Digital Mars - D.gnu - g++ front end

↑ ↓ ← → andy <acoliver apache.org> writes:

 
 I wrote "I think" didn't I???
 


I think you love Visual Basic and wish that it could be as ubiquitous as 
it once was.

I wrote "I think" too.

 
 
 Well, what do we have:
 1.    D front end compiled with C++ with C++ features.
 2.    GCC backend compiled with C written in C
 
 The compiler is probably controlled by the frontend. The frontend parses and
 probably has to pass preprocessed stuff to the backend so the backend can
generate
 the code.
 Well, this sounds to me like calling 'C' from a C++ program. This is not
something
 unheard of, actually It's done all the time. So what basically needs to be
written
 is a layer probably partually C++ and partially C that hooks op the frontend
with
 the backend. That's how simple it is.
 


My understanding from looking at GCC and reading the documentation is 
the C program calls the C++ program that makes calls to the C program. 
Consequently, I should point out the make process especially 
bootstrapping process is fairly complex.  Furthermore, I read that there 
will be callbacks involved, so its more like

C --> C++ --> C -(callback)-> C++ -(maybe another call to)-> C

(which may be common, but I haven't seen too many examples of it)

 When ever D whould be included in the GNU compiler suite, the C compiler would
have
 to be build first. Than the C++ compiler and than the D compiler.
 
 So where are the real problems?


Pointless speculation without actual knowledge.  Misrepresentation of 
someone's opinions without actual knowledge for no apparent purpose 
other than to attack their character or start a distracting religious 
flamewar.  Those are problems.  Everything else is just a technical 
challange to be overcome by choosing the best method and accepting and 
mitigating (where possible) the tradeoffs.

You're attempting to convince me on an approach, then have me do the 
work and then find out if its feasible.  I assure you this is not 
possible, I tend to like to determine whether an approach is feasible 
before getting to far down the path.

How about instead of you and Ben spinning your wheels trying to convince 
me of the approach, you take a few minutes, download GCC take a look at 
the documetnation I sent and write a quick C++ example front end if its 
so simple?  (maybe rewrite the tiny example in C++) humm?  It would 
probably take equal amount of time (again assuming its as simple as you 
say), and be far more productive.  That would be a FAR more convincing 
argument.

-Andy

 Jan

Jun 26 2002

↑ ↓ ← → ben <zander echotech.ca> writes:

andy wrote:

 
 I wrote "I think" didn't I???
 


 I think you love Visual Basic and wish that it could be as ubiquitous as
 it once was.
 
 I wrote "I think" too.
 
 
 
 Well, what do we have:
 1.    D front end compiled with C++ with C++ features.
 2.    GCC backend compiled with C written in C
 
 The compiler is probably controlled by the frontend. The frontend parses
 and probably has to pass preprocessed stuff to the backend so the backend
 can generate the code.
 Well, this sounds to me like calling 'C' from a C++ program. This is not
 something unheard of, actually It's done all the time. So what basically
 needs to be written is a layer probably partually C++ and partially C
 that hooks op the frontend with the backend. That's how simple it is.
 


 My understanding from looking at GCC and reading the documentation is
 the C program calls the C++ program that makes calls to the C program.
 Consequently, I should point out the make process especially
 bootstrapping process is fairly complex.  Furthermore, I read that there
 will be callbacks involved, so its more like
 
 C --> C++ --> C -(callback)-> C++ -(maybe another call to)-> C
 
 (which may be common, but I haven't seen too many examples of it)


If i am ready this correct I have seen some of this before, working with 
glut and c++, there is alot of callbacks from glut to c++ (glut is c). 

 
 When ever D whould be included in the GNU compiler suite, the C compiler
 would have to be build first. Than the C++ compiler and than the D
 compiler.
 
 So where are the real problems?


 Pointless speculation without actual knowledge.  Misrepresentation of
 someone's opinions without actual knowledge for no apparent purpose
 other than to attack their character or start a distracting religious
 flamewar.  Those are problems.  Everything else is just a technical
 challange to be overcome by choosing the best method and accepting and
 mitigating (where possible) the tradeoffs.
 
 You're attempting to convince me on an approach, then have me do the
 work and then find out if its feasible.  I assure you this is not
 possible, I tend to like to determine whether an approach is feasible
 before getting to far down the path.
 
 How about instead of you and Ben spinning your wheels trying to convince
 me of the approach, you take a few minutes, download GCC take a look at
 the documetnation I sent and write a quick C++ example front end if its
 so simple?  (maybe rewrite the tiny example in C++) humm?  It would
 probably take equal amount of time (again assuming its as simple as you
 say), and be far more productive.  That would be a FAR more convincing
 argument.


Hey, hold on, I have never tryied to convince you of anything other then try 
to be productive with the comments. I am not convincing you or anybody else 
what way to do anything, as far as I could tell there were no other ways 
that I was aware of, it was a question of if it is possible, and i asked 
the gcc people.. I was not conserned with other possibilities just 
answering the one question (or trying too).. 

 -Andy
 
 Jan

Jun 26 2002

↑ ↓ ← → Jan Knepper <jan smartsoft.cc> writes:

andy wrote:

 I think you love Visual Basic and wish that it could be as ubiquitous as
 it once was.
 I wrote "I think" too.


Actually... I love VB!
Don't program it though, but because it is around I've got enough work not to
program it!

 Well, what do we have:
 1.    D front end compiled with C++ with C++ features.
 2.    GCC backend compiled with C written in C

 The compiler is probably controlled by the frontend. The frontend parses and
 probably has to pass preprocessed stuff to the backend so the backend can
generate
 the code.
 Well, this sounds to me like calling 'C' from a C++ program. This is not
something
 unheard of, actually It's done all the time. So what basically needs to be
written
 is a layer probably partually C++ and partially C that hooks op the frontend
with
 the backend. That's how simple it is.


 the C program calls the C++ program that makes calls to the C program.
 Consequently, I should point out the make process especially
 bootstrapping process is fairly complex.  Furthermore, I read that there
 will be callbacks involved, so its more like
 C --> C++ --> C -(callback)-> C++ -(maybe another call to)-> C


No problem!

 (which may be common, but I haven't seen too many examples of it)


Now I understand... You do not like C++ and probably do not have a lot of
experience
interfacing between the two as you try to stay away from C++, understandable
and than of
course this example is scary...
A C callback to C++ is no problem. I do those kind of things daily if not
hourly.

 When ever D whould be included in the GNU compiler suite, the C compiler would
have
 to be build first. Than the C++ compiler and than the D compiler.
 So where are the real problems?


 without actual knowledge for no apparent purpose other than to attack their
character
 or start a distracting religious flamewar.  Those are problems.  Everything
else is
 just a technical challange to be overcome by choosing the best method and
accepting and
 mitigating (where possible) the tradeoffs.


So is this thank you!
I am not trying to start a flame war!!!
You just feel actacked because of now I *think* obvious lack in the area of
interfacing C
with C++ out of which I totally understandable understand your questioning of
redoing the
D front in C...
I however, do not see or expect serious problems interfacing the two and out of
that
would not question rewriting C++ code in C.

 You're attempting to convince me on an approach, then have me do the
 work and then find out if its feasible.  I assure you this is not
 possible, I tend to like to determine whether an approach is feasible
 before getting to far down the path.


No I don't. I just seem to have quite a bit more C and C++ experience than
you... So... I
have done a lot of interfacing between C and C++ and yet have to find the first
instance
where I have to rewrite code in C.

 How about instead of you and Ben spinning your wheels trying to convince
 me of the approach, you take a few minutes, download GCC take a look at
 the documetnation I sent and write a quick C++ example front end if its
 so simple?  (maybe rewrite the tiny example in C++) humm?  It would
 probably take equal amount of time (again assuming its as simple as you
 say), and be far more productive.  That would be a FAR more convincing
 argument.


OK, sounds like something I could get into... Again I do not have a lot of time.
Also, since Walter is out, please send (perferable FTP) me the missing file for
the D
front.

Thanks!
Jan

Jun 26 2002

↑ ↓ ← → andy <acoliver apache.org> writes:

Wow, can I start just making presumptuous assumptions as to your
opinions and stating them in emails attacking you for no apparent reason?


 
 Sure. What do you expect? You have honestly and openly mentioned (I think more
than
 once) that you have a strong dislike for C++. Well, there is quite a bit of
C++ code
 around. The D front end is one of those bits.
 


