Issue with my EiffelStudio license

[Rosivaldo Fernandes Alves]

Some days ago, EiffelStudio started to warn me about an issue with my
EiffelStudio license. Visiting my account at
https://account.eiffel.com/, I saw that my license referred to an
earlier build of ES 20.05 (mine is EiffelStudio 20.05.10.4521 - win64).
Dumbly, I removed that license, thinking that another, updated would be
created. No good. Now I have just 12 days of guest use of ES.

How can I solve this?

Thanks in advance.

Rosivaldo.

[Richard]

Brute force:  if you are comfortable using the Windows Registry Editor (assuming you are using Windows of course), look for key HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\ISE\Eiffel_20.05\installation\Eiffel and either delete the value or the key as whole. Open EStudio and you will again be asked for your account info and a new license key gets assigned. For *ix implentation there will be a similar configuration file to tweak.

R.

[Rosivaldo Fernandes Alves]

Thank you very much, Richard. Everything is OK now.

Best regards,

Rosivaldo.

Em 23/08/2020 08:22, Richard escreveu:
> Brute force:  if you are comfortable using the Windows Registry Editor
> (assuming you are using Windows of course), look for
> key HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\ISE\Eiffel_20.05\installation\Eiffel and
> either delete the value or the key as whole. Open EStudio and you will
> again be asked for your account info and a new license key gets
> assigned. For *ix implentation there will be a similar configuration
> file to tweak.
>
> R.
>

> (...)

[Rosivaldo Fernandes Alves]

Since I installed ES 20.11, I got problems with my license. Again.
Unfortunately, the Regedit trick below does not fix the problem anymore.
My account list the following (expired) license:

trial
License ID: ****************

Owner: rosivaldo
Started Mon, 20 Jan 2020 15:26:38 GMT
EXPIRED
Limited to platform(s): win64
Can be installed on: 1 device(s)

Any help will be appreciated.

Rosivaldo.

Em 23/08/2020 08:22, Richard escreveu:

> Brute force:  if you are comfortable using the Windows Registry Editor
> (assuming you are using Windows of course), look for
> key HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\ISE\Eiffel_20.05\installation\Eiffel and
> either delete the value or the key as whole. Open EStudio and you will
> again be asked for your account info and a new license key gets
> assigned. For *ix implentation there will be a similar configuration
> file to tweak.
>
> R.
>
> On Friday, August 21, 2020 at 5:30:53 PM UTC+2, Rosivaldo Fernandes
> Alves wrote:
>
> Some days ago, EiffelStudio started to warn me about an issue with my
> EiffelStudio license. Visiting my account at

> https://account.eiffel.com/ <https://account.eiffel.com/>, I saw

> that my license referred to an
> earlier build of ES 20.05 (mine is EiffelStudio 20.05.10.4521 - win64).
> Dumbly, I removed that license, thinking that another, updated would be
> created. No good. Now I have just 12 days of guest use of ES.
>
> How can I solve this?
>
> Thanks in advance.
>
> Rosivaldo.
>

> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> Groups "Eiffel Users" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
> an email to eiffel-users...@googlegroups.com
> <mailto:eiffel-users...@googlegroups.com>.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/eiffel-users/fd538e76-8253-4e42-adcc-c0eca68fcf09o%40googlegroups.com
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/eiffel-users/fd538e76-8253-4e42-adcc-c0eca68fcf09o%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>.

[Richard]

Have had same problem. It seems that Eiffel Software has revamped their licensing scheme and de facto has no longer any Open Source version, though they publish it still on their website (eiffel.com). The version published on Sourceforge.com is urrently the production version and not the Open Source code. Somewhere in these discussion threads it was mentioned that they will keep Open Source but it will not a current version. Last version not requiring a license key / check is v19.11.

Personally for the time being and until Eiffel Software resolves the issue I have set up an alternate email address (actually just a forwarding address, not a fresh account) to register for a trial version valid a month.

[Larry Rix]

I will chip in my two-cents worth FWIW!

1. I have been a chief complainer about the price of Eiffel Studio for more than a decade. Except for personal work, I had left Eiffel and ES (with regard to commercial work) off-the-plate entirely because of it.

2. Along comes the day when the price tag for a Personal copy went to about $15 USD per month and that is when I became hugely excited about pushing Eiffel and ES back onto my plate for commercial work. It is also why I have been working with Eiffel Software to contribute to getting both Eiffel and Eiffel Studio tooled, prepared, and ready for the Microservice and Cloud marketplaces—because it is an excellent fit and competitor in this space.

3. It is my understanding (tongue-in-cheek) that a GPL version of Eiffel Studio will always be available, but approximately 1 year behind. Thus v19.11 is the last GPL and v20.11 will become the new GPL when 21.11 is released next year.

4. The only suggestion I have for the GPL is that they receive any "bug-fixes" applied to later "paid" versions. It is only right for any software developer to fix his bugs when found—especially if those bug fixes are being paid for in newer versions and can be easily applied to prior and GPL versions. Java refers to this a LTS (Long Term Service), which comes with a sunset date. This is also good customer service for those using the GPL as an evaluation or learning tool. It's not good to ask them to suffer bugs.

In my humble estimation—THIS IS ALL VERY FAIR!!!

Personally—I became Customer #1 (first in line at the till) to take on a $15 USD/month subscription so I could have the latest and greatest ES. It's a very small price to pay (several coffees and a fast-food trip each month that I won't miss at all, as I readjust my budget). I did it because it is the right thing to do as one developer to another. Their work has value to me and that means opening my wallet as long as I am benefitting from their labors.

ALLOW ME TO SAY THIS—Eiffel Software DESERVES to get PAID for the product they produce! We all deserve the fruits of our labors. Also, we do ourselves and each other no good service by complaining at Eiffel Software that we can no longer mooch off of a bleeding-edge GPL version!

I (for one) and quite content to let folks know that a very fine GPL version (v19.11) is available for them to use for FREE as a learning and long-term evaluation tool. But if one wants the cutting-bleeding edge of the labor of Eiffel Software, then we ought to be thoughtful and reasonable enough to pay for it! I do—each and every month! Why? Because I know the value of the tool and I am willing to pay the price as set in the marketplace.

I DO NOT write this to upset anyone, but please have some empathy. If this was OUR WORK, we would want people to reward our labor of love appropriately. We have the GPL v19.11 if we want to learn and experiment. If we want the cutting-edge, then there is a very small and reasonable price-tag attached to it.

