Menu
▾
▴
opl-dev-development — List for developers working on opl-dev
You can subscribe to this list here.
| 2003 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
(4) |
Jun
(1) |
Jul
(4) |
Aug
(3) |
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2004 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
(2) |
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
| 2005 |
Jan
|
Feb
(1) |
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
| 2006 |
Jan
|
Feb
(4) |
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
|
From: <phi...@sy...> - 2006-02-24 04:34:29
|
I will be out of the office starting 26/01/2006 and will not return until 31/12/2006. After over six and a half years, I have moved on from Symbian! For business-related matters, please contact Bruce Carney (bru...@sy...). For private matters, please call/SMS me on my mobile number which remains the same, i.e. +44 7884 061 403. ----------------------------------------- ********************************************************************** Symbian Software Ltd is a company registered in England and Wales with registered number 4190020 and registered office at 2-6 Boundary Row, Southwark, London, SE1 8HP, UK. This message is intended only for use by the named addressee and may contain privileged and/or confidential information. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, copy or take any action in reliance on it. If you have received this message in error please notify pos...@sy... and delete the message and any attachments accompanying it immediately. Neither Symbian nor any of its Affiliates accepts liability for any corruption, interception, amendment, tampering or viruses occurring to this message in transit or for any message sent by its employees which is not in compliance with Symbian corporate policy. ********************************************************************** |
|
From: Alex P. <ap...@al...> - 2006-02-23 07:34:16
|
Arjen Broeze wrote: > Hi Alex > > Thanks for your email and yes, I'm actually reading this :-) Great! > > You're right that there hasn't been much (actually none at all) activity > on the sourceforge pages, but some work is definitely ongoing. A lot of > bugs in the 9300/9500 runtime have been fixed and a new release for the > Communicator is only a couple of weeks away. Well that's excellent news! > > The kind of help we need is in the development of the runtime, which is > written in Symbian C++. All of this is done on PC. For S80 we have a > pretty stable runtime, for UIQ we have a beta that still needs a lot of > work and for Series 60 we have almost nothing. For Series 60 we need an > experienced Symbian C++ developer who can help us to essentially rewrite > the entire runtime to work on newer S60 phones. For UIQ and Communicator > anyone with a little knowledge of Symbian programming can help out already. > > If you have knowledge about S60 C++ programming I'd be happy to have you > in the team. And even if you don't you're welcome as well since, as you > mentioned, we also need to test the changes made. > > Can you provide me with a little more information as to your programming > skills, interests and how you might be able to help out, based on the > information above? Unfortuantely I do not have any C++ programming experience. I tend to stick to more simple interpreted languages. I only own a Series 60 phone, and would be willing to test new Series 60 runtime improvements on the Nokia 6620. I wish there was something more I could do for you. Perhaps there is, and we can't think of it yet ;-) I might suggest, perhaps, that you try a slightly wider recruitment campaign, perhaps submitting stories to OSNews and Slashdot, as well as other more language/region-centric FOSS news websites, with a headline such as "SymbianOS Developers needed for LGPL OPL project" or something...make sure you get those keywords, GPL, OPL, and SymbianOS....otherwise your messages will almost surely go in the bitbucket. What do you think? |
|
From: Arjen B. <ar...@us...> - 2006-02-23 07:26:20
|
Hi Alex Thanks for your email and yes, I'm actually reading this :-) You're right that there hasn't been much (actually none at all) activity on the sourceforge pages, but some work is definitely ongoing. A lot of bugs i= n the 9300/9500 runtime have been fixed and a new release for the Communicato= r is only a couple of weeks away. The kind of help we need is in the development of the runtime, which is written in Symbian C++. All of this is done on PC. For S80 we have a pretty stable runtime, for UIQ we have a beta that still needs a lot of work and for Series 60 we have almost nothing. For Series 60 we need an experienced Symbian C++ developer who can help us to essentially rewrite the entire runtime to work on newer S60 phones. For UIQ and Communicator anyone with a little knowledge of Symbian programming can help out already. If you have knowledge about S60 C++ programming I'd be happy to have you in the team. And even if you don't you're welcome as well since, as you mentioned, we also need to test the changes made. Can you provide me with a little more information as to your programming skills, interests and how you might be able to help out, based on the information above? Thanks in advance Best regards Arjen On 2/23/06, Alex Perez <ap...