Guile questions
Janos Blazi
newbie questions and hope that they are not off topic in this news group.
I could not make Guile work from a .cpp source file, I had to use a .c file.
Now I am going to use wxWindows in my application and so I should need c++.
Is there a way of solving this problem?
Is there a manual for Guile in some easily readable form (html,pdf,...)?
TIA,
Janos Blazi
-----------== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Uncensored Usenet News ==----------
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----= Over 100,000 Newsgroups - Unlimited Fast Downloads - 19 Servers =-----
Siegfried Gonzi
> I have installed Guile on Cygwin and it works fine. I should like to ask two
> newbie questions and hope that they are not off topic in this news group.
Hi:
It is not my intention to convince you; I am sure you are aware of your
tasks. But wouldn't it be better to install Linux and use a multi-boot
system Windows/Linux? I mean the Cygwin solution is insane. If you can
cope with Cygwin, it will be easy for you to cope with Linux.
You are from Germany and obtaining SUSE 8.1 Linux should not be that
hard. The installation is a matter of 20 minutes (even for a beginner).
If you have a Gericom laptop: Gericom laptops are very common in Germany
but they suffer from the problem that most of their product lines just
feature a no-name winmodem. But even there I was lucky and found a site
which said that most of the no-name winmodems are from SMARTLINK. The
SMARTLINK guys emailed me a Linux driver for my Gericom winmoden in the
following. There is no need to use Windows on my laptop if I want to use
my email account, even.
I mean programming languages and Linux/Unix ties better than programming
languages and Windows.
Regards,
S. Gonzi
Janos Blazi
> tasks. But wouldn't it be better to install Linux and use a multi-boot
> system Windows/Linux? I mean the Cygwin solution is insane. If you can
> cope with Cygwin, it will be easy for you to cope with Linux.
Thx. I use Linux. But I teach and at school we use Windows. There is
absolutely no chance of changing this. So I have to write an Windows
standalone application.
Besides, using Linux would not help, the problems were the same.
Jens Axel Søgaard
>>It is not my intention to convince you; I am sure you are aware of your
>>tasks. But wouldn't it be better to install Linux and use a multi-boot
>>system Windows/Linux? I mean the Cygwin solution is insane. If you can
>>cope with Cygwin, it will be easy for you to cope with Linux.
>
>
> Thx. I use Linux. But I teach and at school we use Windows. There is
> absolutely no chance of changing this. So I have to write an Windows
> standalone application.
> Besides, using Linux would not help, the problems were the same.
Why don't you choose a Scheme implementation that runs on both Windows
and Linux?
--
Jens Axel Søgaard
JB
Here is what I should like to do:
I should write a c++ program, that uses wxWindows (which is
a GUI toolkit), Core (which is an esoteric MP arithmetic
library) and then the scripting language Scheme.
I am having tecnical problems with Guile and I should prefer
a Scheme that offers macros anyway. (I do not know if Guile
has macro support.) What I should be be able to
do, are calls like
(define g (line '(3 4) '(4 5)))
(define h (line '(-1 2) '(3 0)))
(define p (section g h))
(draw g h p)
Then the Scheme functions 'line' and 'section' and 'draw'
would call C++ functions that would do the job.
MzScheme look interesting and I shall take a closer look at
it. Didi I understand the user manual correctly: I should
need embedding and extension at the same time?
--
JB
Jens Axel Søgaard
get a copy in e-mail.]
JB wrote:
> Here is what I should like to do:
> I should write a c++ program, that uses wxWindows (which is
> a GUI toolkit), Core (which is an esoteric MP arithmetic
> library) and then the scripting language Scheme.
> Then the Scheme functions 'line' and 'section' and 'draw'
> would call C++ functions that would do the job.
DrScheme actually uses wxWindow to make its GUI portable :-)
To me it would seem simpler to use Scheme as the main language
(that is for both GUI and scripting) then you only need to
make an extension for Core.
One could either use the FFI:
http://download.plt-scheme.org/doc/202/html/mzc/mzc-Z-H-2.html#%_chap_2
or use SWIG http://www.swig.org
> MzScheme look interesting and I shall take a closer look at
> it. Didi I understand the user manual correctly: I should
> need embedding and extension at the same time?
