belle@skipper.dfrf.nasa.gov (Steve Belle) (09/22/89)
In article <73293@yale-celray.yale.UUCP>, jellinghaus-robert@CS.Yale.EDU (Rob Jellinghaus) writes: > Several weeks ago, we were told that it would ship "in a couple of days". > After two weeks of waiting, we called again and were told that "there were > some last-minute bugs, but they've been fixed and it will ship to you in > a day or two." We have not yet seen hide nor hair of the release. > > Has *anyone* out there actually received Eiffel 2.2? Does it live up to its > billing? I seem to remember someone mentioning that they had been getting > stung along by ISE in much the same way that we have been. > > I call on someone at ISE to post explaining the real status of Eiffel 2.2, > and to let us know, no b*llsh*t, how stable it is and when it'll probably > ship. > > Rob Jellinghaus | "Next time you see a lie being spread or a > jellinghaus-robert@CS.Yale.EDU | bad decision being made out of sheer ignor- > ROBERTJ@{yalecs,yalevm}.BITNET | ance, pause, and think of hypertext." > {everyone}!decvax!yale!robertj | -- K. Eric Drexler, _Engines of Creation_ I posted recently about the problems we were (and still are) having with ISE. I have been promised, several time, a tape of 2.2 (I actually did get one, but it was not readable). I still don't have one. I'm still using 2.1 and trying to work around the bugs. My application uses the graphics library, which I have had problems with. I talked about those problems wiht ISE technical support and they said that the bugs were fixed in 2.2. Recently I have tried generating C packages. I have used the optimizer before and it has successfully generated C code that compiles, after I fix the error that occurs in the eiffel generated makefile. I have run that optimized code through "eg" and it runs fine. Yesterday I tried to run my optimized code in SUN's OpenWindows environment. The code didn't blow off, but it did not run correctly. In the OpenWindows environment, the placement of windows in my application was completely screwed up. I know that 2.1 does not use the most current version of X11, but is there that much difference in the two X releases? This morning I tried to generate a C package by calling the optimzer and specifying class WINDOW as VISIBLE. Eiffel generated a bunch of C code, and I called "make". Oops, forgot that the eiffel generated makefile is incorrect; have to edit and fix it. OK, I fixed the makefile and called "make" again. The first file it *tries* to compile is window.c. It doesn't get very far; the code generated by eiffel has *fatal errors* in it. Perhaps I am wrong in assuming I can make VISIBLE a class that is part of the library. I believe, however, that since class WINDOW was made VISIBLE, that this is allowed. Therefore I can assume that the C-package generation feature does not work, and that this one feature that made Eiffel so attractive to me is not a feature at all. I'm sure that I will hear that these problems with C generation have been fixed in 2.2. I ask though, what good does that do when *I don't have 2.2 and can't seem to get it*? Dr. Meyer, would you care to respond on the net? Steve Belle belle@skipper.dfrf.nasa.gov
bertrand@eiffel.UUCP (Bertrand Meyer) (10/07/89)
From <345@skipper.dfrf.nasa.gov> by belle@skipper.dfrf.nasa.gov (Steve Belle),
with quotations from <73293@yale-celray.yale.UUCP> by
jellinghaus-robert@CS.Yale.EDU (Rob Jellinghaus):
... [Various complaints, and questions about the reality of 2.2] ...
> Dr. Meyer, would you care to respond on the net?
Certainly. Version 2.2 has been shipping for several weeks,
and our delivery floor is filled with boxes containing the last
ready-to-mail deliveries.
According to Tom McCarthy, our VP of sales and marketing, every Eiffel
site in the US which has not yet received 2.2 will get it next week.
More explicitly, he would like anyone who has not received the delivery
by NEXT THURSDAY NIGHT (October 12) to send E-mail directly to him
(tmc@eiffel.com) or call him at 805-685-1006.
Please give one more week (Oct. 19) for Canada, and two (Oct. 26) for the
rest of the world, where the proper contact may be not Interactive but local
distributors.
I hope this is clear enough.
I am the major person to blame for the delay in 2.2.
(Not our ``sales people'', who are meticulously honest and only promise
what the ``technical people'' such as myself allow them to say.)
I was personally responsible for adding many new elements to version
2.2, going far beyond the initial plans and endangering timely completion
of the release; whenever unexpected problems arose, I was the one who
said ``do it anyway'', regardless of the delays implied; finally, I am
still the prime author of Eiffel documentation, including the new
reference manual (``Eiffel: The Language''), and documentation played
its part in the schedule slippage.
I apologize to anyone whose personal plans were disrupted by the delay
in putting out 2.2 and I hope that the result is worth the wait.
-- Bertrand Meyer
bertrand@eiffel.comjwg1@gte.com (James W. Gish) (10/09/89)
In article <204@eiffel.UUCP> bertrand@eiffel.UUCP (Bertrand Meyer) writes:
I apologize to anyone whose personal plans were disrupted by the delay
in putting out 2.2 and I hope that the result is worth the wait.
Apology accepted, BUT for future reference, it is not a simple manner
of one's "personal plans" being disrupted; it is a matter of
"corporate" plans being disrupted. This is a far different matter. I
am fortunate that I work in a research lab where milestones are
somewhat flexible. Others are not so fortunate. If suppliers do not
meet their ship dates, it can have a serious ripple effect that can
cost dollars and jobs. Also, multiple slips are anathema. Please
consider this the next time a release date is set.
I understand the complexity of launching a new product and the
tradeoffs that have to be made and that sometimes they are very
difficult to swallow. In the future, Dr. Meyer, please attempt to
keep your customers informed at the earliest possible time in the
event of a slippage in delivery dates. This will help us make
lower-risk planning decisions.
--
Jim Gish
GTE Laboratories, Inc., Waltham, MA
CSNET: jgish@gte.com UUCP: ..!harvard!bunny!jwg1