@al...> wrote: > > Hi there. I'm sending this message in response to the call for help I > recently saw on the front page of my-symbian.com. This mailing list > appears to be dead, but I'm hoping that, just because there hasn't been > any traffic on it in well over a year, the core devs are still lurking. > > My name is Alex, and I've been the proud owner of a Nokia 6620 Series 60 > SymbianOS smartphone for the last nine months or so. I discovered OPL > shortly after purchasing my phone, but to be honest I assumed there was > no further dev going since the lists were dead and the website hadn't > been updated. I'm glad to hear that there's need of more people, > although I'm not sure to what extent I can be of assistance. > > I'm mostly interested in writing OPL apps for my S60 phone, but I would > be more than happy to involve myself with testing anything anyone throws > at me. Would that be at all useful? If not, what do you guys need? > > I hope someone is actually reading this, because there's nothing on the > OPL website at http://opl-dev.sourceforge.net/ about who to contact for > this call-for-help. > > Kind Regards, > Alex Perez > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting > language > that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live > webcast > and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding > territory! > http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=3Dlnk&kid=3D110944&bid=3D241720&dat= =3D121642 > _______________________________________________ > Opl-dev-development mailing list > Opl...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opl-dev-development > |
|
From: Alex P. <ap...@al...> - 2006-02-23 07:02:59
|
Hi there. I'm sending this message in response to the call for help I recently saw on the front page of my-symbian.com. This mailing list appears to be dead, but I'm hoping that, just because there hasn't been any traffic on it in well over a year, the core devs are still lurking. My name is Alex, and I've been the proud owner of a Nokia 6620 Series 60 SymbianOS smartphone for the last nine months or so. I discovered OPL shortly after purchasing my phone, but to be honest I assumed there was no further dev going since the lists were dead and the website hadn't been updated. I'm glad to hear that there's need of more people, although I'm not sure to what extent I can be of assistance. I'm mostly interested in writing OPL apps for my S60 phone, but I would be more than happy to involve myself with testing anything anyone throws at me. Would that be at all useful? If not, what do you guys need? I hope someone is actually reading this, because there's nothing on the OPL website at http://opl-dev.sourceforge.net/ about who to contact for this call-for-help. Kind Regards, Alex Perez |
|
From: Robert S. <rsc...@in...> - 2005-02-24 14:52:12
|
Dear OPL developers, I wrote some guidelines that should help FOSS projects getting more lively and lowering the barrier for new developers to join. You can find them in form of a small manual here http://projects.mi.fu-berlin.de/w/bin/view/SE/ThesisFOSSIMMediationManual. These ideas are the result of work for my bachelor thesis and have been used successfully at the GNU Classpath project. If the topic is of interest to you, I would be happy to receive criticism and comments concerning the manual or the general idea. For further discussion I have set up a mailing-list (use http://lists.spline.inf.fu-berlin.de/mailman/listinfo/mediation_manual to subscribe or med...@li... to post unsubscribed). Please send your feedback to this list but if you have reasons to contact me directly then just reply to this mail. In case you answer to your project's mailing list please CC me. Best regards Robert Schuster |
|
From: <Phi...@sy...> - 2004-05-24 00:03:47
|