Enough said by me,

Larry

P.S. Gripes about the eiffel.com and eiffel.org are certainly excellent feedback for anyone to get. It is plainly obvious that both sites need to be revamped (that is in the works as well AFAIK). I believe that there is a good and coherent plan to get that done.

[Philippe Laré]

You mention 19.11 as the last Eiffel Studio GPL version. I'm afraid that as far I've been looking there is no 19.11 on the download site. Last GPL is 19.05.

Philippe

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Eiffel Users" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to eiffel-users...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/eiffel-users/CAJ7KgmB84p2GAqnzW83eVACfd-HyFP57NVuUCUwtV4%2B-qQqjwQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[Larry Rix]

I think you are actually right. The last GPL I could find is v19.05 as well. Nevertheless, the points still stand and I still stand by them. :-) {friendly-smile}

[Richard]

Eiffel Software did upload the most recent lecense versions of Eiffelstudio to Sourceforge, so they are the most recent.

The actual free Open Source versions remain on Sourceforge, they just have moved down on the activity list.

The Sourceforge repository is https://sourceforge.net/projects/eiffelstudio/

The list of all uploads (Activity List) is https://sourceforge.net/p/eiffelstudio/activity

Scroll far down the list, the last Open Source version available is actually v19.12.

[Louis M]

I think that saying that the GPL version is only used for learning and evaluation is just not understanding Free Software (like at all).

I am a Free Software advocate and every software that is installed on my PC are Free Software. Why is that? Because I believe in freedom. I believe that I should not have to consult a lawyer when I want to modify a file in the accessible source code of the software (like .h files or templates), or when I want to create a cross-compiler for an obscure portable machine, or whatever. I want to be able to read, analyze and modify every byte that is written on my hard drive, without having to ask myself if what I do is legal. Also, when I find something cool that I can do with those bytes, I want to be able to share it with the world. That is the essence of Free Software.

Also, saying that the fact that I used the GPL version means I don't want to give money to the creator is also just not understanding the Free Software culture. I did have a professional license of Eiffel Studio. For months now. I am not the customer #1 like you, but this is just a question of timing. When I saw the professional license web page, I did not think twice before getting one. I'm proud to give some money to the people at Eiffel Software because I think that they are doing a wonderful job. Real Free Software community members did encourage the software creator with donation, crown funding or whatever. So yes, I did have la license, but I still used the GPL version. Saying that wanting to use Free Software means that I think programmers don't deserve to be paid is like saying that wanting a freely accessible park in my neighbourhood means that I don't think that the ones maintaining it does not deserve to be paid.

Finally, know that if Eiffel Studio has not been released as Free Software, I would not be in the community. That means things like Ubuntu users would probably not have an updated version directly on a PPA (also easily usable on every Debian system); and there would not have any Eiffel Game library, or an Eiffel Pango and Cairo high-level library, or an Eiffel 2D physics engine library. Also, I would not have tried to help people on this mailing list or on Stack Overflow. Also, I happen to be a computer science teacher and I use Eiffel in my classes. And that is just me; I am sure that I am not the only one in this situation. In other words, I think that the impact of having a good Free Software version is more important for the Eiffel Community that you actually realize.

BUUUT... I understand what you are saying and I can say that, as long as Eiffel Software did give me a good usable Free Software version of the Eiffel Studio tools with bug fixes, I will not complain.

Good day,

Louis M

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Eiffel Users" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to eiffel-users...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/eiffel-users/CAJ7KgmB84p2GAqnzW83eVACfd-HyFP57NVuUCUwtV4%2B-qQqjwQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[Philippe Laré]

I was talking of stable versions, not beta ones.

Best regards,

Philippe

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/eiffel-users/41f355fb-381c-4f16-aa63-e1619ce50845n%40googlegroups.com.

[Ulrich Windl]

On 1/15/21 4:24 PM, 'Louis M' via Eiffel Users wrote:
> I think that saying that the GPL version is only used for learning and
> evaluation is just not understanding Free Software (like at all).

Well, I'm not quite happy with the licensing either, but:
The programs you compile contain a lot of free/GPL code, so as per GPL
your code has to be GPL as well. At least when you start to distribute
your code.
It seems when you pay for a license, your code does not have to be GPL.

I'd like to see a third option (a bit BSD-like): Allow to distribute
binaries without source code for free when the binary produces the
message "This program was built with the free version of Eiffel
Studio...blabla"

>
> I am a Free Software advocate and every software that is installed on my
> PC are Free Software. Why is that? Because I believe in freedom. I
> believe that I should not have to consult a lawyer when I want to modify
> a file in the accessible source code of the software (like .h files or
> templates), or when I want to create a cross-compiler for an obscure
> portable machine, or whatever. I want to be able to read, analyze and
> modify every byte that is written on my hard drive, without having to
> ask myself if what I do is legal. Also, when I find something cool that
> I can do with those bytes, I want to be able to share it with the world.
> That is the essence of Free Software.

The drawback with quite a lot of free software is the lack of proper
documentation in quite a lot of cases. Obviously writing documentation
takes longer than writing the code in many cases...

>
> Also, saying that the fact that I used the GPL version means I don't
> want to give money to the creator is also just not understanding the
> Free Software culture. I did have a professional license of Eiffel
> Studio. For months now. I am not the customer #1 like you, but this is
> just a question of timing. When I saw the professional license web page,
> I did not think twice before getting one. I'm proud to give some money
> to the people at Eiffel Software because I think that they are doing a
> wonderful job. Real Free Software community members did encourage the
> software creator with donation, crown funding or whatever. So yes, I did
> have la license, but I still used the GPL version. Saying that wanting
> to use Free Software means that I think programmers don't deserve to be
> paid is like saying that wanting a freely accessible park in my
> neighbourhood means that I don't think that the ones maintaining it does
> not deserve to be paid.
>
> Finally, know that if Eiffel Studio has not been released as Free
> Software, I would not be in the community. That means things like Ubuntu

Well, actually having a good affordable compiler is more important than
having some free compiler IMHO. I mean I knew Eiffel/S, VisualEiffel,
Tower Eiffel, ISS-Base (Halstenbach), SmallEiffel, ISE Eiffel, etc.