Full disclosure.  I also do not like Visual Basic.  There is lots of VB 
code around.  What does this have to do with interfacing C++ code into 
the GCC compiler?  Nothing.  Just like my dislike has NOTHING to do with 
it.  Because if the approach works, I'd have little or no C++ to write.

 
I can be assured that sun java on windows or linux is pretty much the same..


I hope so. I do not use Java, do not like nor dislike it. However I have heard
different stories about this.
One of the concerns about Java seems to be that it does not full fill this
promise...


The other is that the performance is theoretically equal to C++, in actuality
its
not true.


 
 <g> What a joke!
 The performance isn't nearly equal to C++.
 May be it quicker and easier to develop something, but running the final
 application???
 I never checked, but Walter plugged the Java frontend he wrote onto the
backend of
 the C++ and D compiler if I understood well. I never heard how good that
worked/was.
 


Sun and others have done benchmarks to show it nearly equal in speed. 
Perhaps one can create a simple application that matches speed, but not 
a real world application.

Performance is my principal problem with Java.  I find Java's WORA 
promise reasonably fulfilled in the type of development I typically do. 
  If I did GUI development, no doubt I'd feel different.

Again, this has absolutely nothing to do with the fact I still have no 
idea how to interface a C++ front end for GCC.

 
Having to port all Walters changes to c for the linux front end would end up
causing a split.


I also think it is not a good idea.


I think it is one approach.  There are others.  I'm trying to pick the
best one.


 
 So, we think it is a bad approach, what about that?
 


Nothing, so long as you understand I don't give a rat's behind what 
people who don't plan to contribute and haven't EVEN LOOKED AT GCC 
think.  Whats even more is I HAVEN'T DECIDED ON AN APPROACH.


-Andy


 Jan

Jun 26 2002

↑ ↓ ← → andy <acoliver apache.org> writes:

Jan Knepper wrote:
Or perhaps you like c more.


 
 When you read some other post you will know soon...
 Some people just do not like C++. Which is fine. I love my wife. I am just glad
 not everybody does. <g>
 Andy's disadvantage is that he would like to have D on Linux, but D is written
 with some C++ features. I personally would just go ahead and compile the D
front
 end in C++ and the GNU backend in C and interface the two. It would basically
 come down to a C++ class system calling a C library which is done all over the
 world and which should not be a problem. However, Andy has stated so here that
 he does not like C++, so the D front will have to be rewritten in C. <g> My


Actually, I haven't made up my mind what approach.  I was hoping to get 
some factual information on what approach to take, but so far all I've 
gotten is conjecture.  I DO not like C++, never have, never will, but if 
we could plug Walters front end over a translation layer of sorts, I'd 
LOVE that approach.  But if it requires specially compiled versions of 
gcc, etc, etc...it won't be worth it.  Supporting a rewrite of Walter's 
front end is FAR easier (because its FAR better code) than any 
significant part of GCC.

My principal problem is that there are NO examples of how to do it in 
C++.  There are examples in C.  I've even gotten one to compile! 
Perhaps there is a reason, perhaps there isn't.  If someone showed me 
the light, I'd be fine with it.  Talk is cheap.

Oddly enough with all of this mischaracterization of my opinion on the 
matter I was favoring the other approach provided I/someone else could 
figure out how.

 personal opinion... dumb, dumb, dumb, dumb, dumb, why would someone try to fix
 what ain't broken??? It's just going to generate a LOT more work as changes to


I haven't made up my mind.  You apparently have.  You seem to hold many 
strong opinions.  I've been goofing around with gcc and Walter's front 
end.  Thats the progress up to now.

For anyone who doesn't like my approach the course of action is simple. 

Start writing something!

 the C++ front will have to be ported to the C front which is probably going to
 create derivations of the language... Than we at least have an other language
 that isn't the same all over the place. <g>


Again, I've summarized this before.  Like I said, it will depend on 
practical it is.  I must study gcc more in depth.

 Unfortunately I really do not have the time to get involved in this. I really
 would like to, but I have a mortage to pay, a T1 to pay, a car to pay, a phone
 to pay oh, I forgot I need to eat too! <g>
 


I paid off my car with my house.  Anyhow, I've got plenty of work to do 
as well (1.5 jobs, wife, kids, bills, co-loco, etc), I just plan to 
squeeze this in.  Its all a matter of priorities.  If this were 
important to you, you'd make time for it.  Its not.  No biggie.


-Andy


 Jan

Jun 26 2002

↑ ↓ ← → Jan Knepper <jan smartsoft.cc> writes:

andy wrote:

 Andy's disadvantage is that he would like to have D on Linux, but D is written
 with some C++ features. I personally would just go ahead and compile the D
front
 end in C++ and the GNU backend in C and interface the two. It would basically
 come down to a C++ class system calling a C library which is done all over the
 world and which should not be a problem. However, Andy has stated so here that
 he does not like C++, so the D front will have to be rewritten in C. <g> My


 Actually, I haven't made up my mind what approach.  I was hoping to get
 some factual information on what approach to take, but so far all I've
 gotten is conjecture.  I DO not like C++, never have, never will, but if
 we could plug Walters front end over a translation layer of sorts, I'd
 LOVE that approach.


I think that's the best approach. It just requires the translation
layer/interface.

  But if it requires specially compiled versions of
 gcc, etc, etc...it won't be worth it.  Supporting a rewrite of Walter's
 front end is FAR easier (because its FAR better code) than any
 significant part of GCC.


Why would it requires a specially compiled version of gcc?
I think Walter's code would flow right throug g++ which also should be able to
interface to the backend.

 My principal problem is that there are NO examples of how to do it in
 C++.  There are examples in C.  I've even gotten one to compile!
 Perhaps there is a reason, perhaps there isn't.  If someone showed me
 the light, I'd be fine with it.  Talk is cheap.


This is not a problem this is a challenge!
I program in C++ on FreeBSD all the time and interface to system functions (C)
all the
time. I really do not see what the problem is.

 Oddly enough with all of this mischaracterization of my opinion on the
 matter I was favoring the other approach provided I/someone else could
 figure out how.


Well, you are pretty strong (honestly though) about your C++ dislike.

 personal opinion... dumb, dumb, dumb, dumb, dumb, why would someone try to fix
 what ain't broken??? It's just going to generate a LOT more work as changes to


 strong opinions.  I've been goofing around with gcc and Walter's front
 end.  Thats the progress up to now.


Well, I also have tried to compile the front end and as it seems there are
header
files missing. I have tried to create some fake once, but it would require some
serious study as to see how it interfaces. Unfortunately I do not have the time
for
that at this moment.

 For anyone who doesn't like my approach the course of action is simple.
 Start writing something!


I guess we just do not like you strong dislike of C++. Sorry...

 the C++ front will have to be ported to the C front which is probably going to
 create derivations of the language... Than we at least have an other language
 that isn't the same all over the place. <g>


 practical it is.  I must study gcc more in depth.


Yes you have. I just repeated it as it is a serious concern to me for the sake
of the
D language.

 Unfortunately I really do not have the time to get involved in this. I really
 would like to, but I have a mortage to pay, a T1 to pay, a car to pay, a phone
 to pay oh, I forgot I need to eat too! <g>




I don't even have a car!

 Anyhow, I've got plenty of work to do as well (1.5 jobs, wife, kids, bills,
co-loco,
 etc), I just plan to
 squeeze this in.  Its all a matter of priorities.  If this were important to
you,
 you'd make time for it.  Its not.  No biggie.


Well, so do I, but to make some serious progress I would have to spend a
contiuous
week or more on it. Besides that... I have no problems with C++. <g> so using
the
front end as is does not create any issue for me in that department.

Jan

Jun 26 2002

↑ ↓ ← → "Andrew C. Oliver" <acoliver apache.org> writes:

Jan Knepper wrote

Where can I find it?


<kindly-scrolls-through-archive-and-repost-for-you/>

  



1. http://cobolforgcc.sourceforge.net/cobol_14.html
2. http://www.eskimo.com/~johnnyb/computers/toy/
3. http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc-3.1/gccint/Languages.html#Languages

The great thing is once we get some manner of framework for working with 
GCC, I think working with walters code should be easy.

