www.digitalmars.com         C & C++   DMDScript  

DMDScript - DMDScript Maintainer?

reply Dan <Dan_member pathlink.com> writes:
Okay, since apparently nobody cares about DMDScript, I've decided I'm going to
start actively maintaining it.  I ran my source code formatter over it as the
first order of the day.

Interestingly, the code is now only 403kb.

Sometime in the next two or three days I'm going to try to get it compiling
again (it was broke before I touched it, honest!)

If I manage to do that, I fully intend to post DMDScript (source, license,
documentation, and all) on my website as well with a backreference to this site.

If anyone (especially Walter) has any problems with this idea, please let me
know and I'll do what I can about it.  If anyone wants to join me in my efforts
let me know.  Thanks!
Oct 25 2005
next sibling parent reply Dan <Dan_member pathlink.com> writes:
PS: I suppose that could look wrong.


My understanding is that under the GPL (as the source is), with an alternate
license available, means that I technically can perform such an adoption of the
project so long as the original author is named and linked to.

I am intending to keep it under the GPL license of the software.  I was hoping
to actively coordinate the development and distribution of DMDScript under the
GPL into several GPL'd projects, as well as possibly setting up (optional)
bindings to OpenGL, libxml2, librsvg, 7zip, and lighttpd.

The objective was to further the language, not line our pockets at your expense,
and I feel it is important that I make that more clear than I did in the first
post.

If you want I can change the name or take on any other relationship, including
active development WITH you.  However, I don't see any activity for DMDScript
for over two months now.  My guess is that it's being postponed while work on
the D language is being done.
Oct 25 2005
parent reply Lars Ivar Igesund <larsivar igesund.net> writes:
I think your assumption on Walter's take on DMDScript is somewhat wrong. He
has implemented an ECMA-script interpreter in D, and that's it. The last
releases has only been to keep it compilable by the latest D release. 

Anyway, the Walnut project over at dsource is already doing something
similar to your plan, although it hasn't been very active lately. Check it
out.

Lars Ivar Igesund

Dan wrote:

 
 PS: I suppose that could look wrong.
 
 
 My understanding is that under the GPL (as the source is), with an
 alternate license available, means that I technically can perform such an
 adoption of the project so long as the original author is named and linked
 to.
 
 I am intending to keep it under the GPL license of the software.  I was
 hoping to actively coordinate the development and distribution of
 DMDScript under the GPL into several GPL'd projects, as well as possibly
 setting up (optional) bindings to OpenGL, libxml2, librsvg, 7zip, and
 lighttpd.
 
 The objective was to further the language, not line our pockets at your
 expense, and I feel it is important that I make that more clear than I did
 in the first post.
 
 If you want I can change the name or take on any other relationship,
 including
 active development WITH you.  However, I don't see any activity for
 DMDScript
 for over two months now.  My guess is that it's being postponed while work
 on the D language is being done.

Oct 26 2005
parent reply Dan <Dan_member pathlink.com> writes:
Thanks for the heads up!

I looked over the Walnut project, and I think you're right.  It's about what I
was going to do.  I still think there's a good reason to do it from DMDScript
again though - their version split at 0.113, and it's now at 0.126.  My codebase
is now perfectly formmatted and I've reduced all the extraneous writing while
still maintaining an exact semantic equivalent.  The code is 380k.  I'm hoping
to change a little of the internal semantics and bring that down to about 350k
before I start to really do anything fancy.

At the rate I'm currently going, that means I should be "doing something fancy"
within a week or so.
Oct 27 2005
parent reply "Unknown W. Brackets" <unknown simplemachines.org> writes:
By perfectly formatted, do you just mean not using a mix of tabs and 
spaces?  Otherwise, I don't know what you mean; the formatting looks 
perfectly fine to me, if I set my tab width to 8.

-[Unknown]


 Thanks for the heads up!
 
 I looked over the Walnut project, and I think you're right.  It's about what I
 was going to do.  I still think there's a good reason to do it from DMDScript
 again though - their version split at 0.113, and it's now at 0.126.  My
codebase
 is now perfectly formmatted and I've reduced all the extraneous writing while
 still maintaining an exact semantic equivalent.  The code is 380k.  I'm hoping
 to change a little of the internal semantics and bring that down to about 350k
 before I start to really do anything fancy.
 
 At the rate I'm currently going, that means I should be "doing something fancy"
 within a week or so.
 
 

Oct 27 2005
parent Dan <Dan_member pathlink.com> writes:
By perfectly formatted, I mean it gives each { or } character it's own line,
indents everything according to the nesting, removes trailing whitespace and
multiple whitespace, adds a newline after semicolons, and replaces a few
if/else/switch situations with better ones.

For instance, replacing:

if(x){ if(y) do(); } --> if(x && y) do();
if(x) y = a; else y = b; --> y = (x)? a : b;

There are 9 other conditions where it will fix the branching in ways that are
semantically identical.  The code internally apparently changes however, since
my sieve.ds (on my old x486) for DMDScript runs at 630 ms on repeated runs,
while my sieve.ds for the modified version runs at 618 ms on repeated runs.
Both are without variation between runs.

I think it may have made some optimizations more transparent to the D compiler.
Anyways, I'm gonna head off to bed.  It's now 1:23AM.
Oct 27 2005
prev sibling parent "Anthony Borla" <ajborla bigpond.com> writes:
"Dan" <Dan_member pathlink.com> wrote in message
news:djn7im$80h$1 digitaldaemon.com...

Dan,
 Okay, since apparently nobody cares about DMDScript,
 I've decided I'm going to start actively maintaining it.
 I ran my source code formatter over it as the
 first order of the day.

 Interestingly, the code is now only 403kb.

 Sometime in the next two or three days I'm going to try to
 get it compiling again (it was broke before I touched it,
 honest!)

 If I manage to do that, I fully intend to post DMDScript
 (source, license, documentation, and all) on my website
 as well with a backreference to this site.

 If anyone (especially Walter) has any problems with this
 idea, please let me know and I'll do what I can about it.
 If anyone wants to join me in my efforts let me know.
 Thanks!

Ah, just when I though this NG was as dead as a Dodo, in blows a breath of fresh air :) ! I quite like DMDScript, but feel that it needs a few [relatively minor, I believe] enhancements to make it truly useful as a command-line tool. See my post: news:dbr0e1$1732$1 digitaldaemon.com listing a number of proposed enhancements. Sadly, no one bothered to respond then, or since. Cheers, Anthony Borla
Oct 29 2005