Not being a professional software developer for Eiffel simply meant that
most compilers were too expensive to allow "playing with it a bit".
My first Eiffel experience was with Eiffel/S "test license" that allowed
60 classes per system. As those 60 classes are almost consumed by the
runtime library already, most software design was about avoiding to add
new classes ;-)
Back in the 90ies I was teaching Eiffel, but I couldn't get the money to
provide every student with the tools needed.
So the first year about 12 students were using a single installation of
Tower Eiffel running on a PC with 486 CPU and 10MB of RAM running Linux,
using SSH text-login and Emacs as an editor (harddisk was 120MB)...
Those were the days when a fast download was 2kB/s in the morning,
dropping significantly when the students awoke.
Today you can't even boot Linux with just a tiny amount of RAM.
The next years we were using VisualEiffel on MS-Windows with allowed
building small systems for free.

>> In my humble estimation—*THIS IS ALL VERY FAIR!!!*

>>
>> Personally—I became Customer #1 (first in line at the till) to take on
>> a $15 USD/month subscription so I could have the latest and greatest
>> ES. It's a very small price to pay (several coffees and a fast-food
>> trip each month that I won't miss at all, as I readjust my budget). I
>> did it because it is the right thing to do as one developer to
>> another. Their work has value to me and that means opening my wallet
>> as long as I am benefitting from their labors.
>>

>> *ALLOW ME TO SAY THIS*—Eiffel Software *DESERVES* to get *PAID* for

>> the product they produce! We all deserve the fruits of our labors.
>> Also, we do ourselves and each other no good service by complaining at
>> Eiffel Software that we can no longer mooch off of a bleeding-edge GPL
>> version!
>>
>> I (for one) and quite content to let folks know that a very fine GPL

>> version (v19.11) is available for them to use for *FREE* as a learning

>> and long-term evaluation tool. But if one wants the cutting-bleeding
>> edge of the labor of Eiffel Software, then we ought to be thoughtful
>> and reasonable enough to pay for it! I do—each and every month! Why?
>> Because I know the value of the tool and I am willing to pay the price
>> as set in the marketplace.
>>

>> *I DO NOT write this to upset anyone*, but please have some empathy.

>> If this was OUR WORK, we would want people to reward our labor of love
>> appropriately. We have the GPL v19.11 if we want to learn and
>> experiment. If we want the cutting-edge, then there is a very small
>> and reasonable price-tag attached to it.
>>
>> Enough said by me,
>>
>> Larry
>>

>> P.S. Gripes about the eiffel.com <http://eiffel.com> and eiffel.org
>> <http://eiffel.org> are certainly excellent feedback for anyone to

>> get. It is plainly obvious that both sites need to be revamped (that
>> is in the works as well AFAIK). I believe that there is a good and
>> coherent plan to get that done.
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>> Groups "Eiffel Users" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
>> an email to eiffel-users...@googlegroups.com

>> <mailto:eiffel-users...@googlegroups.com>.

>> To view this discussion on the web visit
>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/eiffel-users/CAJ7KgmB84p2GAqnzW83eVACfd-HyFP57NVuUCUwtV4%2B-qQqjwQ%40mail.gmail.com

>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/eiffel-users/CAJ7KgmB84p2GAqnzW83eVACfd-HyFP57NVuUCUwtV4%2B-qQqjwQ%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>.

>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> Groups "Eiffel Users" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
> an email to eiffel-users...@googlegroups.com

> <mailto:eiffel-users...@googlegroups.com>.

> To view this discussion on the web visit

> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/eiffel-users/b8f3775c-0fd6-085a-2f50-8f8473f699b0%40tioui.com
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/eiffel-users/b8f3775c-0fd6-085a-2f50-8f8473f699b0%40tioui.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>.

[Ian Joyner]

There was a comment put on Quora (from one of the better more helpful writers) the other day about how languages that have become widespread have free licensing and those that became niche languages had restrictive licensing. Unfortunately, I can’t find the comment again.

The same has happened with version control systems, and even Linux.

It seems you just have to give things away – or at least the core of things, and make money out of associated activities, or get funding from larger customers.

However, I think you could do absolutely everything right and still not get a language into widespread use. But do any one small thing wrong and it is doomed to obscurity.

Ian

[Ian Joyner]

There was a comment put on Quora (from one of the better more helpful writers) the other day about how languages that have become widespread have free licensing and those that became niche languages had restrictive licensing. Unfortunately, I can’t find the comment again.

The same has happened with version control systems, and even Linux.

It seems you just have to give things away – or at least the core of things, and make money out of associated activities, or get funding from larger customers.

However, I think you could do absolutely everything right and still not get a language into widespread use. But do any one small thing wrong and it is doomed to obscurity.

Ian

Sent from my iPad

> On 16 Jan 2021, at 11:15 am, Ulrich Windl <Ulrich...@rz.uni-regensburg.de> wrote:

> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to eiffel-users...@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/eiffel-users/73316ab7-5fc7-16c5-bf4e-8bf89587e252%40rz.uni-regensburg.de.

[Rosivaldo Fernandes Alves]

I am an advocate of free software. And of *paid* software too. It is up
to developer to decide.

My point is that I use EiffelStudio for no profit at all. Not even
personal (except for learning and training design/programming skills).
For the time being, I just want to contribute with some code that may
benefit to the Eiffel community. All free. I know, my progress is *very*
slow, but my spare time is very little.

And I need EiffelStudio installed on two (maybe three) different
systems, whose use I alternate out of my presence in different environments.

Should I buy a license for three installations? Not affordable at all.
Should I buy a license just to finish my set_theory
(https://launchpad.net/set-theory) library, publish it and forget it for
good?

Should I stick with an outdated version of the language/compiler in
order to avoid license fees?

These are questions that I must face now. I'd prefer not having to do so.

Best regards,

Rosivaldo.

Em 14/01/2021 11:26, Larry Rix escreveu:
> I will chip in my two-cents worth FWIW!
>
> 1. I have been a chief complainer about the price of Eiffel Studio for
> more than a decade. Except for personal work, I had left Eiffel and ES
> (with regard to commercial work) off-the-plate entirely because of it.
>

> (...)

[Rosivaldo Fernandes Alves]

And additional word about using an outdated GPL version of EiffelStudio.
When I just installed ES 20.11, I immediately was forced to change
hundreds (maybe above some few thousands?) lines of code in order to
keep my code compilable. Tons of operators had got invalid due to the
new syntax rules (quantifiers etc.)

Making a wannabe free library with an outdated compiler may render such
a library syntax-invalid for those who are using the updated version of
ES, and I don't even have a way to know that, unless I manually check
that my code not only compiles but complies with new rules of a compiler
I don't have yet.

Too much error-prone, at least.