As far as can tell, extension simply means you provide extra
primitives to mzscheme. You therefore need extensions if you
want to call your own primitives from within Scheme. Regardless
of whether you choose to embed or not.
Out of curiosity: What is Core and where can I read about it?
For once I had no success using Google.
--
Jens Axel Søgaard
JB
> DrScheme actually uses wxWindow to make its GUI portable
> :-) To me it would seem simpler to use Scheme as the main
> language (that is for both GUI and scripting) then you
> only need to make an extension for Core.
The program would have to run on a computer without any
sensible infrastructure. I am afraid I cannot make
executables with Scheme. (This is for example a serious
problem with CL.)
> One could either use the FFI:
>
>
http://download.plt-scheme.org/doc/202/html/mzc/mzc-Z-H-2.html#%_chap_2
>
> or use SWIG http://www.swig.org
That would be horrible.
>> MzScheme look interesting and I shall take a closer look
>> at it. Didi I understand the user manual correctly: I
>> should need embedding and extension at the same time?
>
> As far as can tell, extension simply means you provide
> extra primitives to mzscheme. You therefore need
> extensions if you want to call your own primitives from
> within Scheme. Regardless of whether you choose to embed
> or not.
So I should really need both.
> Out of curiosity: What is Core and where can I read about
> it? For once I had no success using Google.
Core is a MP arithmetic package. When you deal with
geometry, you need precise calculations, that is, the first
three or four digits of your results should be exact. Core
offers such precision. (The other package I know about,
that offers the same precision, is LEDA, but it is not
free.)
Look at http://www.cs.nyu.edu/exact/core/
The strange thing is, that from the three components I
should need, that is Guile/Scheme, wxWindows and Core, only
the latter is working at the moment. The Core distribution
I downloaded was slightly buggy, but the Core people helped
me...
--
JB
Jens Axel Søgaard
> That would be horrible.
It would demand some work - yes. But technically it would
be a nice solution.
> Core is a MP arithmetic package. When you deal with
> geometry, you need precise calculations, that is, the first
> three or four digits of your results should be exact. Core
> offers such precision. (The other package I know about,
> that offers the same precision, is LEDA, but it is not
> free.)
> Look at http://www.cs.nyu.edu/exact/core/
This looks interesting indeed. The ability to calculate
as many decimals as needed is very appealing and elegant.
Hm. Reminds me. Have you checked out SISC? Is a
Scheme in Java:
http://sisc.sourceforge.net/manual/html/ch03.html#Numbers
SISC (1.6.0-beta) - main
> (max-precision 1000)
> (min-precision 1000)
> (sqrt 2)
1.4142135623730950488016887242096980785696718753
769480731766797379907324784621070388503875343276
415727350138462309122970249248360558507372126441
214970999358314132226659275055927557999505011527
820605714701095599716059702745345968620147285174
186408891986095523292304843087143214508397626036
279952514079896872533965463318088296406206152583
523950547457502877599617298355752203375318570113
543746034084988471603868999706990048150305440277
903164542478230684929369186215805784631115966687
1301301561856898723723
The on-line demo is at
http://sisc.sourceforge.net/sisc-online.html
I know this is not the same thing as Core, but
it is an easy start. Note that you can call Java
functions from within SISC - and thus make the GUI
using the standard Java API.
--
Jens Axel Søgaard
Friedrich Dominicus
> Jens Axel Søgaard wrote:
>
> > DrScheme actually uses wxWindow to make its GUI portable
> > :-) To me it would seem simpler to use Scheme as the main
> > language (that is for both GUI and scripting) then you
> > only need to make an extension for Core.
>
> The program would have to run on a computer without any
> sensible infrastructure. I am afraid I cannot make
> executables with Scheme. (This is for example a serious
> problem with CL.)
You don't mean this seriously do you? You can make executable at least
with LispWorks and Franz Allegro Lisp.
Friedrich
Siegfried Gonzi
> You don't mean this seriously do you? You can make executable at least
> with LispWorks and Franz Allegro Lisp.
Let's be serious: he needs his stuff for a school. They are not
braindamaged that they will spend many thousands of dollars for a
LispWorks or Franz Allegro distribution; an excecutable requires the
full licence.
Not going to say I am against paying for software (I paid the freeware
license for my Macintosh LateX distribution, though, they would have
been free if I had used it that).
