gwe@cbosgd.UUCP (03/27/87)
In article <2804@well.UUCP> ewhac@well.UUCP (Leo 'Bols Ewhac' Schwab) writes: A mysterious, abeit neat-sounding program called robotroff. With a really great lead-in, so any Amiga owner is chomping at the bit to see it work But then (loud organ chord in a minor key): > Anyway, I think you'll like this one. Hope you haven't thrown away >your Manx 3.20a compiler yet. > > Schwab Curses! Foiled again ! Now, I've been reading this net long enough to know that Manx and Lattice are both C compilers. I've now communicated my sum total knowledge about C (except that "make" causes the compiler to do its thingie and put everything into a bunch a gibberish that the Amiga (but not I) can understand. Which isn't too bad, because neither of us can understand the file before make does its thing). That's it. I'm coming out of the closet. No more hiding, pretending to be something I'm not, trying to conform to society's norms. The big confession: I PROGRAM IN BASIC ! aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaagggggggggggggghhhhhhhhh!! Actually, I'm not exclusively BASIC. When the going gets tough, and I'm with a consenting flowchart, I'll use FORTRAN. I think my point should be obvious. This is not a flame, cause there's no way I can beef about free code being posted to the net, even if I can't do anything with it. I'd even consider buying a C compiler just to use the downloads, but I'd have to buy at least two versions of Manx , Lattice, and Red (Red C compiler.... get it, Red Sea ! Hahahaha ?? Okay, never mind) So now for the biggie. Is there anyone in the vicinity of Columbus, Ohio who downloads and compiles this stuff on a regular basis, and who I could {beg, bribe, coerce [pick one]} into mailing them to me (for a modest fee) on a regular basis ? I know Fred Fish assembles (oops, bad use of another computer term) these, as well as others, on a periodic basis; still, the several months of lag can be pretty frustrating. (Thanks, anyway, Fred; your disks are one of the reasons I bought mi amiga in the first place. Are you any relation to Bert Kersey at Beagle Brothers ? :-) Anybody out there want to take a poor, uneducated user under their wing ? ------------------------------clip and save---------------------------------- Bill Thacker cbatt!cbosgd!gwe DISCLAIMER: Farg 'em if they can't take a joke ! If you love something, set it free. If it doesn't come back to you, track it down and kill it. -----------------------------valuable coupon---------------------------------
spencer@eris.UUCP (04/04/87)
In article <3488@cbosgd.ATT.COM> gwe@cbosgd.UUCP (Bill Thacker) writes: >> Anyway, I think you'll like this one. Hope you haven't thrown away >>your Manx 3.20a compiler yet. >> Schwab >Curses! Foiled again ! > >That's it. I'm coming out of the closet. No more hiding, pretending to be >something I'm not, trying to conform to society's norms. The big confession: > >I PROGRAM IN BASIC ! aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaagggggggggggggghhhhhhhhh!! > >Actually, I'm not exclusively BASIC. When the going gets tough, and I'm with >a consenting flowchart, I'll use FORTRAN. That must have been a tough thing to admidt, in this day and age. > Bill Thacker cbatt!cbosgd!gwe The jist of this posting was to say (please get me a copy of these things). I would like to say that I was one of the four people that encouraged Leo to post uuencoded stuff to the net, following Matt's example (this net is on a first name basis). I would like to point out, however, that this was to mean: Post uuencoded executables to the net IN ADDITION TO THE SOURCE CODE!!!!!!!!!! (had enough? no? ok here are some more) !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! DON'T POST THE EXECUTABLE INSTEAD OF THE SOURCE. The reason that I say this is because I have noticed in the past something interesting, and that is: "You can create an executable from the source, but you can't create the source from the executable" OK, I know this might not be obvious at first, but if you think about it I think that you will see what I mean.:') Now I don't want limit the number of PD programs posted, but I think that we have got a hackers machine here, and this here net is the pulse of the community that supports it. As soon as we start posting executables all the time we end up with a lazy group. Everyone just downloads software and runs it and is content. Is that what we want? I learned everything I know about this machine by trying to compile other peoples code (and having to fix it so it would work). I remember the first MicroEmacs I tried to compile, I couldn't get the concept of working with more than one source file down for a week! I have come a long way since then, and it is all because of this net (everyone stand up and take a bow!)(co-workers around the country are now wondering what you are doing:'). Now it is getting confusing how to compile programs under all these different environments, and it is only going to get worse. Right now we have the Lattice environment, and then comes the Manx environment, and then the.... well, um... Oh, yeah, compiling with those two environments and using matt.lib. I knew there were three! Ok, ok, there are lots of different programs that make up the individual environment, and not everyone has the same PD make. That is why I suggested to Leo that he post uuencoded executables. Not everyone has both Lattice and Manx (at least not the new updated releases). Also Matt releasing an updated version of a program as executable only is fine, we have the original posting that allows us to look at the source, so we can see how he does things, and we can TelNet to UCBvax and get the most up to date source (well, *I* can). This makes the release of the executable make sense. Also, the ASDGRRD (the what????) was released with the idea of it being a shareware product that the author was going to support. That makes sense, how will they make money on it if everybody has their own modified version of it? Who will deserve the shareware fee. But really now. We have seen too many executable only postings recently. In the short run we will have GNU C on the Amiga (what can I do to help?) and there will be no reason that everyone can't compile the source off the net. Of course there are some things like Perry and Eric's "DropCloth" that nobody would ever modify anyway since Perry is a "Master" programmer ;') Actually, that is a good example. There was a question put to the net by Leo saying: "I can't get this program to replace the image on the backdrop window the workbench opens, maybe someone else can". Then ASDG comes in and says "We can". And to prove it they release an executable that does, but we all are still in the dark as to what they did right and Leo didn't. Ok, so I am asking for something for nothing again. But I think one of our strengths on the Amiga is the preponderance of PD software WITH SOURCE! Have you ever looked at the ST's PD stuff? Sort of limits the learning curve on the ST (learning curve?:') Sorry this message is so long, I just finished reading /kim's stuff, and it got me in a verbose mood. No, really I just got the previous message rejected for lack of contribution over previous stuff. This makes up for it. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Randy Spencer P.O. Box 4542 Berkeley CA 94704 (415)284-4740 I N F I N I T Y BBS: (415)283-5469 Now working for |||||||||||::::... . . BUD-LINX But in no way |||||||||||||||::::.. .. . Officially representing ||||||||||||:::::... .. ....ucbvax!mica!spencer s o f t w a r e spencer@mica.berkeley.edu -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-