. For some applications this can dramatically reduce development time which is a big point in its favour. However, I'm not a great fan of dynamic typing. It means that many bugs are not detected until run-time, and therefore requires a lot more testing to verify code. Also, the lack of defined return types makes APIs very hard to navigate. Compared with Javadocs (and OOC docs) Python docs are a nightmare. The other problem is performance, which is quite poor compared to compiled code. Of course, for some apps it doesn't matter (assuming you've got a fast enough machine). Scala is interesting because its functional but supports static typing (actually, type inference) and compiles to very fast code that runs on the JVM. I looked briefly at the Lift web framework which is implemented in Scala. Scala includes language-level XML support, and the basic APIs support actors, messaging, etc so its quite a good fit for a web environment. Unfortunately I don't have the brain-space at the moment to learn so many new things at the moment. What sort of things are you doing with Clojure? Cheers, Stewart |
|
From: Michael v. A. <mic...@gm...> - 2010-07-29 06:03:48
|
On 29 July 2010 04:58, Stewart Greenhill <sgr...@ii...> wrote: > [...] > It looks like there is quite a trend these days towards interpreted, > dynamically typed code especially for things like web frameworks, which > is where my interest in Python comes from. It looks like there is a > great community and lots of libraries available. For some applications > this can dramatically reduce development time which is a big point in > its favour. However, I'm not a great fan of dynamic typing. It means > that many bugs are not detected until run-time, and therefore requires a > lot more testing to verify code. Also, the lack of defined return types > makes APIs very hard to navigate. Compared with Javadocs (and OOC docs) > Python docs are a nightmare. The other problem is performance, which is > quite poor compared to compiled code. Of course, for some apps it > doesn't matter (assuming you've got a fast enough machine). Hi Stewart, regarding the Python documentation: it took me years to get to a decent hit rate when looking things up. For some reason or other, I was always looking at the wrong places first for a particular piece of information. The docs and my brain seem to be structured along different lines ;-) Just yesterday I read a nice article "Strong Typing vs. Strong Testing" http://docs.google.com/View?id=dcsvntt2_25wpjvbbhk With Python and Clojure I do not miss static type checks at all. Both have their ways to make up for it. > Scala is interesting because its functional but supports static typing > (actually, type inference) and compiles to very fast code that runs on > the JVM. I looked briefly at the Lift web framework which is implemented > in Scala. Scala includes language-level XML support, and the basic APIs > support actors, messaging, etc so its quite a good fit for a web > environment. Unfortunately I don't have the brain-space at the moment to > learn so many new things at the moment. > > What sort of things are you doing with Clojure? I've done a lot of web application stuff, both at work and in private. Libraries like compojure and hiccup make server side request parsing and HTML generation trivial. Also a big boon: for development one can set up things so that functions can be replaced in the running server, from within the editor. With this, the turnaround time from changing a function to running it for new HTML takes a fraction of a second. Btw, the package management done by leiningen or cljr is great: a trivial interface towards the user but able to resolve all package dependencies in the background. With this I really appreciate the wealth of Java libraries available. For example, it took me three minutes to get an OpenGL demo up and running on a laptop where no Clojure was installed beforehand. The other stuff I've done is database access (Oracle and CouchDB), 3D graphics (just a few days ago I implemented shadow mapping for OpenGL using penumbra, something I wanted to do since I toyed with OpenGL under Python), data analysis (unsurprisingly, Clojure shines at list processing), and by now even general scripting (although the JVM has a rather long startup time). -- mva |
|
From: Stewart G. <sgr...@ii...> - 2010-08-04 02:27:01
|