I will be out of the office starting 07/05/2004 and will not return until 14/06/2004. I will be out of the office during this time and will not have regular access to my mail. I will deal with your message when I return. If the matter is urgent, please call or SMS me on +44 7884 061 403. ********************************************************************** Symbian Software Ltd is a company registered in England and Wales with registered number 4190020 and registered office at 2-6 Boundary Row, London, Southwark, SE1 8HP, UK. This message is intended only for use by the named addressee and may contain privileged and/or confidential information. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, copy or take any action in reliance on it. If you have received this message in error please notify pos...@sy... and delete the message and any attachments accompanying it immediately. Neither Symbian nor any of its subsidiaries accepts liability for any corruption, interception, amendment, tampering or viruses occurring to this message in transit or for any message sent by its employees which is not in compliance with Symbian corporate policy. ********************************************************************** |
|
From: <ben...@id...> - 2004-05-22 13:06:41
|
Dear Open Source developer I am doing a research project on "Fun and Software Development" in which I kindly invite you to participate. You will find the online survey under http://fasd.ethz.ch/qsf/. The questionnaire consists of 53 questions and you will need about 15 minutes to complete it. With the FASD project (Fun and Software Development) we want to define the motivational significance of fun when software developers decide to engage in Open Source projects. What is special about our research project is that a similar survey is planned with software developers in commercial firms. This procedure allows the immediate comparison between the involved individuals and the conditions of production of these two development models. Thus we hope to obtain substantial new insights to the phenomenon of Open Source Development. With many thanks for your participation, Benno Luthiger PS: The results of the survey will be published under http://www.isu.unizh.ch/fuehrung/blprojects/FASD/. We have set up the mailing list fa...@we... for this study. Please see http://fasd.ethz.ch/qsf/mailinglist_en.html for registration to this mailing list. _______________________________________________________________________ Benno Luthiger Swiss Federal Institute of Technology Zurich 8092 Zurich Mail: benno.luthiger(at)id.ethz.ch _______________________________________________________________________ |
|
From: David M. <dav...@sy...> - 2003-08-05 11:49:44
|
Keita, It is an open source project, so if you and others are keen to backport the code to Symbian OS v5 feel free to do it. I am not convinced that's the most efficient use of resources and hence think it is not a very good idea, but you don't need my blessing! As for support, it should come from all involved in opl-dev. My role in making opl-dev happen was mainly in building a case for it to get Symbian's management to approve it and convincing our legal department to adopt LGPL for this project (and dealing with part of the infrastructure such as setting up the SourceForge project), ie I haven't contributed any code to the project so couldn't support you on development issues. br -d On 4 Aug 2003 at 21:24, ktk...@hi... wrote: > Hi David, > > Thank you very much for your reply. > > > Yes, we would need to check/rebuild/fix/test. > > OK you would want to do that, and I don't have any > reason to argue against that. > I'm only grateful to you Symbian to release the OPL > code for ER6, which should have costed you considerable > time, money and human resources. You've made a brave > and tough decision which I think is REALLY benefitical > to users and developers alike. > > Probably the only reasonable approach that would attract > more ER5 guys to the codebase of OPL is to backport > everything to ER5. > > And I guess it is most desirable for Symbian if this > backporting is done as an independent user-side project > to minimize the support issue (i.e. the product should > never, under any circumstances, be confused as the > "official" product from Symbian). > > I'm not too sure if I'll have time in the near future, > but if I will I'd like to start. > If that ever happens (let's be wishful), can I expect > any support from you, or do you think it's plainly a > bad idea? > > Best wishes, > Keita -- David Mery Technology Outreach, Symbian Ltd dav...@sy... http://www.symbian.com vox: +44 20 7563 2235 mobile: +44 7973 204 214 When I use a word, it means just what I choose it to mean - Lewis Carroll ********************************************************************** Symbian Ltd is a company registered in England and Wales with registered number 01796587 and registered office at 19 Harcourt Street, London, W1H 4HF, UK. This message is intended only for use by the named addressee and may contain privileged and/or confidential information. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, copy or take any action in reliance on it. If you have received this message in error please notify pos...@sy... and delete the message and any attachments accompanying it immediately. Symbian does not accept liability for any corruption, interception, amendment, tampering or viruses occurring to this message in transit or for any message sent by its employees which is not in compliance with Symbian corporate policy. ********************************************************************** |