Em 14/01/2021 11:26, Larry Rix escreveu:

> I will chip in my two-cents worth FWIW!
>
> 1. I have been a chief complainer about the price of Eiffel Studio for
> more than a decade. Except for personal work, I had left Eiffel and ES
> (with regard to commercial work) off-the-plate entirely because of it.
>

> (...)

[Larry Rix]

With all due respect, care, and no ill-will intended ...

I noted that Eiffel Software has (in fact) updated the latest GPL version to v19.11 (?). So, this is a good thing. I forget if the "bug-fixes" of v19.11 -> v20.11 would be applied back to v19.11 or not. So, I won't make assumptions based on my leaky-bucket brain and memory.

Also—thank you for your "free" contributions to the publicly available Eiffel code-base. I am quite sure everyone is both thankful and grateful. I know Eiffel Software is both as they have not only expressed their gratitude, but graciously included such excellent contribution work in the "contribs" folder that delivers with each version of Eiffel Studio.

That said—there is nothing stopping any of us from several choices.

1. Buy a license if you are going to produce commercially saleable software. Period! No one has the right to personally profit while stealing the work of another and using it to obtain that profit!
2. If one is a contributor—then use the latest GPL version.
3. If one is a contributes who can show just cause for needing the cutting edge version of Eiffel Studio, then—make your appeal directly to Eiffel Software. If they feel that your contributions have worth and merit, then they can grant you a contributors license that will give you access to the latest version. If you need that on several platforms, then—again—make that a part of your appeal to them.
4. If one is strictly a learner—then use the latest GPL version. Period.
5. If one has another circumstance—then make your appeal to Eiffel Software and do them the courtesy of choosing for themselves how to respond.

All of this quibbling about "your rights" and what you are owed by what you do and what you contribute is utterly dismissive of the RIGHTS of the labor of Eiffel Software in producing their product and their innate RIGHT to allow access to it by their choice and not yours.

If you want to write Eiffel code for FREE, then write your own compiler and your own IDE and use it. You have that choice. Otherwise, you are speaking of and directing your comments to the labors, work, intellectual property of other people that you do NOT have an inherent RIGHT to do with as you please! Disrespecting that is an affront to the Liberty endowed in each of us by Nature and Nature's God!

Just who in the heck are we that we sit here and quibble as though we are victims and owed something by Eiffel Software? Are we nuts, crazy, and stupid? God forbid!

Let's grow up and treat each other as adults and respect the ownership of a product that someone else has produced. Give them their DUE! They've earned it. If you don't value it at that level, then perhaps you need to do something else and make other choices. Quit crying at Eiffel Software and just do what is right and good as you would expect others to do towards you and yours!

Enough said by me. Have a great day!

[Ian Joyner]

Hi Larry,

I agree that people should be rewarded for their work. But a direct relationship between work and reward does not happen in the digital economy. A lot of people have put a lot of free work into Eiffel, but are not getting rewards because it is not widespread. Maybe it is not widespread for many reasons (C++ anti-anything-else bashers), etc. But availability and licensing must be one – but how large? It seems many universities have not adopted Eiffel because of licensing.

I think your second last sentence “value it at that level, then perhaps you need to do something else and make other choices” is exactly the case because others don’t value it that much and thus make the other choices.

Languages like C and C++ had the backing of Bell. Linux has many developers working for free. This needs a false perception of ‘what it is cool to do’.

Anything can be driven out of the market by subsidised prices in competition, either because people don’t buy the more expensive product anymore, or prices are dropped so there is no longer any profit and bankruptcy results.

I don’t think any whining and whinging is directed at people working hard or thinking they should get no reward, rather that Eiffel (and other good languages that are not the usual industry-standard garbage) is not more widespread.

Ian

[Rosivaldo Fernandes Alves]

Hi Larry.

With all due respect, you were rather aggressive. I have *no* right at
all. I claim *no* right at all.

Repeating: I am advocate of free software. And of *paid* software. It is
up to developer to decide: their product, their rights.

If I have any additional opinion, here it is: when EiffelStudio gone
GPL, I remember of seeing people accusing Eiffel Software of expecting
people (the community) to work on improving ES for free, which is a
shocking thing to say. I think that GPL ES never got critical mass in
order to be an advantage to Eiffel Software. The community simply did
not help enough. We are few, maybe this is just a sad fact.

Now they turn around to license fees. Will they succeed? I really hope
so. But it is impossible not to think that demoting GPL *may* be
detrimental to the growth of code and user bases. My fear is that Eiffel
may get even less widespread. Which may be detrimental to Eiffel
Software, after all. What if I was in their place? I don't know. I'm not
qualified to even suggest a business model to any one.

But definitely don't get me wrong: I'm not asking for charity.

Best regards,

Rosivaldo.

Em 17/01/2021 11:35, Larry Rix escreveu:
> With all due respect, care, and no ill-will intended ...
>

> (...)

>
> All of this quibbling about "your rights" and what you are owed by what
> you do and what you contribute is utterly dismissive of the RIGHTS of
> the labor of Eiffel Software in producing their product and their innate
> RIGHT to allow access to it by their choice and not yours.
>
> If you want to write Eiffel code for FREE, then write your own compiler
> and your own IDE and use it. You have that choice. Otherwise, you are
> speaking of and directing your comments to the labors, work,
> intellectual property of other people that you do NOT have an inherent
> RIGHT to do with as you please! Disrespecting that is an affront to the
> Liberty endowed in each of us by Nature and Nature's God!
>
> Just who in the heck are we that we sit here and quibble as though we
> are victims and owed something by Eiffel Software? Are we nuts, crazy,
> and stupid? God forbid!
>
> Let's grow up and treat each other as adults and respect the ownership
> of a product that someone else has produced. Give them their DUE!
> They've earned it. If you don't value it at that level, then perhaps you
> need to do something else and make other choices. Quit crying at Eiffel
> Software and just do what is right and good as you would expect others
> to do towards you and yours!
>
> Enough said by me. Have a great day!
>

> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> Groups "Eiffel Users" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
> an email to eiffel-users...@googlegroups.com
> <mailto:eiffel-users...@googlegroups.com>.
> To view this discussion on the web visit

> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/eiffel-users/a5867098-2920-4663-aa9d-2a8a28680b0fn%40googlegroups.com
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/eiffel-users/a5867098-2920-4663-aa9d-2a8a28680b0fn%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>.