Project URL for anyone who missed it is at: 
http://sourceforge.net/projects/brightd -




Why would it requires a specially compiled version of gcc?
I think Walter's code would flow right throug g++ which also should be able to
interface to the backend.
      


    


Simply Why?
  


not an elementary excercise, you need to see this on your own.

  

      


    


I don't, but dislikes usually make that you don't know alot about it. Just the
few things
you do not like, at least with me that's the case which than of course disabled
you to do
what you would like to do with it.
  


have written mostly headless code in it (last think I remember writting 
was an NT service).   The reason I dislike C++ are the projects I've 
worked on with others.  If I were coding strictly on my own or with 
someone who writes as good of code as Walter does (only perhaps with a 
bit more in the way of comments), then I'd find C++ adequate (like I do 
C).  The trouble is that I've never seen exsiting C++ code where 
multiple people worked on it and it wasn't a horrible mess.  Do I know 
how to write a decent C++ program that is not a mess.  Yes, but C++ is a 
language which more adequately facillitates entropy.

I've seen horrible software written in many languages, but the most 
horrible software I've seen was written in a mix of C++ and C, the 
second most horrible piece of software I've seen was written in VB.  The 
afore mentioned C++ code utilized multiple inheritance in ways that 
would just hurt your head and I shan't describe it further because it 
still hurts my head to think of it.  

For the record, I know PERL and use it when I need an advanced shell 
script, but I feel the same way about it as I do C++ for anything more 
substantial than a shell script.

Consequently (and attempting to bring this irrelevant and offtopic 
conversation back on the subject), most of the things that I see as 
promoting software entropy in C++ are missing or greatly improved in D.  

  

Well, I also have tried to compile the front end and as it seems there are
header
files missing. I have tried to create some fake once, but it would require some
serious study as to see how it interfaces. Unfortunately I do not have the time
for
that at this moment.
      


others he left out because he didn't think them important.
    


Could you put them on FTP please?
  



If C++ was all that great, then there would be no point in D..humm.  My
dislike for C++ is irrelevant.  If the C++ approach would work, I'd not
even have to necessarily code in C++ very much.
    


I don't say C++ is that great. I just happen to like it and have quite a bit of
experience
with it.
Indeed if the C++ approach works the whole project would make a lot more sense
to me as no
work is being redone. That's one thing I really do not like, not for myself nor
others.
  


experience in it (2+ years).  I also do not have a great deal of 
experience burning my own flesh, although I've rubbed against hot pans 
on the stove by accident on a few accassions and once tripped and 
touched my finger to my bar-b-que grill, from this experience I feel 
fully qualified in saying that having one's flesh burnt seriously sucks 
and I will continue to avoid it (just like C++).

Since you do not plan to contribute to the project, I do not understand 
why rework would be an issue for you.

  

If I didn't have a car I couldn't get to work.  Public transportation
here sucks and Cabs are $35 bucks a trip (hardly worth it).
    


I live out in the stix, the nearest store is about 5 miles away...
I don't even think we have public transportation anywhere close!
  


station/conv store within a few miles.

  

I'm doing this in non-continuous blocks.  OKAY LETS GET ONE THING
STRAIGHT.  MY PROBLEM IS NOT C++ its GCC.  And until you ACTUALLY look
at GCC and at least ONE of the front end examples (which should take you
all of 2 hours if your skill matches your gab), you've NO idea what I'm
talking about.
    


Well thanks!
Just point me to where I can find the stuff.
I might REWRITE one of the front ends in C++. That would be an easy and quick
way to go.
  


honestly hope you prove me a baffoon and make short
work of it.  From there, the stooge shall quietly take your example and 
begin working out a way to plug the D front end onto it.

BTW, Ben mentioned he was insterested in doing the same thing, so you 
might want to utilize his assistance in the interest in saving time.

-Andy

Jan

Jun 26 2002

↑ ↓ ← → Jan Knepper <jan smartsoft.cc> writes:

 <kindly-scrolls-through-archive-and-repost-for-you/>


Thanks!

 In article <3CF645E3.3030006 apache.org>, andy says...

1. http://cobolforgcc.sourceforge.net/cobol_14.html
2. http://www.eskimo.com/~johnnyb/computers/toy/
3. http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc-3.1/gccint/Languages.html#Languages

The great thing is once we get some manner of framework for working with
GCC, I think working with walters code should be easy.

Project URL for anyone who missed it is at:
http://sourceforge.net/projects/brightd -






OK, did you try to compile Toy?

Why would it requires a specially compiled version of gcc?
I think Walter's code would flow right throug g++ which also should be able to
interface to the backend.






 not an elementary excercise, you need to see this on your own.


OK, hopefully later this week.

So?  Who cares?  This is NOT about my C++ dislike.


you do not like, at least with me that's the case which than of course disabled
you to do
what you would like to do with it.


 have written mostly headless code in it (last think I remember writting
 was an NT service).


Well, if you would, you would put it on your resume or not???

 The reason I dislike C++ are the projects I've worked on with others.


That's not C++'s fault...

 If I were coding strictly on my own or with
 someone who writes as good of code as Walter does (only perhaps with a
 bit more in the way of comments), then I'd find C++ adequate (like I do
 C).  The trouble is that I've never seen exsiting C++ code where
 multiple people worked on it and it wasn't a horrible mess.


<g>
I have, but it takes STRONG guidance and somebody really needs to define the
style/rules, etc.

 Do I know how to write a decent C++ program that is not a mess.  Yes, but C++
is a language
 which more adequately facillitates entropy.


I know.

 I've seen horrible software written in many languages, but the most
 horrible software I've seen was written in a mix of C++ and C, the
 second most horrible piece of software I've seen was written in VB.  The
 afore mentioned C++ code utilized multiple inheritance in ways that
 would just hurt your head and I shan't describe it further because it
 still hurts my head to think of it.


I've seen those things too. I call it "excessive C++" <g>
This is not C++'s fault, but the designers...
Of course C++ allows you to do it, which I think is great...

 For the record, I know PERL and use it when I need an advanced shell
 script, but I feel the same way about it as I do C++ for anything more
 substantial than a shell script.


Don't know perl.

 Consequently (and attempting to bring this irrelevant and offtopic
 conversation back on the subject), most of the things that I see as
 promoting software entropy in C++ are missing or greatly improved in D.


Sure are.

Well, I also have tried to compile the front end and as it seems there are
header
files missing. I have tried to create some fake once, but it would require some
serious study as to see how it interfaces. Unfortunately I do not have the time
for
that at this moment.


others he left out because he didn't think them important.






I'll give you a userid+passwd via private mail.

If C++ was all that great, then there would be no point in D..humm.  My
dislike for C++ is irrelevant.  If the C++ approach would work, I'd not
even have to necessarily code in C++ very much.


with it.
Indeed if the C++ approach works the whole project would make a lot more sense
to me as no
work is being redone. That's one thing I really do not like, not for myself nor
others.


 experience in it (2+ years).  I also do not have a great deal of
 experience burning my own flesh, although I've rubbed against hot pans
 on the stove by accident on a few accassions and once tripped and
 touched my finger to my bar-b-que grill, from this experience I feel
 fully qualified in saying that having one's flesh burnt seriously sucks
 and I will continue to avoid it (just like C++).


That's comparing apples and oranges, but point taken.
I would not go and burn my own flesh eather, but I have been know of taking a
razor and cutting
some stuff out of my foot... (No kiddig!) Also, I have not problems refraining
from 'pleasures'
in life and tend to pressure myself to hard... (only slept from 4:30 to 7:45
last night). So
basically, the more difficult it gets for me, the more fun I have.

 Since you do not plan to contribute to the project, I do not understand why
rework would be
 an issue for you.


I think that time could be spend better... I spend too little time with my
better half...

If I didn't have a car I couldn't get to work.  Public transportation
here sucks and Cabs are $35 bucks a trip (hardly worth it).


I don't even think we have public transportation anywhere close!


 station/conv store within a few miles.


No gas for at least 6/7 miles.

I'm doing this in non-continuous blocks.  OKAY LETS GET ONE THING
STRAIGHT.  MY PROBLEM IS NOT C++ its GCC.  And until you ACTUALLY look
at GCC and at least ONE of the front end examples (which should take you
all of 2 hours if your skill matches your gab), you've NO idea what I'm
talking about.