|
From: <ktk...@hi...> - 2003-08-04 19:20:09
|
Hi David, Thank you very much for your reply. > Yes, we would need to check/rebuild/fix/test. OK you would want to do that, and I don't have any reason to argue against that. I'm only grateful to you Symbian to release the OPL code for ER6, which should have costed you considerable time, money and human resources. You've made a brave and tough decision which I think is REALLY benefitical to users and developers alike. Probably the only reasonable approach that would attract more ER5 guys to the codebase of OPL is to backport everything to ER5. And I guess it is most desirable for Symbian if this backporting is done as an independent user-side project to minimize the support issue (i.e. the product should never, under any circumstances, be confused as the "official" product from Symbian). I'm not too sure if I'll have time in the near future, but if I will I'd like to start. If that ever happens (let's be wishful), can I expect any support from you, or do you think it's plainly a bad idea? Best wishes, Keita |
|
From: David M. <dav...@sy...> - 2003-08-04 16:00:09
|
Keita, Yes, we would need to check/rebuild/fix/test. We are not willing to contribute code which doesn't work. This is not the approach we took for OPL for Symbian OS v6.x, and we would not be happy taking it for an earlier version either. As such we would face the large task of removing confidential information, testing, fixing and re-building what is now a very old and out-of-date codeline. The legal side would also need to be looked into, both from the point-of-view that OPL is in the ROM on the Psion devices, and from a backward compatibility point-of-view in case it broke an OPL app Psion users are relying onto. br -d -- David Mery Technology Outreach, Symbian Ltd dav...@sy... http://www.symbian.com vox: +44 20 7563 2235 mobile: +44 7973 204 214 When I use a word, it means just what I choose it to mean - Lewis Carroll ********************************************************************** Symbian Ltd is a company registered in England and Wales with registered number 01796587 and registered office at 19 Harcourt Street, London, W1H 4HF, UK. This message is intended only for use by the named addressee and may contain privileged and/or confidential information. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, copy or take any action in reliance on it. If you have received this message in error please notify pos...@sy... and delete the message and any attachments accompanying it immediately. Symbian does not accept liability for any corruption, interception, amendment, tampering or viruses occurring to this message in transit or for any message sent by its employees which is not in compliance with Symbian corporate policy. ********************************************************************** |
|
From: <ktk...@hi...> - 2003-07-30 21:19:16
|
Hi David, Thanks for your reply, I actually had seen the original post of Phil's I think. I very much understand that this is the decision of Psion/Symbian, but anyway I have to counter where I think it's appropriate. > Symbian...source had to be sanitised, checked, re-built, > fixed, tested again... Of course you want to remove confidential information from the source, but apart from that, you are not required to check/rebuild/fix/test. It is nice if you do that, but you don't have to publish a fully working set of code. > and that's > before other legal-related issues. The legal situation > on v5 is also more complex as > OPL was included directly in product ROMs. This never > ended up happening for v6.0 > which made open sourcing easier. From my point of view this has nothing to do with the legal issue, but I should have missed something. It's very nice of you if you kindly tell me why. To me it seems that ALL of the problems that can potentially arise are related to cost (i.e. development cost, support cost etc.), not law. > Like it or not, v5 is nowhere near as mass- > market as v6.x onwards (and becoming increasingly less > so too) That's quite understandable. And the only false logic is that doing something for ER5 means nothing for V6 and later. My point was there are MANY ER5-only developers who would be VERY useful for longer term possibilities and future of Symbian V6 and later if Symbian/Psion opens up the ER5 OPL source. Now, returning to your reply, David, > I hope that some of the contributors to the Psion-ML-J > mailing list that showed