S. Gonzi
Friedrich Dominicus
> Friedrich Dominicus wrote:
>
>
> > You don't mean this seriously do you? You can make executable at least
> > with LispWorks and Franz Allegro Lisp.
>
> Let's be serious: he needs his stuff for a school. They are not
> braindamaged that they will spend many thousands of dollars for a
> LispWorks or Franz Allegro distribution; an excecutable requires the
> full licence.
For what should thy need executable than? And I bet they could get a
decent offer from both Xanalys and Franz if they would ask for it.
But I won't argue about it any longer. this is c.l.scheme isn't it?
Regards
Friedrich
JB
> You don't mean this seriously do you? You can make
> executable at least with LispWorks and Franz Allegro Lisp.
First, those great products are not free. Though we are a
rich country, my school is so poor that we cannot even
afford to buy blackboards with grids on them.
And the second point is that I am not sure if they could be
embedded. I thought more of ECL Lisp when I wrote about CL
but there are several problems with that option too.
I also investigated OpenLisp and TISL.
There are always some problems with these products.
--
JB
JB
> Hm. Reminds me. Have you checked out SISC? Is a
> Scheme in Java:
>
> http://sisc.sourceforge.net/manual/html/ch03.html#Numbers
>
> SISC (1.6.0-beta) - main
> > (max-precision 1000)
> > (min-precision 1000)
> > (sqrt 2)
>
> 1.4142135623730950488016887242096980785696718753
> 769480731766797379907324784621070388503875343276
> 415727350138462309122970249248360558507372126441
> 214970999358314132226659275055927557999505011527
> 820605714701095599716059702745345968620147285174
> 186408891986095523292304843087143214508397626036
> 279952514079896872533965463318088296406206152583
> 523950547457502877599617298355752203375318570113
> 543746034084988471603868999706990048150305440277
> 903164542478230684929369186215805784631115966687
> 1301301561856898723723
I had seen this. Clisp offers the same precision. (I think I
had checked virtually everything.)
--
JB
Rainer Joswig
> > You don't mean this seriously do you? You can make executable at least
> > with LispWorks and Franz Allegro Lisp.
>
> Let's be serious: he needs his stuff for a school. They are not
> braindamaged that they will spend many thousands of dollars for a
> LispWorks or Franz Allegro distribution; an excecutable requires the
> full licence.
The academic license for LispWorks for Windows Professional is
$540 dollars and includes royalty-free application distribution.
The academic license for LispWorks for Windows Enterprise is $1680.
http://www.lispworks.com/buy/index.html
From http://www.lispworks.com/products/lww.html :
Professional Edition
The Professional Edition includes everything you need for
commercial Common Lisp software development and
application delivery. CLIM 2.0 is included to further increase
program portability. Applications developed with the
Professional edition can be distributed free of charge.
Enterprise Edition
The Enterprise Edition includes all the features of the
Professional Edition, and provides further support for software
needs of the modern enterprise, including:
+ Database access through object-oriented SQL/ODBC
libraries.
+ Industry standard distributed computing through LispWorks
ORB.
+ Expert system programming through KnowledgeWorksTM
which has an embedded Prolog compiler.
Distribution of applications developed with the Enterprise
Edition in version 4.2 and above no longer require the payment
of a runtime fee.
Friedrich Dominicus
>
> First, those great products are not free. Though we are a
> rich country, my school is so poor that we cannot even
> afford to buy blackboards with grids on them.
Well without having the need for "excetutables" you can use the
personal editions. With LispWorks even CAPI comes along bundeled with
it. So you can write either Windows programs and/or Linux Programs.
>
> And the second point is that I am not sure if they could be
> embedded. I thought more of ECL Lisp when I wrote about CL
> but there are several problems with that option too.
Strange you post you have problems with Guile too. What is your
problem with ECL than?
> I also investigated OpenLisp and TISL.
> There are always some problems with these products.
Well as you notices those are "free". You're "free" to improve on
them.
Regards
Friedrich
JB
> Siegfried Gonzi <siegfri...@kfunigraz.ac.at> wrote in
> message news:<3DC62589...@kfunigraz.ac.at>...
>
>> > You don't mean this seriously do you? You can make
>> > executable at least with LispWorks and Franz Allegro
>> > Lisp.