Just point me to where I can find the stuff.
I might REWRITE one of the front ends in C++. That would be an easy and quick
way to go.


 honestly hope you prove me a baffoon and make short
 work of it.  From there, the stooge shall quietly take your example and
 begin working out a way to plug the D front end onto it.

 BTW, Ben mentioned he was insterested in doing the same thing, so you
 might want to utilize his assistance in the interest in saving time.


Well, this is an open forum. Ben should be able to followup on this.
I will check with him though.
Thanks!
Jan

Jun 26 2002

↑ ↓ ← → andy <acoliver apache.org> writes:

Project URL for anyone who missed it is at:
http://sourceforge.net/projects/brightd -






 OK, did you try to compile Toy?
 


Yes, it took some doing, but I eventually got it to compile.  I don't 
remember everything I had to do.  I did have to modify the make file, 
but I think it was mostly mis-defined paths (which you should be able to 
  figure out pretty easily).

I COULDN'T get it to compile on windows.  There seems to be a missing 
header file and/or library include somewhere.

Look.  No amount of explaining on my part will convince you that this is
not an elementary excercise, you need to see this on your own.


 
 OK, hopefully later this week.
 


Excellent.

No.  I do not profess to have many years of experience in C++ ( 2 ).  I
have written mostly headless code in it (last think I remember writting
was an NT service).


 
 Well, if you would, you would put it on your resume or not???
 


Which C++ or the NT Service.  I'm a contractor.  I put everything on my 
resume, proud or not.  Especially in this economy.

 
The reason I dislike C++ are the projects I've worked on with others.


 
 That's not C++'s fault...
 


And its not PERL's fault that most perl programs are incomprehensible 
spaghetti, but it certainly doesn't help.

 
If I were coding strictly on my own or with
someone who writes as good of code as Walter does (only perhaps with a
bit more in the way of comments), then I'd find C++ adequate (like I do
C).  The trouble is that I've never seen exsiting C++ code where
multiple people worked on it and it wasn't a horrible mess.


 
 <g>
 I have, but it takes STRONG guidance and somebody really needs to define the
style/rules, etc.
 


And when I have a say in the matter, this happens.  Generally speaking 
this is not the natural order of things.

 
Do I know how to write a decent C++ program that is not a mess.  Yes, but C++
is a language
which more adequately facillitates entropy.


 
 I know.
 


Then you know have an understanding of why exactly

 
I've seen horrible software written in many languages, but the most
horrible software I've seen was written in a mix of C++ and C, the
second most horrible piece of software I've seen was written in VB.  The
afore mentioned C++ code utilized multiple inheritance in ways that
would just hurt your head and I shan't describe it further because it
still hurts my head to think of it.


 
 I've seen those things too. I call it "excessive C++" <g>
 This is not C++'s fault, but the designers...
 Of course C++ allows you to do it, which I think is great...
 


I'm from the school of the moderate.  The language should not support 
horrible practices, let the programmers write that in themselves.

 
For the record, I know PERL and use it when I need an advanced shell
script, but I feel the same way about it as I do C++ for anything more
substantial than a shell script.


 
 Don't know perl.
 


Its pretty dern useful.  PERL should be in anyone's toolcase.  I hope to 
learn awk one day soon.

 
Consequently (and attempting to bring this irrelevant and offtopic
conversation back on the subject), most of the things that I see as
promoting software entropy in C++ are missing or greatly improved in D.


 
 Sure are.
 


And so we come to a greater understanding.

Where?  I imagine he included them in the recent release.


 
 I'll give you a userid+passwd via private mail.
 


cool.  Check that the latest release donesn't include newer ones.  I 
found one file, but walter sent the other to the newsgroup.  Still 
looking for that one.

I avoid working in C++ and therefore do not have a great deal of
experience in it (2+ years).  I also do not have a great deal of
experience burning my own flesh, although I've rubbed against hot pans
on the stove by accident on a few accassions and once tripped and
touched my finger to my bar-b-que grill, from this experience I feel
fully qualified in saying that having one's flesh burnt seriously sucks
and I will continue to avoid it (just like C++).


 
 That's comparing apples and oranges, but point taken.
 I would not go and burn my own flesh eather, but I have been know of taking a
razor and cutting
 some stuff out of my foot... (No kiddig!) Also, I have not problems refraining
from 'pleasures'
 in life and tend to pressure myself to hard... (only slept from 4:30 to 7:45
last night). So
 basically, the more difficult it gets for me, the more fun I have.
 


Hehe..  I do this: http://jakarta.apache.org/poi (a port of a horribly 
overcomplicated convoluted file format to a language with poor support 
for low level IO and inefficient data structures!  HA!)

 
Since you do not plan to contribute to the project, I do not understand why
rework would be
an issue for you.


 
 I think that time could be spend better... I spend too little time with my
better half...
 
 


I hear that.

BTW, Ben mentioned he was insterested in doing the same thing, so you
might want to utilize his assistance in the interest in saving time.


 
 Well, this is an open forum. Ben should be able to followup on this.
 I will check with him though.


Collaboration does not commonly happen by accident.

Prost,

-Andy


 Thanks!
 Jan

Jun 26 2002

↑ ↓ ← → ben <zander echotech.ca> writes:

I would like to point out that you can write crap in any language, its the 
languages that have the ability to write clean code are the good ones.. ie 

c, my god there is some bad c code, stuff that the copiler can't even figure 
out enough to optimize it.
perl - well that is just an invitation for hackers, almost everybody i know 
that use perl are programmers that like righting unreadable small tight 
(tight is usually not the case, they just think it is) code, 

php - everybody I know  that program in php have this consept for everything 
"Put it in an array, then parse array", that even happens when looping 
though the results of a database. Every app have looked though (well alot 
of them have this) 
while (not the end of query) {
        put in array
}

while not the end of array {
        do something
}
What is the point of that. 

c++ - overloading and inheratince does not have to be used in everything 
program like its the "function main()".

The list goes on.. The point is not the bad things, cause theres no stoping 
some people, its the good things. 
c++ allows you to write class, so all you have to worry about is the 
interface (if you make sure your values are private) and if nessesary build 
a testing harness for each class. (its been a while for c so don't worry 
about syntex)

--------
cMath.cpp
--------

class cMath() {
        long add(int,int)
        long add(long,long)
private:
        long value
}

------------
cMathTest.c
------------
int main() {
        math = new cMath();
        long a,b; 
        a = math->add(100,100);
        b = math->add(100000,100000);
        if (a != 200) {
                cout << "ERROR, cMath has an error in add(int,int)" << endl;
                cout << "Correct result is 200";
                cout << "cMath result is " << a;
        }
        if (b != 200000) {
                cout << "ERROR, cMath has an error in add(long,long)" << endl;
                cout << "Correct result is 200000";
                cout << "cMath result is " << b;
        }
}

So if you decide to change all the code inside cMath to assembly and do 
bitshifting when possible then you can run the test harness on top of it 
again. To make sure everything is being tested correctly, including 
overflows and such. If everybody wrote each class with a harness, then the 
harness can be the example program, and as long as you up stuff like 
overflows and such in the testing harness, your code would be increadebly 
solid, and very easy to change the internals without introducing bugs. 

Later, Ben


Jan Knepper wrote:

 <kindly-scrolls-through-archive-and-repost-for-you/>


 Thanks!
 
 In article <3CF645E3.3030006 apache.org>, andy says...

1. http://cobolforgcc.sourceforge.net/cobol_14.html
2. http://www.eskimo.com/~johnnyb/computers/toy/
3.
http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc-3.1/gccint/Languages.html#Languages

The great thing is once we get some manner of framework for working
with GCC, I think working with walters code should be easy.

Project URL for anyone who missed it is at:
http://sourceforge.net/projects/brightd -






 OK, did you try to compile Toy?
 
Why would it requires a specially compiled version of gcc?
I think Walter's code would flow right throug g++ which also should be
able to interface to the backend.






 not an elementary excercise, you need to see this on your own.


 OK, hopefully later this week.
 
So?  Who cares?  This is NOT about my C++ dislike.


Just the few things you do not like, at least with me that's the case
which than of course disabled you to do what you would like to do with
it.


 have written mostly headless code in it (last think I remember writting
 was an NT service).


 Well, if you would, you would put it on your resume or not???
 
 The reason I dislike C++ are the projects I've worked on with others.