Michael van Acken wrote: [...] > regarding the Python documentation: it took me years to get to a > decent hit rate when looking things up. For some reason or other, > I was always looking at the wrong places first for a particular piece of > information. The docs and my brain seem to be structured along > different lines ;-) > > Just yesterday I read a nice article "Strong Typing vs. Strong > Testing" http://docs.google.com/View?id=dcsvntt2_25wpjvbbhk > With Python and Clojure I do not miss static type checks at all. > Both have their ways to make up for it. Hi Michael, Interesting article, but I'm not sure I agree with the conclusion: "what we need is strong testing, not strong typing." Its true that testing pick up some errors that static typing would otherwise have picked up. But what we actually need is strong testing AND strong typing. Static typing allows us to define a "contract" which the compiler can help enforce. As well as ensuring correctness, it also helps to document code. Without some static guarantees, APIs are really hard to navigate. >> What sort of things are you doing with Clojure? > > I've done a lot of web application stuff, both at work and in private. > Libraries like compojure and hiccup make server side request parsing > and HTML generation trivial. Also a big boon: for development one > can set up things so that functions can be replaced in the running > server, from within the editor. With this, the turnaround time from > changing a function to running it for new HTML takes a fraction of a > second. Btw, the package management done by leiningen or cljr is > great: a trivial interface towards the user but able to resolve all package > dependencies in the background. With this I really appreciate the > wealth of Java libraries available. For example, it took me three > minutes to get an OpenGL demo up and running on a laptop where > no Clojure was installed beforehand. > > The other stuff I've done is database access (Oracle and CouchDB), > 3D graphics (just a few days ago I implemented shadow mapping > for OpenGL using penumbra, something I wanted to do since I toyed > with OpenGL under Python), data analysis (unsurprisingly, Clojure > shines at list processing), and by now even general scripting > (although the JVM has a rather long startup time). Sounds neat. The JVM is a good platform with so many implementations and libraries around. For some things it can be quite inefficient as its not possible to allocate objects on the stack or in arrays. I used to do some Lisp programming myself, and learned a bit about implementing interpreters from studying different LISP implementations (eg. xlisp). Cheers, Stewart |
|
From: Treutwein B. <Ber...@Ve...> - 2010-07-28 15:24:24
|
do I understand right: OOC is orphaned then the question is not: Dead or just comatose? but better How to reanimate it and who will lead the intensive care unit? -- Bernhard |
|
From: Peter F. <ph...@ac...> - 2010-07-28 15:52:34
|
Hi all, On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 11:24 AM, Treutwein Bernhard <Ber...@ve...> wrote: > do I understand right: OOC is orphaned > > then the question is not: > > Dead or just comatose? > > but better > > How to reanimate it and who will lead the intensive care unit? I always liked OOC although I had my troubles with it as well. :-D Sadly I won't be leading the ICU for this, but the code is there and if there are a few people with enough interest I am sure it'll be picked up again. Maybe Michael can make this "orphanage" official by putting something to the effect of "maintainer needed" on the sf.net site or the ooc website (if there is still one?). Cheers, Peter -- Peter H. Froehlich <http://www.cs.jhu.edu/~phf/> Senior Lecturer | Director, Johns Hopkins Gaming Lab |
|
From: Peter F. <ph...@ac...> - 2010-07-29 03:18:05
|
Hi all, On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 10:58 PM, Stewart Greenhill <sgr...@ii...> wrote: > It looks like there is quite a trend these days towards interpreted, > dynamically typed code especially for things like web frameworks, which > is where my interest in Python comes from. It looks like there is a > great community and lots of libraries available. For some applications > this can dramatically reduce development time which is a big point in > its favour. However, I'm not a great fan of dynamic typing. It means > that many bugs are not detected until run-time, and therefore requires a > lot more testing to verify code. Also, the lack of defined return types > makes APIs very hard to navigate. You may want to take a look at Google's Go language at golang.org because it has some of the niceties of Python and friends combined with solid Oberon (and even Lagoona :-D) roots, albeit hidden behind a C-like syntax of dubious attractiveness. I've played with it a bit last year and had a lot of fun. Still intend to do more with it later this year. And oh, it's statically typed and compiled, they even target embedded development to some extent. Cheers, Peter -- Peter H. Froehlich <http://www.cs.jhu.edu/~phf/> Senior Lecturer | Director, Johns Hopkins Gaming Lab |