[Gachoud Philippe]

Hi all,

I was about to tell something similar. I know Eiffel since now about 22 years and work daily with a licensed version since about 3 professionally. Back 20 years ago I remember some small eiffel compiler and vim for a collegue wanting a free version. I'm a fan and the first to use and contribute to free software, GNU-Linux as has to be named as Stallman points it out right. Eiffel for reasons of low popularity and as I would say a lack of knowledge of proper software languages and tools didnt have the essort and popularity it deserves. Due to many factors which are with many history variables we dont manage Eiffel had not the luck of having been sufficiently popular to have as many compilers and libraries as java, python, javascript etc which are popular but a pain ... to work with because the porr language and compilers doesn't do the job for us. I ignore what is building quality compiler for such high level language as eiffel but have a looot of respect to those who do it. 

My experience for paying a really afordable price is that I had support and responsive team when I needed it. I consider to PAY MORE FOR EIFFEL AS A CONTRIBUTION TO AN AMAZING COMPILER, LIBRARIES AND IDE, than to pay for people who are getting rich on royalities of something running without work.

So you have 2 alternatives offered to you

- contribute without paying to something which is already offered to you on hours of the life and money of others. 

- pay your license in a way of contributing to a world of progamation that needs it to extend and maintain what exists so that Eiffel does not die.

I think if eiffel could have the luxury of being 100% free we'd know it today and the people working for it would have enough money from other sources as other languages, OS, etc....

If there are enough people offering there time to offer you something as a gift, nice! Great! if there isnt, be part of what you want building GPL AND buying... so that lets hope one day your complain will be realized....

Be part of a whole that needs your contribution in the form it needs it. All people I know from eiffel software are not as rich to be able to live without your contribution, otherwise I'm sure they'd work for free because they LOVE THEIR WORK more than money. Otherwise they'd work with other commercial tools that permit to make really more money.

Have fun eiffeling!!!

Philippe Gachoud

--
**********************************************
Philippe Gachoud
Puerto Williams 6657
Las Condes
Santiago de Chile
+56  934022210
ph.ga...@gmail.com
**********************************************
   

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Eiffel Users" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to eiffel-users...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/eiffel-users/a5867098-2920-4663-aa9d-2a8a28680b0fn%40googlegroups.com.

[Ulrich Windl]

>>> Ian Joyner <joyne...@gmail.com> schrieb am 17.01.2021 um 23:47 in
Nachricht
<dcfc1690-61a9-4af4...@googlegroups.com>:
...

> Languages like C and C++ had the backing of Bell. Linux has many developers

> working for free. This needs a false perception of ‘what it is cool to do’.

Personally I think the success of UNIX and C and maybe Perl and others was due
to the fact that the original authors (I'm not talking about the companies that
employed them) did not have making money at the primary goal. Instead they
wanted to provide nice tools to themselves, and wanted to share them for
others.

If you look at productes like Blender, it seems it became much more popular
and better _after_ it became available for free. And it seems people are
willing to donate (time, money or code) because they appreciate the product.

...

Regards,
Ulrich

[Rosivaldo Fernandes Alves]

OK. Simple solution for the license problem: buy a single license for my
main system. Install GPL on the two that I use less frequently. No panic.

Em 23/08/2020 08:22, Richard escreveu:

> Brute force:  if you are comfortable using the Windows Registry Editor
> (assuming you are using Windows of course), look for
> key HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\ISE\Eiffel_20.05\installation\Eiffel and
> either delete the value or the key as whole. Open EStudio and you will
> again be asked for your account info and a new license key gets
> assigned. For *ix implentation there will be a similar configuration
> file to tweak.
>
> R.
>
> On Friday, August 21, 2020 at 5:30:53 PM UTC+2, Rosivaldo Fernandes
> Alves wrote:
>
> Some days ago, EiffelStudio started to warn me about an issue with my
> EiffelStudio license. Visiting my account at

> https://account.eiffel.com/ <https://account.eiffel.com/>, I saw

> that my license referred to an
> earlier build of ES 20.05 (mine is EiffelStudio 20.05.10.4521 - win64).
> Dumbly, I removed that license, thinking that another, updated would be
> created. No good. Now I have just 12 days of guest use of ES.
>
> How can I solve this?
>
> Thanks in advance.
>
> Rosivaldo.
>

> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> Groups "Eiffel Users" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
> an email to eiffel-users...@googlegroups.com

> <mailto:eiffel-users...@googlegroups.com>.

> To view this discussion on the web visit

> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/eiffel-users/fd538e76-8253-4e42-adcc-c0eca68fcf09o%40googlegroups.com
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/eiffel-users/fd538e76-8253-4e42-adcc-c0eca68fcf09o%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>.

[Ian Joyner]

“Personally I think the success of UNIX and C and maybe Perl and others was due 

to the fact that the original authors (I'm not talking about the companies that 

employed them) did not have making money at the primary goal”

To understand the success of Unix and C, needs some understanding of the context. MULTICS was too slow to produce results and Bell wanted something faster, so pulled out, leaving Unix to grow in the vacuum, taking some of the ideas. There was also contact with BCPL. Unix and C represented limited versions of these (at least BCPL was a limited CPL).

The Unix and C guys were Bell employees so had financial security. Security leaves us free to be creative and management of the time were reasonably hands-off (same in the record industry where rock groups could have a studio to experiment in and come up with some of the fantastic music of the 1960/70s, and we got Stockhausen and Wendy Carlos). Human cultures grew when they had food and personal security.

I think part of the success of Unix and C is also because it appealed to the anti-vendor and anti-establishment feel of the time. But this has ended up a cult. The cult was evangelised, and became more anti-academic than anything. That is too deep to go into here.

Those who contribute to free software feel they have enough security.

I read a comment from Stroustrup that he didn’t conceive of a C-based language in the first place, but Bell management insisted that anything he did had to be done with C. Thus he started out with #defines to do OO-style in C. (I also did ALGOL Eiffel Style, or OO style with the better and original define facilities as suggested by Donald Knuth in Burroughs ALGOL.)

So really it is about making sure that people involved with Eiffel (or any language) at all levels have security to be creative. But I think that Eiffel also does not want to be constrained by management of partners who might be insisting it is made to look more like C++ (for a horrifying example).

But I agree that Unix/C creators weren’t motivated by becoming fabulously wealthy, just as employees having a reasonable life style, which salaried security would have given them.

Ian

[Ulrich Windl]

>>> Ian Joyner <joyne...@gmail.com> schrieb am 19.01.2021 um 00:05 in Nachricht
<ba03914f-817f-4e43...@googlegroups.com>:

...

> Those who contribute to free software feel they have enough security.