 That's not C++'s fault...
 
 If I were coding strictly on my own or with
 someone who writes as good of code as Walter does (only perhaps with a
 bit more in the way of comments), then I'd find C++ adequate (like I do
 C).  The trouble is that I've never seen exsiting C++ code where
 multiple people worked on it and it wasn't a horrible mess.


 <g>
 I have, but it takes STRONG guidance and somebody really needs to define
 the style/rules, etc.
 
 Do I know how to write a decent C++ program that is not a mess.  Yes, but
 C++ is a language which more adequately facillitates entropy.


 I know.
 
 I've seen horrible software written in many languages, but the most
 horrible software I've seen was written in a mix of C++ and C, the
 second most horrible piece of software I've seen was written in VB.  The
 afore mentioned C++ code utilized multiple inheritance in ways that
 would just hurt your head and I shan't describe it further because it
 still hurts my head to think of it.


 I've seen those things too. I call it "excessive C++" <g>
 This is not C++'s fault, but the designers...
 Of course C++ allows you to do it, which I think is great...
 
 For the record, I know PERL and use it when I need an advanced shell
 script, but I feel the same way about it as I do C++ for anything more
 substantial than a shell script.


 Don't know perl.
 
 Consequently (and attempting to bring this irrelevant and offtopic
 conversation back on the subject), most of the things that I see as
 promoting software entropy in C++ are missing or greatly improved in D.


 Sure are.
 
Well, I also have tried to compile the front end and as it seems there
are header files missing. I have tried to create some fake once, but
it would require some serious study as to see how it interfaces.
Unfortunately I do not have the time for that at this moment.


others he left out because he didn't think them important.






 I'll give you a userid+passwd via private mail.
 
If C++ was all that great, then there would be no point in D..humm.  My
dislike for C++ is irrelevant.  If the C++ approach would work, I'd not
even have to necessarily code in C++ very much.


bit of experience with it.
Indeed if the C++ approach works the whole project would make a lot more
sense to me as no work is being redone. That's one thing I really do not
like, not for myself nor others.


 experience in it (2+ years).  I also do not have a great deal of
 experience burning my own flesh, although I've rubbed against hot pans
 on the stove by accident on a few accassions and once tripped and
 touched my finger to my bar-b-que grill, from this experience I feel
 fully qualified in saying that having one's flesh burnt seriously sucks
 and I will continue to avoid it (just like C++).


 That's comparing apples and oranges, but point taken.
 I would not go and burn my own flesh eather, but I have been know of
 taking a razor and cutting some stuff out of my foot... (No kiddig!) Also,
 I have not problems refraining from 'pleasures' in life and tend to
 pressure myself to hard... (only slept from 4:30 to 7:45 last night). So
 basically, the more difficult it gets for me, the more fun I have.
 
 Since you do not plan to contribute to the project, I do not understand
 why rework would be an issue for you.


 I think that time could be spend better... I spend too little time with my
 better half...
 
If I didn't have a car I couldn't get to work.  Public transportation
here sucks and Cabs are $35 bucks a trip (hardly worth it).


I don't even think we have public transportation anywhere close!


 station/conv store within a few miles.


 No gas for at least 6/7 miles.
 
I'm doing this in non-continuous blocks.  OKAY LETS GET ONE THING
STRAIGHT.  MY PROBLEM IS NOT C++ its GCC.  And until you ACTUALLY look
at GCC and at least ONE of the front end examples (which should take
you all of 2 hours if your skill matches your gab), you've NO idea what
I'm talking about.


Just point me to where I can find the stuff.
I might REWRITE one of the front ends in C++. That would be an easy and
quick way to go.


 honestly hope you prove me a baffoon and make short
 work of it.  From there, the stooge shall quietly take your example and
 begin working out a way to plug the D front end onto it.

 BTW, Ben mentioned he was insterested in doing the same thing, so you
 might want to utilize his assistance in the interest in saving time.


 Well, this is an open forum. Ben should be able to followup on this.
 I will check with him though.
 Thanks!
 Jan

Jun 27 2002

↑ ↓ ← → andy <acoliver apache.org> writes:

ben wrote:
 I would like to point out that you can write crap in any language, its the 
 languages that have the ability to write clean code are the good ones.. ie 


yes

 c, my god there is some bad c code, stuff that the copiler can't even figure 
 out enough to optimize it.
 perl - well that is just an invitation for hackers, almost everybody i know 
 that use perl are programmers that like righting unreadable small tight 
 (tight is usually not the case, they just think it is) code, 
 


yes

 php - everybody I know  that program in php have this consept for everything 
 "Put it in an array, then parse array", that even happens when looping 
 though the results of a database. Every app have looked though (well alot 
 of them have this) 
 while (not the end of query) {
         put in array
 }
 
 while not the end of array {
         do something
 }
 What is the point of that. 
 
 c++ - overloading and inheratince does not have to be used in everything 
 program like its the "function main()".
 


but it does.

<snip/> (I read it but this has nothing to do with my issues with C)

In my opinion, while C++ adding the concept of a class is nice, the 
other less useful but easily and frequently misused features extend,
add onto and compound the problems of C, not improve them.  D leaves in
the good stuff, adds other good stuff (garbage collection), then removes 
the nasty C++ additions.  This is why I do not like C++, but like D.

PERL - I stated I also don't like PERL but find it less avoidable then C++.

C - there is a time and place for C

Java - expensive, but less problematic than C++

This is way off topic... lets drop it and make D wipe the floor with 
them all (except PERL which will still be just the write tool for a 
quick advanced shell script)

-Andy

 Later, Ben
 
 
 Jan Knepper wrote:
 
 
<kindly-scrolls-through-archive-and-repost-for-you/>


Thanks!


In article <3CF645E3.3030006 apache.org>, andy says...


1. http://cobolforgcc.sourceforge.net/cobol_14.html
2. http://www.eskimo.com/~johnnyb/computers/toy/
3.
http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc-3.1/gccint/Languages.html#Languages

The great thing is once we get some manner of framework for working
with GCC, I think working with walters code should be easy.

Project URL for anyone who missed it is at:
http://sourceforge.net/projects/brightd -








Why would it requires a specially compiled version of gcc?
I think Walter's code would flow right throug g++ which also should be
able to interface to the backend.


You are in error.


Simply Why?


Look.  No amount of explaining on my part will convince you that this is
not an elementary excercise, you need to see this on your own.


OK, hopefully later this week.


So?  Who cares?  This is NOT about my C++ dislike.


I don't, but dislikes usually make that you don't know alot about it.
Just the few things you do not like, at least with me that's the case
which than of course disabled you to do what you would like to do with
it.


No.  I do not profess to have many years of experience in C++ ( 2 ).  I
have written mostly headless code in it (last think I remember writting
was an NT service).


Well, if you would, you would put it on your resume or not???


The reason I dislike C++ are the projects I've worked on with others.


That's not C++'s fault...


If I were coding strictly on my own or with
someone who writes as good of code as Walter does (only perhaps with a
bit more in the way of comments), then I'd find C++ adequate (like I do
C).  The trouble is that I've never seen exsiting C++ code where
multiple people worked on it and it wasn't a horrible mess.


<g>
I have, but it takes STRONG guidance and somebody really needs to define
the style/rules, etc.


Do I know how to write a decent C++ program that is not a mess.  Yes, but
C++ is a language which more adequately facillitates entropy.


I know.


I've seen horrible software written in many languages, but the most
horrible software I've seen was written in a mix of C++ and C, the
second most horrible piece of software I've seen was written in VB.  The
afore mentioned C++ code utilized multiple inheritance in ways that
would just hurt your head and I shan't describe it further because it
still hurts my head to think of it.


I've seen those things too. I call it "excessive C++" <g>
This is not C++'s fault, but the designers...
Of course C++ allows you to do it, which I think is great...


For the record, I know PERL and use it when I need an advanced shell
script, but I feel the same way about it as I do C++ for anything more
substantial than a shell script.


Don't know perl.


Consequently (and attempting to bring this irrelevant and offtopic
conversation back on the subject), most of the things that I see as
promoting software entropy in C++ are missing or greatly improved in D.


Sure are.


Well, I also have tried to compile the front end and as it seems there
are header files missing. I have tried to create some fake once, but
it would require some serious study as to see how it interfaces.
Unfortunately I do not have the time for that at this moment.