interest > in OPL for Symbian OS v5 might be interested to contribute > to opl-dev anyway. I really hope so. But my impression was negative. Anyway when I told them that OPL was opensourced, they didn't look at the code. And then later when I asked if they'd like to see ER5 code, they said yes. From some of the replis I got, it was rather clear that they're not interested in developing for V6/7 or later because there's no interesting device for them running V6/7 and there seems to be no plan of such interesting devices in the future. And by the way that's the reason why many of these kind of people in Japan are converting to Linux Zaurus. At least so it appears to me. There's nothing inherently wrong with that, but as a matter of fact it is this "I'll use gcc/java/perl/ruby/python/lua/ whatever" kind of people who are most willing to see the code of interpreter/compiler. Is this a loss or something else? That depends, but for me it's a loss and a pitty. > So far opl-dev has generated lost of interest from OPL > developers, but not (yet) as > much interest from C++ developers wanting to contribute > to the project. Rick is still > doing all/most of the work on the v6.0 and v6.1 port. Yes, that's exactly what I'm worrying about, and that's why I got really serious about asking you to open ER5 OPL source. > Good luck with your new job. I hope you'll soon have more spare time! Thank you very much, I'll try to keep following your progress! Best regards, Keita |
|
From: David M. <dav...@sy...> - 2003-07-30 18:10:24
|
Keita, I remember your original question. At the time I explained it was highly unlikely. The current plan is not to open source versions prior to v6.0. See below a good explanation posted by my colleague Phil Spencer in another forum. = At the moment, we have no plans to open source anything before v6.0 OPL. The reason for this is simple (if, unfortunately, not what you want to hear...) - resources. To publish the v6.0 source code required a very big effort from several people inside Symbian...source had to be sanitised, checked, re-built, fixed, tested again...and that's before other legal-related issues. The legal situation on v5 is also more complex as OPL was included directly in product ROMs. This never ended up happening for v6.0 which made open sourcing easier. We took the decision to invest the required effort in open sourcing v6.0 OPL because of its longer term possibilities and future. Like it or not, v5 is nowhere near as mass- market as v6.x onwards (and becoming increasingly less so too) so there would be less benefit in us dedicating time and resources to open sourcing v5 OPL too. = I hope that some of the contributors to the Psion-ML-J mailing list that showed interest in OPL for Symbian OS v5 might be interested to contribute to opl-dev anyway. So far opl-dev has generated lost of interest from OPL developers, but not (yet) as much interest from C++ developers wanting to contribute to the project. Rick is still doing all/most of the work on the v6.0 and v6.1 port. As has been mentioned, another developer has been involved in a UIQ port (Symbian OS v7.0) and is close to posting sources for an alpha version. Good luck with your new job. I hope you'll soon have more spare time! br -d On 30 Jul 2003 at 19:35, ktk...@hi... wrote: > Hello all, > > sorry for keeping quiet for a while, I'm in a process of > changing job and cannot spare much time for OPL development. > > It seems that, so far, not too many people are reviewing > OPL codebase (OK they might be quietly reviewing it), and > my question is relevant to this point. > > Do you remember (especially David?) that I asked about > opening the codebase for ER5 OPL? At that time it was > mere an wishful thinking of me, but this time I'd like > to seriously ask you the possibility of that. > > The following is just to give you my view on this topic: > > Probably some of the inside people in Psion and/or > Symbian would augue that there's absolutely no point > in doing anything on ER5, but if that's the case they're > very much mislead, probably because they don't know how > opensource works. > Actually the point in opening the ER5 OPL is to boost > the number of people who look at the common OPL codebase. > As a large part of the ER5 OPL code should be identical to > that of newer Symbian opensource code (i.e. 92XX and Series60), > it is very likely that Symbian OPL would be benefitted > whenever ANY improvement is added to ER5 OPL. > > If you're developing a cross-platform product like OPL, > you can attract more developers if you open the code for > more platforms, and one contribution from a developer who > is only interested in one platform would benefit the whole > range of products. > > Just to give you some example, I made the following questionair > in