Not to forget about "having fun" doing so. For some contributors having fun is more important than receiving $$$.
(I had listened to the "I Woz" (Steve Wozniak) audio book some time ago, and I had the impression that for Wozniak it always had been important to have fun, while Steve Jobs primarily had $$$ in mind. May be the synthesis of both is "You must give us your $$$ to have fun"... ;-))
...
(I appreciate your insights, even when leaving them out here)

Regards,
Ulrich

[Ian Joyner]

Exactly! That is what I mean by having security to pursue culture. Those who decide on having fun, must at least know where their next pizza and coke is coming from (yuk!), so they don’t starve. Seems I have done most of my software development for fun!

Steve Jobs famously ended up on an annual salary of $1, but had shares and a private jet provided.

Back to the point – people don’t want to pay licence fees to have fun.

(I wonder what OO number licenses one for fun?)

I always thought it would have been better for Stroustrup to fix the Simula implementation. The first OO language I used was Simula on a CDC Cyber. This seemed to be quite a good implementation. Apparently, there was another one by CDC which was one of the worst compilers ever written. The Burroughs implementation was also very good.

[Gary Smithrud (GMS134)]

But the company also needs to buy pizza and coke as well.  A company that sells a OS and other products can allow people to play with their development environment.  A company that sells the development does not have that option.  Understanding this and the low price, I was more than happy to toss the company to have fun.

Sent from my iPhone

On Jan 19, 2021, at 3:21 AM, Ian Joyner <joyne...@gmail.com> wrote:

Exactly! That is what I mean by having security to pursue culture. Those who decide on having fun, must at least know where their next pizza and coke is coming from (yuk!), so they don’t starve. Seems I have done most of my software development for fun!

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Eiffel Users" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to eiffel-users...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/eiffel-users/3040663e-09f8-4f59-83ee-deeee14361den%40googlegroups.com.

[Richard]

As a retiree I am using the free Open Source version for small personal projects. At this time I cannot make up for a personal license. I do look at the new features with a trial license of the next new compiler versions.

My issue with the delayed release of current licensed technology by one year for the free version is that when errors are found and fixed (most likely not occuring in Eiffelstudio workbench and the compiler proper) I have to wait up to a full year to get moving without workarounds. Such happened in 2019 where I returned from a longer absence and run into problems with EiffelBuild when I attempted to make a UI.  While something was corrected in v19.12, iirc more was tweaked in v20.05. 

The casual prospect user (newbie?) will get put off knowing that they get to work with a defective tool.

In a  teaching environment I understand that  the tutor has the ability to offer challenges to the class that will not run into a pending issue.

[Ian Joyner]

The issue of licensing is a conundrum. As Richard says, people on the free software won’t feel like submitting problems because they might already be fixed. That means that thousands or millions won’t be helping solve problems in the latest software, so testing base is smaller. I know Eiffel software should require less external testing due to tight static checking, DbC, etc, but it is always unpleasant interactions with underlying platforms and different configurations.

The problem for any software company is supporting multiple versions – if only all users were on the latest version. Of course some users won’t want to use the cutting edge version until others have tested, but the narrower the version window the better.

Perhaps a parallel with natural language exists (I’m sure this must have been drawn before). English became dominant because of freedom of people to speak it and changed it. But Acadamie Français was more like “Don’t speak French unless you can speak it like we do”. Probably an oversimplification, I know, but you get the point. Programming languages must be stricter about their definition, since splintering of languages results in the version problems, incompatibility between platforms, and splitting of the community.

Ian

[Ulrich Windl]

>>> Ian Joyner <joyne...@gmail.com> schrieb am 28.01.2021 um 00:20 in
Nachricht
<825d1423-a69b-4063...@googlegroups.com>:

> The issue of licensing is a conundrum. As Richard says, people on the free
> software won’t feel like submitting problems because they might already be
> fixed. That means that thousands or millions won’t be helping solve
> problems in the latest software, so testing base is smaller. I know Eiffel
> software should require less external testing due to tight static checking,

> DbC, etc, but it is always unpleasant interactions with underlying
> platforms and different configurations.

Maybe that's the reason why usability of the editor is that poor ;-)
I really considered switching to Emacs and a make-like building as it's more
productive.
(It may be personal taste that I don't like editors to undo my code
indentation, or just indent new line wrongly.
Even in Emacs some recent "improvements" are gainst the spirit of Emacs (which
is "Do what I want, not what you want"))

>
> The problem for any software company is supporting multiple versions – if
> only all users were on the latest version. Of course some users won’t want
> to use the cutting edge version until others have tested, but the narrower
> the version window the better.

Interestingly some companies do it the opposite way: You can test the latest
versions for free, only either time-limited or somewhat feature limited,
combined with a permissive license. I don't want to make advertising for a
specific product, but one of those is a very professional one that comes with
an "over 3000 pages" high-quality PDF manual. We all know how much time it
takes to produce even such a manual alone... An finally the product is
amazingly "cheap" (compared to what it offers) to license.

>
> Perhaps a parallel with natural language exists (I’m sure this must have
> been drawn before). English became dominant because of freedom of people to

> speak it and changed it. But Acadamie Français was more like “Don’t speak
> French unless you can speak it like we do”. Probably an oversimplification,

> I know, but you get the point. Programming languages must be stricter about

> their definition, since splintering of languages results in the version
> problems, incompatibility between platforms, and splitting of the
community.

Amazingly a few year ago I meat a guy that liked learning "difficult" natural
languages while his native language was rather restricted (you can't express
complicated things in it). He said he prefers German over English, because
there are many more ways to express one thing than there are in English. At
that time he also learned Hungariin, which is probably the most difficult
language to learn... But admittedly that guy is really talented and his German
was about as fluent as natives in Hamburg's fish market (if you know what I
mean).

Regards,
Ulrich

<https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/eiffel-users/3040663e-09f8-4f59-83ee-deeee1

> 4361den%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
>>> .

>>>
>>>
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Eiffel Users" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to eiffel-users...@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
>

https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/eiffel-users/825d1423-a69b-4063-9577-ed707d

> 347ce5n%40googlegroups.com.

[Richard]

I was just looking up some detail in my "account.eiffel.com" and see that it has been updated.

The Purchase license page, very well hidden and only accessible from the  link on page EiffelStudio Licenses of the account, shows now a link For Contributors to a free license that may apply to contributors of this discussion group!