I got them from walter.  He didn't leave them out on purpose, and the
others he left out because he didn't think them important.


Could you put them on FTP please?


Where?  I imagine he included them in the recent release.


I'll give you a userid+passwd via private mail.


If C++ was all that great, then there would be no point in D..humm.  My
dislike for C++ is irrelevant.  If the C++ approach would work, I'd not
even have to necessarily code in C++ very much.


I don't say C++ is that great. I just happen to like it and have quite a
bit of experience with it.
Indeed if the C++ approach works the whole project would make a lot more
sense to me as no work is being redone. That's one thing I really do not
like, not for myself nor others.


I avoid working in C++ and therefore do not have a great deal of
experience in it (2+ years).  I also do not have a great deal of
experience burning my own flesh, although I've rubbed against hot pans
on the stove by accident on a few accassions and once tripped and
touched my finger to my bar-b-que grill, from this experience I feel
fully qualified in saying that having one's flesh burnt seriously sucks
and I will continue to avoid it (just like C++).


That's comparing apples and oranges, but point taken.
I would not go and burn my own flesh eather, but I have been know of
taking a razor and cutting some stuff out of my foot... (No kiddig!) Also,
I have not problems refraining from 'pleasures' in life and tend to
pressure myself to hard... (only slept from 4:30 to 7:45 last night). So
basically, the more difficult it gets for me, the more fun I have.


Since you do not plan to contribute to the project, I do not understand
why rework would be an issue for you.


I think that time could be spend better... I spend too little time with my
better half...


If I didn't have a car I couldn't get to work.  Public transportation
here sucks and Cabs are $35 bucks a trip (hardly worth it).


I live out in the stix, the nearest store is about 5 miles away...
I don't even think we have public transportation anywhere close!


I actually live reasonably out in the stix.  Although there is a gas
station/conv store within a few miles.


No gas for at least 6/7 miles.


I'm doing this in non-continuous blocks.  OKAY LETS GET ONE THING
STRAIGHT.  MY PROBLEM IS NOT C++ its GCC.  And until you ACTUALLY look
at GCC and at least ONE of the front end examples (which should take
you all of 2 hours if your skill matches your gab), you've NO idea what
I'm talking about.


Well thanks!
Just point me to where I can find the stuff.
I might REWRITE one of the front ends in C++. That would be an easy and
quick way to go.


Then I'll be convinced.  With me, code speaks way louder than words.  I
honestly hope you prove me a baffoon and make short
work of it.  From there, the stooge shall quietly take your example and
begin working out a way to plug the D front end onto it.

BTW, Ben mentioned he was insterested in doing the same thing, so you
might want to utilize his assistance in the interest in saving time.


Well, this is an open forum. Ben should be able to followup on this.
I will check with him though.
Thanks!
Jan

Jun 27 2002

↑ ↓ ← → ben <zander echotech.ca> writes:

I would like to see d wipe the floor but the first step is to get it into 
linux.. So far nowone will help me build a c++ frontend but I am going to 
keep working at it..

later, Ben

andy wrote:

 ben wrote:
 I would like to point out that you can write crap in any language, its
 the languages that have the ability to write clean code are the good
 ones.. ie


 yes
 
 c, my god there is some bad c code, stuff that the copiler can't even
 figure out enough to optimize it.
 perl - well that is just an invitation for hackers, almost everybody i
 know that use perl are programmers that like righting unreadable small
 tight (tight is usually not the case, they just think it is) code,
 


 yes
 
 php - everybody I know  that program in php have this consept for
 everything "Put it in an array, then parse array", that even happens when
 looping though the results of a database. Every app have looked though
 (well alot of them have this)
 while (not the end of query) {
         put in array
 }
 
 while not the end of array {
         do something
 }
 What is the point of that.
 
 c++ - overloading and inheratince does not have to be used in everything
 program like its the "function main()".
 


 but it does.
 
 <snip/> (I read it but this has nothing to do with my issues with C)
 
 In my opinion, while C++ adding the concept of a class is nice, the
 other less useful but easily and frequently misused features extend,
 add onto and compound the problems of C, not improve them.  D leaves in
 the good stuff, adds other good stuff (garbage collection), then removes
 the nasty C++ additions.  This is why I do not like C++, but like D.
 
 PERL - I stated I also don't like PERL but find it less avoidable then
 C++.
 
 C - there is a time and place for C
 
 Java - expensive, but less problematic than C++
 
 This is way off topic... lets drop it and make D wipe the floor with
 them all (except PERL which will still be just the write tool for a
 quick advanced shell script)
 
 -Andy
 
 Later, Ben
 
 
 Jan Knepper wrote:
 
 
<kindly-scrolls-through-archive-and-repost-for-you/>


Thanks!


In article <3CF645E3.3030006 apache.org>, andy says...


1. http://cobolforgcc.sourceforge.net/cobol_14.html
2. http://www.eskimo.com/~johnnyb/computers/toy/
3.
http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc-3.1/gccint/Languages.html#Languages

The great thing is once we get some manner of framework for working
with GCC, I think working with walters code should be easy.

Project URL for anyone who missed it is at:
http://sourceforge.net/projects/brightd -








Why would it requires a specially compiled version of gcc?
I think Walter's code would flow right throug g++ which also should
be able to interface to the backend.


You are in error.


Simply Why?


Look.  No amount of explaining on my part will convince you that this is
not an elementary excercise, you need to see this on your own.


OK, hopefully later this week.


So?  Who cares?  This is NOT about my C++ dislike.


I don't, but dislikes usually make that you don't know alot about it.
Just the few things you do not like, at least with me that's the case
which than of course disabled you to do what you would like to do with
it.


No.  I do not profess to have many years of experience in C++ ( 2 ).  I
have written mostly headless code in it (last think I remember writting
was an NT service).


Well, if you would, you would put it on your resume or not???


The reason I dislike C++ are the projects I've worked on with others.


That's not C++'s fault...


If I were coding strictly on my own or with
someone who writes as good of code as Walter does (only perhaps with a
bit more in the way of comments), then I'd find C++ adequate (like I do
C).  The trouble is that I've never seen exsiting C++ code where
multiple people worked on it and it wasn't a horrible mess.


<g>
I have, but it takes STRONG guidance and somebody really needs to define
the style/rules, etc.


Do I know how to write a decent C++ program that is not a mess.  Yes,
but C++ is a language which more adequately facillitates entropy.


I know.


I've seen horrible software written in many languages, but the most
horrible software I've seen was written in a mix of C++ and C, the
second most horrible piece of software I've seen was written in VB.  The
afore mentioned C++ code utilized multiple inheritance in ways that
would just hurt your head and I shan't describe it further because it
still hurts my head to think of it.


I've seen those things too. I call it "excessive C++" <g>
This is not C++'s fault, but the designers...
Of course C++ allows you to do it, which I think is great...


For the record, I know PERL and use it when I need an advanced shell
script, but I feel the same way about it as I do C++ for anything more
substantial than a shell script.


Don't know perl.


Consequently (and attempting to bring this irrelevant and offtopic
conversation back on the subject), most of the things that I see as
promoting software entropy in C++ are missing or greatly improved in D.


Sure are.


Well, I also have tried to compile the front end and as it seems
there are header files missing. I have tried to create some fake
once, but it would require some serious study as to see how it
interfaces. Unfortunately I do not have the time for that at this
moment.


I got them from walter.  He didn't leave them out on purpose, and the
others he left out because he didn't think them important.


Could you put them on FTP please?


Where?  I imagine he included them in the recent release.


I'll give you a userid+passwd via private mail.


If C++ was all that great, then there would be no point in D..humm. 
My
dislike for C++ is irrelevant.  If the C++ approach would work, I'd
not even have to necessarily code in C++ very much.


I don't say C++ is that great. I just happen to like it and have quite
a bit of experience with it.
Indeed if the C++ approach works the whole project would make a lot
more sense to me as no work is being redone. That's one thing I really
do not like, not for myself nor others.


I avoid working in C++ and therefore do not have a great deal of
experience in it (2+ years).  I also do not have a great deal of
experience burning my own flesh, although I've rubbed against hot pans
on the stove by accident on a few accassions and once tripped and
touched my finger to my bar-b-que grill, from this experience I feel
fully qualified in saying that having one's flesh burnt seriously sucks
and I will continue to avoid it (just like C++).