>>
>> Let's be serious: he needs his stuff for a school. They
>> are not braindamaged that they will spend many thousands
>> of dollars for a LispWorks or Franz Allegro distribution;
>> an excecutable requires the full licence.
>
>
> The academic license for LispWorks for Windows
> Professional is $540 dollars and includes royalty-free
> application distribution.
Rainer, I do not know the situation of schools in Hamburg,
but in Bavaria, the communities pay for the equipment of
the schools and the state pays the slaries of the teachers.
Now the small town where I live is virtually bankrupt. They
almost had to close down their theatre last year.
So paying even $54 is completely out of question. As far as
I am concerned, I think that volunteering my time is enough
and do not want to support the community financially.
Let me tell you an example: When I want to use a coloured
chalk, I have to use thick and cheap ones as the thin
pieces of chalk are a bit more expensive and we cannot
afford it. I also have to pay for the tranparecies I use in
my classes.
I am sure that the price for an academic license is
justified, but I do not think that they have sold many
licenses in Bavaria.
--
JB
JB
> Well without having the need for "excetutables" you can
> use the personal editions. With LispWorks even CAPI comes
> along bundeled with it. So you can write either Windows
> programs and/or Linux Programs.
Is the Personal Edition of LispWorks embeddable?
>> And the second point is that I am not sure if they could
>> be embedded. I thought more of ECL Lisp when I wrote
>> about CL but there are several problems with that option
>> too.
> Strange you post you have problems with Guile too. What is
> your problem with ECL than?
You are writing to me as though I were not a sincere person.
You are not putting it explicitly but I have a fine antenna
for this as everybody else has, I suppose. I do not think
that I was inpolite to you even on one occasion. (Though I
must admit that I may have forgotten it.)
Now to answer you question:
A studied the manuals for ECL. At the beginning they say
that ECL /was/ designed to be embeddable but it is not
clear to me if it still is. Later in the manuals,
/extending/ ECl is discussed at some length but /embedding/
it is not mentioned any more. So I lost my courage.
For Guile, on the other hand, there is a very good tutorial.
I tried to run the programs from the tutorial and my system
crashed immediately. I you were member of the right mailing
lists, you could see that I followed up on this and finally
found out why and what happened and how to circumvent the
problem.
But I need C++ and at the time Guile only works with C. So I
shall try using extern "C" directives but this will take
time and I do not think that asking for help is in any way
negative.
>> I also investigated OpenLisp and TISL.
>> There are always some problems with these products.
> Well as you notices those are "free". You're "free" to
> improve on them.
Again the same attitude. Why are you doing this? (I remember
that I once had a problem with a German guy on c.l.l and
finally I wrote him a private letter in which I politely
asked him to shut the **** up. I do not remember whether
that were you.)
--
JB
Siegfried Gonzi
> So paying even $54 is completely out of question. As far as
> I am concerned, I think that volunteering my time is enough
> and do not want to support the community financially.
> Let me tell you an example: When I want to use a coloured
> chalk, I have to use thick and cheap ones as the thin
> pieces of chalk are a bit more expensive and we cannot
> afford it. I also have to pay for the tranparecies I use in
> my classes.
You shouldn't worry too much. I do not know of any school in a German
speaking country which would be that lunatic and pays many thousand of
dollars for a software license which will become scarcely applied.
However, universities have a budget for such license issues and they pay
if needed.
It is questionable whether school childern should be confronted with
programming languages at all. Maybe they should become exposed to some
LOGO or Scheme programming but nothing more. I know of insane beeings
who want to confront school children with C++.
You should rather teach them that programming for the sake of
programming is irrelevant.
Regards,
S. Gonzi
JB
> It is questionable whether school childern should be
> confronted with programming languages at all. Maybe they
> should become exposed to some LOGO or Scheme programming
> but nothing more.
This is of course a speculative statement as there is no way
to falsify it by experiment.
> I know of insane beeings who want to
> confront school children with C++.
I did that myself before I new that Scheme or Python existed
but now I should not do it again. At the moment I use
Python but by using Scheme you make the structure of the
problem more explicit and this is why I am going to script
my application with Scheme or another Lisp dialect and not
with Python.
--
JB
Siegfried Gonzi
> This is of course a speculative statement as there is no way
> to falsify it by experiment.
One has to be fair and concede that it all depends on the type of
education institution. As you maybe know, we in Austria have a school
system where you can decide whether you want become educated in
classical things like poetry, writing, math,...or where you become
educated in an engineering discipline.