Quote: "

Apply for a contributor license

Eiffel benefits from a thriving community of developers who passionately share Eiffel's goals of high-quality software development based on the principles of Design by Contract and the focus on reusable library components. Active members of the community who contribute libraries and tools are entitled to a special Eiffel contributor license providing them access to EiffelStudio at no charge.

To request a contributor license, please fill in the following form.

We ask you to update the form once a year if you wish to retain the license.

"

[Ian Joyner]

“Maybe that's the reason why usability of the editor is that poor ;-) 

I really considered switching to Emacs and a make-like building as it's more 
productive. 
(It may be personal taste that I don't like editors to undo my code 
indentation, or just indent new line wrongly. 
Even in Emacs some recent "improvements" are gainst the spirit of Emacs (which 

is "Do what I want, not what you want")) ”

Well, I have not used EiffelStudio in quite a while, and maybe last time I did it was on X Windows on Mac which is a bit crude. But even on Windows it seemed a little crude (can’t think of a more accurate word).

However, most editors are text editors and I think we need program editors which are more attuned to entire program elements. That is why I have suggested before that editors become graphical, meaning more around the program elements.

This is where the ideas of Smalltalk and Eiffel could be merged. I realised why Smalltalk has such a small syntax – because the structural framework of the language has moved to the environment being browser and editor. In fact, to create a class, you more-or-less just fill in a form for class name, inheritance, locals. That could be internationalised, so that class in English is translated to whatever language – जात in Sanskrit.

https://www.quora.com/What-is-modern-programming/answer/Ian-Joyner-1

Furthermore, programmers should be in control of style issues like indentation. That reduces the style rules that plague many projects because someone sets them and many of the other programmers don’t like that style. That way the editor and environment truly “does what you want”.

Ian

[Larry Rix]

Furthermore, programmers should be in control of style issues like indentation. That reduces the style rules that plague many projects because someone sets them and many of the other programmers don’t like that style. That way the editor and environment truly “does what you want”.

I have been working with our adopted son in teaching him both Eiffel and Python. The Eiffel Studio editor is hugely adaptive to whatever "style" I want to use in terms of tabbing or indenting as well as breaking up lines and so on. I do not experience any restrictive behavior at all.

On the other hand—Python, using PyCharm, is an utter Style Nazi! The little Fascist-freak not only complains rather vigorously when I do not get the style demands "just right", but its complaints do not tell me what the requirement is or how to fix it. I have several example of this. Thus, I find PyCharm to be aggravating and pathetically petty. My most central response to the little Style Nazi is, "You are straining at gnats and swallowing camels!"

From where I sit, Python is a bug waiting to happen. So, while it is sitting there griping at me because of petty and small style issues, it is letting bugs through the gates like herds of cattle!

Finally—having stated all of this, I do not want to ever imply that programmers ought to have free reign over their "personal style". Good programmers have style conventions that they adhere to whether the compiler and editor care or not. They have these for the purpose of making their code as readable as possible. This is the purpose of any "convention"—good to excellent readability, comprehension, and so on. The ultimate purpose is the reduction of bugs, which are the sworn enemy of quality software.

Cheers,

Larry

[Ian Joyner]

“I do not want to ever imply that programmers ought to have free reign over their "personal style".”

I completely agree. But the problem is for those who care about clean style and getting things right you get someone who decides that if others care about this they are going to wreck it. It is the old school playground bully syndrome. Adults participate in that kind of behaviour – care about trees and forests, send in the bulldozer. Taliban demolishes Banyan Buddhas. Isis much cultural heritage. We had a mining company (Rio Tinto) here blow up caves with 30,000 year old rock art in Western Australia. But on a smaller scale programmers do this as well. They seem to consciously or unconsciously through ignorance break typographic conventions( like this )and commit typographic atrocities.

So OK, they win. The workplace gets unpleasant when you try to explain or even set style rules. On a language level, we know that typing is a great advance in producing quality software with flexibility. That is put down as ‘training wheels for beginners’ and many other trite platitudes. Much bogus thinking is supported by appeals to freedom – “let me do what I want”. But one person’s freedom is another’s slavery. Some people still want the ‘freedom’ to have slaves.

Neater syntax like Pascal, Ada, Eiffel, disparaged.

Let them have their fake freedom. If they want to view a real program in Eiffel in horrible C/C++ syntax complete with ‘()’ call operator, let them see it that way.

That is why I think editing should be more than just pushing text and syntax around, but dealing with program concepts – that is semantics rather than syntax and text editors.

Not only does that solve the problem of dissident programmers, but it is a better way of working!

Ian

[Ulrich Windl]

Hi!

So first you get the license, and then you have to contribute (what)?
Or do you have to contribute first and then get the license? ;-)

Regards,
Ulrich

>>> Richard <eiffel-...@rth10260.info> schrieb am 28.01.2021 um 13:35 in
Nachricht <19040a18-8511-43f2...@googlegroups.com>:

> I was just looking up some detail in my "account.eiffel.com" and see that
> it has been updated.
>

> The Purchase license <https://account.eiffel.com/licenses/_/buy/> page,

> very well hidden and only accessible from the link on page EiffelStudio

> Licenses <https://account.eiffel.com/licenses/> of the account, shows now a

> link For Contributors <https://account.eiffel.com/cloud/forms/contributor>

to
> a free license that may apply to contributors of this discussion group!
>
> Quote: "

> *Apply for a contributor license*

>
> Eiffel benefits from a thriving community of developers who passionately
> share Eiffel's goals of high-quality software development based on the
> principles of Design by Contract and the focus on reusable library
> components. Active members of the community who contribute libraries and
> tools are entitled to a special Eiffel contributor license providing them
> access to EiffelStudio at no charge.
>

> To request a *contributor* license, please fill in the following form.

https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/eiffel-users/19040a18-8511-43f2-8051-1f2114

> 0ec9a4n%40googlegroups.com.

[Ulrich Windl]

>>> Larry Rix <lar...@moonshotsoftware.com> schrieb am 28.01.2021 um 14:01 in
Nachricht
<CAJ7KgmBW_z6Hn-d+ZywtwwXL...@mail.gmail.com>:
> *Furthermore, programmers should be in control of style issues like

> indentation. That reduces the style rules that plague many projects because
> someone sets them and many of the other programmers don’t like that style.

> That way the editor and environment truly “does what you want”.*

> I have been working with our adopted son in teaching him both Eiffel and
> Python. The Eiffel Studio editor is hugely adaptive to whatever "style" I
> want to use in terms of tabbing or indenting as well as breaking up lines
> and so on. I do not experience any restrictive behavior at all.