That's comparing apples and oranges, but point taken.
I would not go and burn my own flesh eather, but I have been know of
taking a razor and cutting some stuff out of my foot... (No kiddig!)
Also, I have not problems refraining from 'pleasures' in life and tend to
pressure myself to hard... (only slept from 4:30 to 7:45 last night). So
basically, the more difficult it gets for me, the more fun I have.


Since you do not plan to contribute to the project, I do not understand
why rework would be an issue for you.


I think that time could be spend better... I spend too little time with
my better half...


If I didn't have a car I couldn't get to work.  Public transportation
here sucks and Cabs are $35 bucks a trip (hardly worth it).


I live out in the stix, the nearest store is about 5 miles away...
I don't even think we have public transportation anywhere close!


I actually live reasonably out in the stix.  Although there is a gas
station/conv store within a few miles.


No gas for at least 6/7 miles.


I'm doing this in non-continuous blocks.  OKAY LETS GET ONE THING
STRAIGHT.  MY PROBLEM IS NOT C++ its GCC.  And until you ACTUALLY look
at GCC and at least ONE of the front end examples (which should take
you all of 2 hours if your skill matches your gab), you've NO idea
what I'm talking about.


Well thanks!
Just point me to where I can find the stuff.
I might REWRITE one of the front ends in C++. That would be an easy and
quick way to go.


Then I'll be convinced.  With me, code speaks way louder than words.  I
honestly hope you prove me a baffoon and make short
work of it.  From there, the stooge shall quietly take your example and
begin working out a way to plug the D front end onto it.

BTW, Ben mentioned he was insterested in doing the same thing, so you
might want to utilize his assistance in the interest in saving time.


Well, this is an open forum. Ben should be able to followup on this.
I will check with him though.
Thanks!
Jan

Jun 28 2002

↑ ↓ ← → andy <acoliver apache.org> writes:

Jan is working at it too.  Perhaps if you summarize what you've done so 
far.  Oh and the site will move to www.opend.org, provided we all agree 
on an approach.

-Andy

ben wrote:
 I would like to see d wipe the floor but the first step is to get it into 
 linux.. So far nowone will help me build a c++ frontend but I am going to 
 keep working at it..
 
 later, Ben
 
 andy wrote:
 
 
ben wrote:

I would like to point out that you can write crap in any language, its
the languages that have the ability to write clean code are the good
ones.. ie


yes


c, my god there is some bad c code, stuff that the copiler can't even
figure out enough to optimize it.
perl - well that is just an invitation for hackers, almost everybody i
know that use perl are programmers that like righting unreadable small
tight (tight is usually not the case, they just think it is) code,


yes


php - everybody I know  that program in php have this consept for
everything "Put it in an array, then parse array", that even happens when
looping though the results of a database. Every app have looked though
(well alot of them have this)
while (not the end of query) {
        put in array
}

while not the end of array {
        do something
}
What is the point of that.

c++ - overloading and inheratince does not have to be used in everything
program like its the "function main()".


but it does.

<snip/> (I read it but this has nothing to do with my issues with C)

In my opinion, while C++ adding the concept of a class is nice, the
other less useful but easily and frequently misused features extend,
add onto and compound the problems of C, not improve them.  D leaves in
the good stuff, adds other good stuff (garbage collection), then removes
the nasty C++ additions.  This is why I do not like C++, but like D.

PERL - I stated I also don't like PERL but find it less avoidable then
C++.

C - there is a time and place for C

Java - expensive, but less problematic than C++

This is way off topic... lets drop it and make D wipe the floor with
them all (except PERL which will still be just the write tool for a
quick advanced shell script)

-Andy


Later, Ben


Jan Knepper wrote:



<kindly-scrolls-through-archive-and-repost-for-you/>


Thanks!



In article <3CF645E3.3030006 apache.org>, andy says...



1. http://cobolforgcc.sourceforge.net/cobol_14.html
2. http://www.eskimo.com/~johnnyb/computers/toy/
3.
http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc-3.1/gccint/Languages.html#Languages

The great thing is once we get some manner of framework for working
with GCC, I think working with walters code should be easy.

Project URL for anyone who missed it is at:
http://sourceforge.net/projects/brightd -









Why would it requires a specially compiled version of gcc?
I think Walter's code would flow right throug g++ which also should
be able to interface to the backend.


You are in error.


Simply Why?


Look.  No amount of explaining on my part will convince you that this is
not an elementary excercise, you need to see this on your own.


OK, hopefully later this week.



So?  Who cares?  This is NOT about my C++ dislike.


I don't, but dislikes usually make that you don't know alot about it.
Just the few things you do not like, at least with me that's the case
which than of course disabled you to do what you would like to do with
it.


No.  I do not profess to have many years of experience in C++ ( 2 ).  I
have written mostly headless code in it (last think I remember writting
was an NT service).


Well, if you would, you would put it on your resume or not???



The reason I dislike C++ are the projects I've worked on with others.


That's not C++'s fault...



If I were coding strictly on my own or with
someone who writes as good of code as Walter does (only perhaps with a
bit more in the way of comments), then I'd find C++ adequate (like I do
C).  The trouble is that I've never seen exsiting C++ code where
multiple people worked on it and it wasn't a horrible mess.


<g>
I have, but it takes STRONG guidance and somebody really needs to define
the style/rules, etc.



Do I know how to write a decent C++ program that is not a mess.  Yes,
but C++ is a language which more adequately facillitates entropy.


I know.



I've seen horrible software written in many languages, but the most
horrible software I've seen was written in a mix of C++ and C, the
second most horrible piece of software I've seen was written in VB.  The
afore mentioned C++ code utilized multiple inheritance in ways that
would just hurt your head and I shan't describe it further because it
still hurts my head to think of it.


I've seen those things too. I call it "excessive C++" <g>
This is not C++'s fault, but the designers...
Of course C++ allows you to do it, which I think is great...



For the record, I know PERL and use it when I need an advanced shell
script, but I feel the same way about it as I do C++ for anything more
substantial than a shell script.


Don't know perl.



Consequently (and attempting to bring this irrelevant and offtopic
conversation back on the subject), most of the things that I see as
promoting software entropy in C++ are missing or greatly improved in D.


Sure are.



Well, I also have tried to compile the front end and as it seems
there are header files missing. I have tried to create some fake
once, but it would require some serious study as to see how it
interfaces. Unfortunately I do not have the time for that at this
moment.


I got them from walter.  He didn't leave them out on purpose, and the
others he left out because he didn't think them important.


Could you put them on FTP please?


Where?  I imagine he included them in the recent release.


I'll give you a userid+passwd via private mail.



If C++ was all that great, then there would be no point in D..humm. 
My
dislike for C++ is irrelevant.  If the C++ approach would work, I'd
not even have to necessarily code in C++ very much.


I don't say C++ is that great. I just happen to like it and have quite
a bit of experience with it.
Indeed if the C++ approach works the whole project would make a lot
more sense to me as no work is being redone. That's one thing I really
do not like, not for myself nor others.


I avoid working in C++ and therefore do not have a great deal of
experience in it (2+ years).  I also do not have a great deal of
experience burning my own flesh, although I've rubbed against hot pans
on the stove by accident on a few accassions and once tripped and
touched my finger to my bar-b-que grill, from this experience I feel
fully qualified in saying that having one's flesh burnt seriously sucks
and I will continue to avoid it (just like C++).


That's comparing apples and oranges, but point taken.
I would not go and burn my own flesh eather, but I have been know of
taking a razor and cutting some stuff out of my foot... (No kiddig!)
Also, I have not problems refraining from 'pleasures' in life and tend to
pressure myself to hard... (only slept from 4:30 to 7:45 last night). So
basically, the more difficult it gets for me, the more fun I have.



Since you do not plan to contribute to the project, I do not understand
why rework would be an issue for you.


I think that time could be spend better... I spend too little time with
my better half...



If I didn't have a car I couldn't get to work.  Public transportation
here sucks and Cabs are $35 bucks a trip (hardly worth it).


I live out in the stix, the nearest store is about 5 miles away...
I don't even think we have public transportation anywhere close!


I actually live reasonably out in the stix.  Although there is a gas
station/conv store within a few miles.


No gas for at least 6/7 miles.