Psion-ML-J, the largest Psion-related mailing list in > Japan with 831 subscribers: > Are you going to review the OPL code when ER5 OPL is ever going > to be opensourced? > > And I've got a positive response from 7 people (not including > me myself). They all said that they have never looked into > Symbian OPL code, but if ER5 OPL is opened they're quite sure > they'll look into that. Adding me, it's almost 1% of the user > base, which is actually a large number. > > Please think of this. They might not be that interested in > improving Symbian OPL, but they're willing to help to improve > ER5 OPL, which will immediately turn into the improvement in > Symbian code. Now we have only one Japanese contributor (me), > but we're going to have 7 more. > There're many skilled C++/OPL developers for ER5 who could > potentially help this project. > And it is much more so in Europe than in Japan where Psion > products have always been minority. > Are there any good reason to decide against using this huge > human resources? > > OK, enough of my personal opinion at the moment. > Best regards, > Keita > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.Net email sponsored by: Free pre-built ASP.NET sites including > Data Reports, E-commerce, Portals, and Forums are available now. > Download today and enter to win an XBOX or Visual Studio .NET. > http://aspnet.click-url.com/go/psa00100003ave/direct;at.aspnet_072303_01/01 > _______________________________________________ > Opl-dev-development mailing list > Opl...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opl-dev-development -- David Mery Technology Outreach, Symbian Ltd dav...@sy... http://www.symbian.com vox: +44 20 7563 2235 mobile: +44 7973 204 214 When I use a word, it means just what I choose it to mean - Lewis Carroll ********************************************************************** Symbian Ltd is a company registered in England and Wales with registered number 01796587 and registered office at 19 Harcourt Street, London, W1H 4HF, UK. This message is intended only for use by the named addressee and may contain privileged and/or confidential information. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, copy or take any action in reliance on it. If you have received this message in error please notify pos...@sy... and delete the message and any attachments accompanying it immediately. Symbian does not accept liability for any corruption, interception, amendment, tampering or viruses occurring to this message in transit or for any message sent by its employees which is not in compliance with Symbian corporate policy. ********************************************************************** |
|
From: <ktk...@hi...> - 2003-07-30 17:32:17
|
Hello Rick, I'm not sure if you already know this issue of ALLOC, LENALLOC and FREEALLOC, so I report here. There's a person in the following forum posting an interesting question: http://www.pdastreet.com/forums/showthread.php?s=ed06f378f1869828167cb7ff92862f63&threadid=21720 His code example has unnecessary bits, so I write the stripped-down version here: PROC test: LOCAL test&, test2& test&=ALLOC(30000000) PRINT LENALLOC(test&), "allocated" GET test2&=ALLOC(10000000) PRINT LENALLOC(test2&), "allocated" GET FREEALLOC(test&) PRINT "freed, now test& occupies", LENALLOC(test&) GET FREEALLOC(test2&) PRINT "freed completely, now test& occupies", LENALLOC(test&) PRINT "and test2& occupies", LENALLOC (test2&) GET ENDP I've run this code on my netBook with 64Mb RAM. One of the two problems is that, after the first FREEALLOC(test&), the OPLR still holds the large memory area used to store 30000000 bytes (for example you can confirm this by going to the system screen and check the free memory). It is only after the second FREEALLOC(test2&) that the memory for test& is actally released. I don't know if this is a bug or not, but if this is the correct behavior it's better to document it somewhere. The second problem is that, after the memory area was actually released, LENALLOC returns some bogus value. This could be changed in such a way that: 1. The value of test& is changed to -1 or whatever when FREEALLOC(test&) actually worked. 2. LENALLOC(buf&) returns zero when the value of buf& is negative. In principle we can use zero instead of negative value, but I think it's safer to use negative because zero might actually be a valid value for OPLR to point to some valid memory area. Would you please confirm if this is also the case with Symbian OPL? I wanted to look into this by myself, but as I said in the previous email I cannot spare much time on OPL at the moment. Best regards, Keita |
|
From: <ktk...@hi...> - 2003-07-30 17:32:07
|