I'm fully aware that you can set up quite a lot of customizations, but maybe
that's exactly the problem:
Maybe compare to Emacs and the C-mode: You can also change a lot of settings,
but there are predefined "styles"
like "K&R", "BSD", "Linux", etc. Also allowing to define your own style,
allowing to switch settings quickly.
Maybe the Eiffel Studio also needs "Bertrand Style", "ISE Style", ... ;-)

BTW: Is there a more recent style guide (talking about syntax (not programming
style) only) for Eiffel since ETL3?

>
> On the other hand—Python, using PyCharm, is an utter Style Nazi! The little
> Fascist-freak not only complains rather vigorously when I do not get the
> style demands "just right", but its complaints do not tell me what the
> requirement is or how to fix it. I have several example of this. Thus, I
> find PyCharm to be aggravating and pathetically petty. My most central
> response to the little Style Nazi is, "You are straining at gnats and
> swallowing camels!"

Actually that semantic indentation prevented me from learning Python so far.
Don't get me wrong: I take great care to format my programs nicely and
consistent, but for me a language still is "free form":
Just imaging you are reading a program aloud for another person to type it:
You would have to say things like "line break", "four spaces", etc. just to
make the program semantically correct...

>
> From where I sit, Python is a bug waiting to happen. So, while it is
> sitting there griping at me because of petty and small style issues, it is
> letting bugs through the gates like herds of cattle!
>
> Finally—having stated all of this, I do not want to ever imply that
> programmers ought to have free reign over their "personal style". Good

Depends how much dictator the person was that defined the style ;-)
Wasn't original K&R C style using 6-space indent? Nobody uses that today (I
guess).

> programmers have style conventions that they adhere to whether the compiler
> and editor care or not. They have these for the purpose of making their
> code as readable as possible. This is the purpose of any "convention"—good
> to excellent readability, comprehension, and so on. The ultimate purpose is
> the reduction of bugs, which are the sworn enemy of quality software.

Regards,
Ulrich

>
> Cheers,
>
> Larry

>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Eiffel Users" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to eiffel-users...@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
>

https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/eiffel-users/CAJ7KgmBW_z6Hn-d%2BZywtwwXLfJ8

> X6yMwiyDG8d7QtJT-B5ggbQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[Ulrich Windl]

>>> Ian Joyner <joyne...@gmail.com> schrieb am 29.01.2021 um 00:55 in
Nachricht
<8af7f7fa-6975-4783...@googlegroups.com>:

> “I do not want to ever imply that programmers ought to have free reign over

> their "personal style".”
>
> I completely agree. But the problem is for those who care about clean style

> and getting things right you get someone who decides that if others care
> about this they are going to wreck it. It is the old school playground
> bully syndrome. Adults participate in that kind of behaviour – care about
> trees and forests, send in the bulldozer. Taliban demolishes Banyan
> Buddhas. Isis much cultural heritage. We had a mining company (Rio Tinto)
> here blow up caves with 30,000 year old rock art in Western Australia. But
> on a smaller scale programmers do this as well. They seem to consciously or

> unconsciously through ignorance break typographic conventions( like this
> )and commit typographic atrocities.

There might be exceptions. For example I think "italics correction"
(non-italic glyph following an italic one) should be done by the font renderer,
not by the programmer adding a space between both glyphs.

>
> So OK, they win. The workplace gets unpleasant when you try to explain or
> even set style rules. On a language level, we know that typing is a great
> advance in producing quality software with flexibility. That is put down as

> ‘training wheels for beginners’ and many other trite platitudes. Much bogus

> thinking is supported by appeals to freedom – “let me do what I want”. But
> one person’s freedom is another’s slavery. Some people still want the
> ‘freedom’ to have slaves.

A great topic is plain functions (pardon: "procedure calls") calls:
f(x)
f (x)
f( x )
f ( x )
when x is "a,b":
a,b
a, b
a , b
(recursion applies)

>
> Neater syntax like Pascal, Ada, Eiffel, disparaged.
>
> Let them have their fake freedom. If they want to view a real program in
> Eiffel in horrible C/C++ syntax complete with ‘()’ call operator, let them
> see it that way.
>
> That is why I think editing should be more than just pushing text and
> syntax around, but dealing with program concepts – that is semantics rather

> than syntax and text editors.
>
> Not only does that solve the problem of dissident programmers, but it is a
> better way of working!

I also think many Eiffel programmers do not care about input formatting as the
tools reformat their texts anyway, making them look worse (matter of taste)
most of the time.

So any editor style definition should also have a corresponding tool
formatting style. Now it gets hard: Some people demand a unique output style
from the tools.

Regards,
Ulrich

>
> Ian
>
> On Friday, January 29, 2021 at 12:01:42 AM UTC+11 Larry Rix wrote:
>
>>
>>

>> *Furthermore, programmers should be in control of style issues like

>> indentation. That reduces the style rules that plague many projects because

>> someone sets them and many of the other programmers don’t like that style.

>> That way the editor and environment truly “does what you want”.*

>> I have been working with our adopted son in teaching him both Eiffel and
>> Python. The Eiffel Studio editor is hugely adaptive to whatever "style" I
>> want to use in terms of tabbing or indenting as well as breaking up lines
>> and so on. I do not experience any restrictive behavior at all.
>>
>> On the other hand—Python, using PyCharm, is an utter Style Nazi! The
>> little Fascist-freak not only complains rather vigorously when I do not get

>> the style demands "just right", but its complaints do not tell me what the

>> requirement is or how to fix it. I have several example of this. Thus, I
>> find PyCharm to be aggravating and pathetically petty. My most central
>> response to the little Style Nazi is, "You are straining at gnats and
>> swallowing camels!"
>>
>> From where I sit, Python is a bug waiting to happen. So, while it is
>> sitting there griping at me because of petty and small style issues, it is

>> letting bugs through the gates like herds of cattle!
>>
>> Finally—having stated all of this, I do not want to ever imply that
>> programmers ought to have free reign over their "personal style". Good
>> programmers have style conventions that they adhere to whether the compiler

>> and editor care or not. They have these for the purpose of making their
>> code as readable as possible. This is the purpose of any "convention"—good

>> to excellent readability, comprehension, and so on. The ultimate purpose is

>> the reduction of bugs, which are the sworn enemy of quality software.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Larry
>>
>

> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Eiffel Users" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to eiffel-users...@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
>

https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/eiffel-users/8af7f7fa-6975-4783-b602-d1531d

> 1f851cn%40googlegroups.com.