|
From: Stewart G. <sgr...@ii...> - 2010-08-04 03:30:25
|
> On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 10:58 PM, Stewart Greenhill > <sgr...@ii...> wrote: >> It looks like there is quite a trend these days towards interpreted, >> dynamically typed code especially for things like web frameworks, which >> is where my interest in Python comes from. It looks like there is a >> great community and lots of libraries available. For some applications >> this can dramatically reduce development time which is a big point in >> its favour. However, I'm not a great fan of dynamic typing. It means >> that many bugs are not detected until run-time, and therefore requires a >> lot more testing to verify code. Also, the lack of defined return types >> makes APIs very hard to navigate. > > You may want to take a look at Google's Go language at golang.org > because it has some of the niceties of Python and friends combined > with solid Oberon (and even Lagoona :-D) roots, albeit hidden behind a > C-like syntax of dubious attractiveness. I've played with it a bit > last year and had a lot of fun. Still intend to do more with it later > this year. And oh, it's statically typed and compiled, they even > target embedded development to some extent. Hi Peter, "Go" looks nice. Like Oberon it gives you type safety without the baggage of a huge VM. It looks like they are using gcc as a back end. Interesting that they have implemented interfaces not subclassing. Providing you can easily use aggregation that's probably a good idea - solves the "fragile base class" problem. Interfaces are a cleaner way to get run-time polymorphism. I notice you're directing a gaming lab. What software tools do you use for game development? Cheers, Stewart |
|
From: Duke N. <duk...@ml...> - 2010-07-28 14:12:29
|
On Wed, 28 Jul 2010, Treutwein Bernhard wrote: > hmm, > > > Does anybody know about signs of Oberon lifeforms > > elsewere in webspace? > > ofcourse, there are the semaphores of Zürich, namely > http://www.ocp.inf.ethz.ch/ Sure! There's one or 2 zealots lurking there! ;) [snip] > I do not know what happened to OOC/OO2C project founder Michael van > Acken ... nor if any of the other admins (Jürgen Zimmermann, guenne, or > Stewart Greenhill) are still active ... Michael and Stewart are still around, and probably lurking this list ;) Also, they might be on vacation at the moment. The comp.lang.oberon News Group is another resources that may help out. At the moment, the NG is probably the most compiler-independent Oberon resource. IMHO, OCP should be just that, via the Forum, simply by adding a few new categories, like "VisualOberon", "ooc/oo2c", Mike Spivey's "obc", etc. One stop, Oberon shopping. ;) -- |
|
From: Duke N. <duk...@ml...> - 2010-07-28 16:06:08
|
On Wed, 28 Jul 2010, Michael van Acken wrote: > On 28 July 2010 16:05, Duke Normandin <duk...@ml...> wrote: > > [...] > >> for myself I can say that I stopped working with Oberon several > >> years ago. By now it's quite hard for me to even read and > >> understand Oberon code. Go figure... > > > > Well! You're no fun at all, are you! ;) Do you remember how mature ooc > > was when you were last involved with it? > > Actually no, I don't remember. Nowadays I have fun with Clojure :-) That's a flavor of Lisp, is it not? -- Duke |
|
From: Michael v. A. <mic...@gm...> - 2010-07-28 16:29:52
|
On 28 July 2010 18:05, Duke Normandin <duk...@ml...> wrote: > [...] >> Actually no, I don't remember. Nowadays I have fun with Clojure :-) > > That's a flavor of Lisp, is it not? Yes, it's a Lisp running on the JVM with an emphasis on pure functions and a distinct approach to handle mutable state. -- mva |
|
From: Duke N. <duk...@ml...> - 2010-07-28 18:00:01
|
On Wed, 28 Jul 2010, Michael van Acken wrote: > On 28 July 2010 18:05, Duke Normandin <duk...@ml...> wrote: > > [...] > >> Actually no, I don't remember. Nowadays I have fun with Clojure :-) > > > > That's a flavor of Lisp, is it not? > > Yes, it's a Lisp running on the JVM with an emphasis on pure > functions and a distinct approach to handle mutable state. I thought so! I'm dabbling with newLisp and CL/SLIME myself. I haven't made up my mind yet whether or not "I just can't live without" Lisp - in any flavor. The dabbling is interesting, though. -- Duke |
Thanks for helping keep SourceForge clean.
X