I'm doing this in non-continuous blocks.  OKAY LETS GET ONE THING
STRAIGHT.  MY PROBLEM IS NOT C++ its GCC.  And until you ACTUALLY look
at GCC and at least ONE of the front end examples (which should take
you all of 2 hours if your skill matches your gab), you've NO idea
what I'm talking about.


Well thanks!
Just point me to where I can find the stuff.
I might REWRITE one of the front ends in C++. That would be an easy and
quick way to go.


Then I'll be convinced.  With me, code speaks way louder than words.  I
honestly hope you prove me a baffoon and make short
work of it.  From there, the stooge shall quietly take your example and
begin working out a way to plug the D front end onto it.

BTW, Ben mentioned he was insterested in doing the same thing, so you
might want to utilize his assistance in the interest in saving time.


Well, this is an open forum. Ben should be able to followup on this.
I will check with him though.
Thanks!
Jan

Jun 28 2002

↑ ↓ ← → ben <zander echotech.ca> writes:

Opend sounds good to me.. 

andy wrote:

 Jan is working at it too.  Perhaps if you summarize what you've done so
 far.  Oh and the site will move to www.opend.org, provided we all agree
 on an approach.
 
 -Andy
 
 ben wrote:
 I would like to see d wipe the floor but the first step is to get it into
 linux.. So far nowone will help me build a c++ frontend but I am going to
 keep working at it..
 
 later, Ben
 
 andy wrote:
 
 
ben wrote:

I would like to point out that you can write crap in any language, its
the languages that have the ability to write clean code are the good
ones.. ie


yes


c, my god there is some bad c code, stuff that the copiler can't even
figure out enough to optimize it.
perl - well that is just an invitation for hackers, almost everybody i
know that use perl are programmers that like righting unreadable small
tight (tight is usually not the case, they just think it is) code,


yes


php - everybody I know  that program in php have this consept for
everything "Put it in an array, then parse array", that even happens
when looping though the results of a database. Every app have looked
though (well alot of them have this)
while (not the end of query) {
        put in array
}

while not the end of array {
        do something
}
What is the point of that.

c++ - overloading and inheratince does not have to be used in everything
program like its the "function main()".


but it does.

<snip/> (I read it but this has nothing to do with my issues with C)

In my opinion, while C++ adding the concept of a class is nice, the
other less useful but easily and frequently misused features extend,
add onto and compound the problems of C, not improve them.  D leaves in
the good stuff, adds other good stuff (garbage collection), then removes
the nasty C++ additions.  This is why I do not like C++, but like D.

PERL - I stated I also don't like PERL but find it less avoidable then
C++.

C - there is a time and place for C

Java - expensive, but less problematic than C++

This is way off topic... lets drop it and make D wipe the floor with
them all (except PERL which will still be just the write tool for a
quick advanced shell script)

-Andy


Later, Ben


Jan Knepper wrote:



<kindly-scrolls-through-archive-and-repost-for-you/>


Thanks!



In article <3CF645E3.3030006 apache.org>, andy says...



1. http://cobolforgcc.sourceforge.net/cobol_14.html
2. http://www.eskimo.com/~johnnyb/computers/toy/
3.
http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc-3.1/gccint/Languages.html#Languages

The great thing is once we get some manner of framework for working
with GCC, I think working with walters code should be easy.

Project URL for anyone who missed it is at:
http://sourceforge.net/projects/brightd -









Why would it requires a specially compiled version of gcc?
I think Walter's code would flow right throug g++ which also should
be able to interface to the backend.


You are in error.


Simply Why?


Look.  No amount of explaining on my part will convince you that this
is not an elementary excercise, you need to see this on your own.


OK, hopefully later this week.



So?  Who cares?  This is NOT about my C++ dislike.


I don't, but dislikes usually make that you don't know alot about it.
Just the few things you do not like, at least with me that's the case
which than of course disabled you to do what you would like to do
with it.


No.  I do not profess to have many years of experience in C++ ( 2 ). 
I have written mostly headless code in it (last think I remember
writting was an NT service).


Well, if you would, you would put it on your resume or not???



The reason I dislike C++ are the projects I've worked on with others.


That's not C++'s fault...



If I were coding strictly on my own or with
someone who writes as good of code as Walter does (only perhaps with a
bit more in the way of comments), then I'd find C++ adequate (like I
do
C).  The trouble is that I've never seen exsiting C++ code where
multiple people worked on it and it wasn't a horrible mess.


<g>
I have, but it takes STRONG guidance and somebody really needs to
define the style/rules, etc.



Do I know how to write a decent C++ program that is not a mess.  Yes,
but C++ is a language which more adequately facillitates entropy.


I know.



I've seen horrible software written in many languages, but the most
horrible software I've seen was written in a mix of C++ and C, the
second most horrible piece of software I've seen was written in VB. 
The afore mentioned C++ code utilized multiple inheritance in ways
that would just hurt your head and I shan't describe it further
because it still hurts my head to think of it.


I've seen those things too. I call it "excessive C++" <g>
This is not C++'s fault, but the designers...
Of course C++ allows you to do it, which I think is great...



For the record, I know PERL and use it when I need an advanced shell
script, but I feel the same way about it as I do C++ for anything more
substantial than a shell script.


Don't know perl.



Consequently (and attempting to bring this irrelevant and offtopic
conversation back on the subject), most of the things that I see as
promoting software entropy in C++ are missing or greatly improved in
D.


Sure are.



Well, I also have tried to compile the front end and as it seems
there are header files missing. I have tried to create some fake
once, but it would require some serious study as to see how it
interfaces. Unfortunately I do not have the time for that at this
moment.


I got them from walter.  He didn't leave them out on purpose, and
the others he left out because he didn't think them important.


Could you put them on FTP please?


Where?  I imagine he included them in the recent release.


I'll give you a userid+passwd via private mail.



If C++ was all that great, then there would be no point in D..humm.
My
dislike for C++ is irrelevant.  If the C++ approach would work, I'd
not even have to necessarily code in C++ very much.


I don't say C++ is that great. I just happen to like it and have
quite a bit of experience with it.
Indeed if the C++ approach works the whole project would make a lot
more sense to me as no work is being redone. That's one thing I
really do not like, not for myself nor others.


I avoid working in C++ and therefore do not have a great deal of
experience in it (2+ years).  I also do not have a great deal of
experience burning my own flesh, although I've rubbed against hot pans
on the stove by accident on a few accassions and once tripped and
touched my finger to my bar-b-que grill, from this experience I feel
fully qualified in saying that having one's flesh burnt seriously
sucks and I will continue to avoid it (just like C++).


That's comparing apples and oranges, but point taken.
I would not go and burn my own flesh eather, but I have been know of
taking a razor and cutting some stuff out of my foot... (No kiddig!)
Also, I have not problems refraining from 'pleasures' in life and tend
to pressure myself to hard... (only slept from 4:30 to 7:45 last
night). So basically, the more difficult it gets for me, the more fun I
have.



Since you do not plan to contribute to the project, I do not
understand why rework would be an issue for you.


I think that time could be spend better... I spend too little time with
my better half...



If I didn't have a car I couldn't get to work.  Public
transportation here sucks and Cabs are $35 bucks a trip (hardly
worth it).


I live out in the stix, the nearest store is about 5 miles away...
I don't even think we have public transportation anywhere close!


I actually live reasonably out in the stix.  Although there is a gas
station/conv store within a few miles.


No gas for at least 6/7 miles.



I'm doing this in non-continuous blocks.  OKAY LETS GET ONE THING
STRAIGHT.  MY PROBLEM IS NOT C++ its GCC.  And until you ACTUALLY
look at GCC and at least ONE of the front end examples (which should
take you all of 2 hours if your skill matches your gab), you've NO
idea what I'm talking about.


Well thanks!
Just point me to where I can find the stuff.
I might REWRITE one of the front ends in C++. That would be an easy
and quick way to go.


Then I'll be convinced.  With me, code speaks way louder than words. 
I honestly hope you prove me a baffoon and make short
work of it.  From there, the stooge shall quietly take your example
and begin working out a way to plug the D front end onto it.

BTW, Ben mentioned he was insterested in doing the same thing, so you
might want to utilize his assistance in the interest in saving time.


Well, this is an open forum. Ben should be able to followup on this.
I will check with him though.
Thanks!
Jan

Jun 28 2002