mat@emcard.UUCP (Mat Waites) (05/18/88)
I feel like a good way of distributing software to the comp.sys.cbm crowd would be to vote on "standard" language development tools and then distribute sources. If the group can pick a C (power C) and an assembler to use, then the posting of binaries would be unnecessary. The sizes of the sources are generally smaller than binaries (in C, anyway) and the copyright problems are greatly reduced. I feel like the formation of a .source group should not be judged by the current traffic on the net. I think the group has remained small because of the lack of a standardized method for sharing software. mat -- W Mat Waites | PHONE: (404) 727-7197 Emory Univ Cardiac Data Bank | UUCP: ...!gatech!emcard!mat Atlanta, GA 30322 |
leblanc@godzilla.ele.toronto.edu (Marcel LeBlanc) (05/19/88)
In article <5502@emcard.UUCP> mat@emcard.UUCP (Mat Waites) writes: > >I feel like a good way of distributing software to the comp.sys.cbm crowd >would be to vote on "standard" language development tools and then distribute >sources. If the group can pick a C (power C) and an assembler to use, then >the posting of binaries would be unnecessary. I disagree on two points: I don't think we can choose an assembler standard that would satisfy everyone. More importantly, I don't think that C could possibly be chosen as the high level language standard. The availability of C compilers is relatively recent for the C64/C128 world. The VERY vast majority of non-assembler programs written for the C64 are written in BASIC. My development language of choice for the C128 (and C64) is assembler (BUDDY 128, PAL 64). >The sizes of the sources are generally smaller than binaries (in C, anyway) ^^^^^^^ For SMALL C programs maybe, but not for anything large, and especially not for assembler programs of any size! > W Mat Waites | PHONE: (404) 727-7197 > Emory Univ Cardiac Data Bank | UUCP: ...!gatech!emcard!mat > Atlanta, GA 30322 | Marcel A. LeBlanc University of Toronto -- Toronto, Canada also: LMS Technologies Ltd, Fredericton, NB, Canada CSNET: leblanc@godzilla.ele.toronto.edu CDNNET: <...>.toronto.cdn UUCP: {decvax,ihnp4,linus,utzoo,uw-beaver}!utcsri!godzilla.ele!leblanc ARPA: leblanc%godzilla.ele.toronto.edu@relay.cs.net BITNET: leblanc@godzilla.ele.utoronto (may not work from all sites)
reese@pdnbah .uucp (Don Reese) (05/19/88)
In article <5502@emcard.UUCP> mat@emcard.UUCP (Mat Waites) writes: > >I feel like a good way of distributing software to the comp.sys.cbm crowd >would be to vote on "standard" language development tools and then distribute >sources. If the group can pick a C (power C) and an assembler to use, then >the posting of binaries would be unnecessary. I agree that a standard set of language development tools should be selected for the distribution of sources (power C and super C are so different, has anyone ported the small C from Dr. Dobbs?). But both compilers have thier limitations (I dislike 2 byte longs in power C 8^{ ). But I strongly disagree that the posting of binaries is unnecessary. What about the poor smuck that has the other C compiler? Posting of binaries is a definit requirement, but the creation of seperate newsgroups for each is totally unnecessary. > >The sizes of the sources are generally smaller than binaries (in C, anyway) >and the copyright problems are greatly reduced. Once again I have to disagree, the project that I am currenly working on has over 700K of C sources (I don't comment very much either 8^} ) which compile down into 240K executable. True on small utilities that may not be true, but on a product of any resonable scope this will probably not be true. > >I feel like the formation of a .source group should not be judged by the >current traffic on the net. I think the group has remained small because >of the lack of a standardized method for sharing software. How right you are. Even though I am a Unix and MS/DOS user normally, I still read this newsgroup on a daily basis. I don't tend to post articles directly to newsgroups, preferring to normally send mail (cheaper) to the original poster. But just within the current area, I know of may Unix people with a C=64 or C=128 sitting at home. Many may not get to use thier machine as much as before due to a loss of interest, but this newsgroup could help return them to thier keyboards. I am interested in doing some code under GEOS using Power C once a way has been found to do so (But I don't currently have time to research this now - New AT due in any day now). ================================================================================ || Don Reese || Paradyne Corporation || || uunet!pdn!pdnbah!reese || Mail Stop LF-207 || || Phone: (813) 530-8361 || P.O. Box 2826 || || || Largo, FL 34649-2826 || ================================================================================