Hello all, sorry for keeping quiet for a while, I'm in a process of changing job and cannot spare much time for OPL development. It seems that, so far, not too many people are reviewing OPL codebase (OK they might be quietly reviewing it), and my question is relevant to this point. Do you remember (especially David?) that I asked about opening the codebase for ER5 OPL? At that time it was mere an wishful thinking of me, but this time I'd like to seriously ask you the possibility of that. The following is just to give you my view on this topic: Probably some of the inside people in Psion and/or Symbian would augue that there's absolutely no point in doing anything on ER5, but if that's the case they're very much mislead, probably because they don't know how opensource works. Actually the point in opening the ER5 OPL is to boost the number of people who look at the common OPL codebase. As a large part of the ER5 OPL code should be identical to that of newer Symbian opensource code (i.e. 92XX and Series60), it is very likely that Symbian OPL would be benefitted whenever ANY improvement is added to ER5 OPL. If you're developing a cross-platform product like OPL, you can attract more developers if you open the code for more platforms, and one contribution from a developer who is only interested in one platform would benefit the whole range of products. Just to give you some example, I made the following questionair in Psion-ML-J, the largest Psion-related mailing list in Japan with 831 subscribers: Are you going to review the OPL code when ER5 OPL is ever going to be opensourced? And I've got a positive response from 7 people (not including me myself). They all said that they have never looked into Symbian OPL code, but if ER5 OPL is opened they're quite sure they'll look into that. Adding me, it's almost 1% of the user base, which is actually a large number. Please think of this. They might not be that interested in improving Symbian OPL, but they're willing to help to improve ER5 OPL, which will immediately turn into the improvement in Symbian code. Now we have only one Japanese contributor (me), but we're going to have 7 more. There're many skilled C++/OPL developers for ER5 who could potentially help this project. And it is much more so in Europe than in Japan where Psion products have always been minority. Are there any good reason to decide against using this huge human resources? OK, enough of my personal opinion at the moment. Best regards, Keita |
|
From: Rick A. <ri...@ci...> - 2003-06-16 20:42:12
|
Hi, Some good news: we now have Keita's OPLT changes in both the source code CVS repository and the downloadable user .zip packages! The CVS changes went in a couple of weeks ago, but I underestimated the effort required to rebuild the 9200-OPL-*.zip packages - however, there are now build scripts for automating that package construction process. ;-) I have just a couple more things to do tonight to complete this release: * update the project home page web site with details of the release * post the following news announcement on sourceforge.net <QUOTE> The opl-dev team is pleased to announce a new release of OPL for the Nokia 9200 Communicator series. This v1.24 release represents a significant milestone for the opl-dev open source project, as it contains the first OPL language source code changes contributed by a non-Symbian developer. Keita Kawabe's improvements to OPL casting are now part of the OPL translator, and so are available to the entire OPL community. This release demonstrates the benefits of the Symbian open source initiative, by enabling independent developers to contribute to the success of the Symbian ecosystem. <QUOTE ENDS> Keita: many thanks for your changes. Perhaps they took a little longer than we all thought to get into the language, but they're in now. I hope it won't take so long next time! ;-) Regards, Rick -- mailto:ri...@us... |
|
From: Rick A. <ri...@ci...> - 2003-05-22 22:22:16
|
Hi all, I've been a bit delayed putting Keita's OPLT changes back into CVS. I was hoping to get them done last weekend, but things snowballed a bit... 1. I switched from an old internal build of the SDK to the official Nokia SDK v1.2, and found that the THUMB builds were broken. :-( The fix, a new library in the .mmp file, is documented in a FAQ, but what's not documented is the fact that the new library has to be before euser.lib. I've asked for the FAQ to be updated. 2. I've added some test code to the OPLT test suite, to demonstrate that Keita's changes work. Then I found out that the OPLT tests haven't worked since ER5, so I've now got them working. 3. And in order to ship the new OPLT, I have to get OPLR and the OPXs built - something I've not yet done with the code in the configuration that it's in. Basically, 95% of the above was stuff that should have been done back in April, as opl-dev was being moved to SourceForge. Still, it's done now. And I've got the next four days off work, so I'm expecting to make some decent progress on this project! However, I'm not going to be able to use my wireless connection for a couple of days, but should be back on-line by Sunday night. So I expect to begin the CVS submissions then, and complete them by Monday night. Regards, Rick |
|
From: <ktk...@hi...> - 2003-05-04 19:23:39
|
Hi administrators, Do any of you have any thought on what's going to happen on ER5 OPL source? It's really nice if Symbian could release the ER5 OPL sourcecode under LGPL. I'm quite sure there's considerable interest in improving ER5 OPL. Even in the worst case I could at least backport things, but that's not a trivial effort. Regards, Keita |
|
From: <ktk...@hi...> - 2003-05-04 17:04:00
|
Sorry, > Is still haven't found any occasion where this does some > harm. I meant "I still haven't..." Regards, Keita |
|
From: <ktk...@hi...> - 2003-05-04 16:57:12
|
Hi all, Is this list working? Very quiet, indeed. First of all my BIG thanks for you guys, for making OPL truly open, giving me the opportunity to scratch my long-time itch. I was very pessimistic about this in the past, and you probably cannot even imagine how much a pleasant surprise it was to hear the news. --------------------------------------------------------- OK, so here's my first input. Attached is a small patch for oplt to allow sensible translation-time casting of the OPL constants. Since I'm still in the process of learning the codebase, it might well be that I'm doing something stupid. Anyway please review it and consider merging it to the CVS tree. Currently, the casting functions of OPLT for numerical constants (i.e. TOplConstant::AsWordL() and such) work in such a way that only the "smaller" types can be cast to "larger" types, i.e. 1. Word and Long can be casted to Real. 2. Word can be casted to Long. 3. Anything else Leaves (and is handled by various traps). At the first glance this seems to be logical (and it is logical indeed), but sometimes this can become very awkward. For example the following list causes translation-time error reporting "Bad array size". CONST KSomeConstant&=300 PROC Test: LOCAL a%(KSomeConstant&) ENDP Apart from the embarrasing error message (it's actually not the size of the array), since OPLT knows (on translation-time) the value of KSomeConstant&, there's little point in rejecting the declaration like this on the sole basis that "Long can be larger than 32767". I've just added some sanity check in the casting functions to allow casting from larger types to smaller ONLY WHEN IT MAKES SENSE. Is still haven't found any occasion where this does some harm. Note that this doesn't affect the run-time type/range checking. Regards, Keita http://www.hi-ho.ne.jp/~ktkawabe/densha_e.html ------------------------------------------------------------ *** ./cvs/opl/oplt/stran/OT_UTL.CPP Sun Apr 27 13:21:38 2003 --- ./my/opl/oplt/stran/OT_UTL.CPP Sun May 04 16:15:46 2003 *************** *** 4,10 **** --- 4,15 ---- // #include "ot_std.h" + const TInt16 OPL_WORD_MIN = -32768; + const TInt16 OPL_WORD_MAX = 32767; + const TInt32 OPL_LONG_MIN = -2147483647-1; + const TInt32 OPL_LONG_MAX = 2147483647; + GLDEF_C void Panic(TOpltPanic aPanic) // // Does a Panic from withn the OPL translator *************** *** 48,72 **** // // Returns the 'word' value of a constant // { ! if (Type()!=TOplToken::EWord) ! TypeMismatchL(); ! return TInt16(iInt); } EXPORT_C TInt32 TOplConstant::AsLongL() const // // Returns the 'long' value of a constant // { ! if (Type()==TOplToken::ELong) ! return TInt32(iInt); return TInt32(AsWordL()); } EXPORT_C TReal64 TOplConstant::AsRealL() const // ! // Returns teh value as a Real // { --- 53,103 ---- // // Returns the 'word' value of a constant // + // If it's not 'word' but 'real' or 'long', tries to + // cast to 'word' in a sensible manner. + // { ! switch ( Type() ) ! { ! case TOplToken::EReal: ! if ( iReal < TReal64(OPL_WORD_MIN) || iReal > TReal64(OPL_WORD_MAX) ) ! TypeMismatchL(); ! return (TInt16)(iReal); ! case TOplToken::ELong: ! if ( iInt < OPL_WORD_MIN || iInt > OPL_WORD_MAX ) ! TypeMismatchL(); ! case TOplToken::EWord: ! return TInt16(iInt); ! default: ! TypeMismatchL(); ! } ! return TInt16(0); //Can never be reached. } EXPORT_C TInt32 TOplConstant::AsLongL() const // // Returns the 'long' value of a constant // + // If it's not 'long' but 'real' or 'word', tries to + // cast to 'long' in a sensible manner. + // { ! switch ( Type() ) ! { ! case TOplToken::ELong: ! return TInt32(iInt); ! case TOplToken::EReal: ! if ( iReal < TReal64(OPL_LONG_MIN) || iReal > TReal64(OPL_LONG_MAX) ) ! TypeMismatchL(); ! else ! return (TInt32)(iReal); ! } return TInt32(AsWordL()); } EXPORT_C TReal64 TOplConstant::AsRealL() const // ! // Returns the value as a Real // { |