The latter is mostly used by people who want not go to the university
thereafter, but want a harder education than the classical one. Before I
went to university I decided to go through the taff way and enrolled to
a mechanical engineering school. But I was never interested in
engineering and decided in the following, after obtaining the degree, to
jump onto a university career.
Nowadays the programming language education in schools is way more
sophisticated than it was back to 1989. Even during my university time
in physics (now I am in a PhD position) there were nearly no courses
held in programming; they expect that you learn programming in your leisure.
But I highly appreciate when teachers present Scheme to childern. Not
that I believe Scheme is the best thing since sliced bread, but it is
good to move beyond ones Java/C++ horizon.
Regards,
S. Gonzi
Jens Axel Søgaard
> Jens Axel Søgaard wrote:
>
>
>>Hm. Reminds me. Have you checked out SISC? Is a
>>Scheme in Java:
> I had seen this. Clisp offers the same precision. (I think I
> had checked virtually everything.)
Do you know the exact reals library by Boehm et al:
http://www.hpl.hp.com/personal/Hans_Boehm/crcalc/CRCalc-force.html
It is written in Java and I imagine it would be quite easy to
call it from SISC (or Bigloo!).
--
Jens Axel Søgaard
By know you probably have guessed I don't like C++ :-)
JB
> JB wrote:
>> Jens Axel Søgaard wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Hm. Reminds me. Have you checked out SISC? Is a
>>>Scheme in Java:
>
>> I had seen this. Clisp offers the same precision. (I
>> think I had checked virtually everything.)
>
> Do you know the exact reals library by Boehm et al:
>
>
http://www.hpl.hp.com/personal/Hans_Boehm/crcalc/CRCalc-force.html
>
> It is written in Java and I imagine it would be quite easy
> to call it from SISC (or Bigloo!).
>
I vaguely remember that have seen this before. You cannot
compare to CRs, can you? I think this is not excatly what I
am after.
At the moment I have a few possibilities I can explore. The
problem with Guile may be harder than I thought. They use
GTK+ which is in C and therefor it may not be possible to
use Guile from within C++ at all.
--
JB
Neil W. Van Dyke
MzScheme is embeddable, is extensible via shared libraries, runs on the
popular OS platforms, has an active user community, has a number of
standard and add-on libraries, is well-documented, and is freely
available.
There are several other free Scheme implementations that would also
probably do what you need.
--
Neil W. Van Dyke
http://www.neilvandyke.org/
JB
> Have you considered MzScheme
> ("http://www.plt-scheme.org/")?
>
> MzScheme is embeddable, is extensible via shared
> libraries, runs on the popular OS platforms, has an active
> user community, has a number of standard and add-on
> libraries, is well-documented, and is freely available.
>
> There are several other free Scheme implementations that
> would also probably do what you need.
>
I have just responded to Jens Axel:
"At the moment I have a few possibilities I can explore..."
and MzScheme was one of those very interesting
possibilities. It looks very good. If you read one of my
earlier postings in this thread, you can see that I am
dealing with the technical problems already:
I wrote:
"Here is what I should like to do:
I should write a c++ program, that uses wxWindows (which is
a GUI toolkit), Core (which is an esoteric MP arithmetic
library) and then the scripting language Scheme.
I am having tecnical problems with Guile and I should prefer
a Scheme that offers macros anyway. (I do not know if Guile
has macro support.) What I should be be able to
do, are calls like
(define g (line '(3 4) '(4 5)))
(define h (line '(-1 2) '(3 0)))
(define p (section g h))
(draw g h p)
Then the Scheme functions 'line' and 'section' and 'draw'
would call C++ functions that would do the job.
MzScheme look interesting and I shall take a closer look at
it. Didi I understand the user manual correctly: I should
need embedding and extension at the same time?"
--
JB
Friedrich Dominicus
>
> You are writing to me as though I were not a sincere person.
?
> You are not putting it explicitly but I have a fine antenna
> for this as everybody else has, I suppose. I do not think
> that I was inpolite to you even on one occasion. (Though I
> must admit that I may have forgotten it.)
Well to put it as clear as possible.
- you do not want to spend any money
- you do have problems with any of the free alternatives
So I pointed out more than one alternative, but all things do not
satisfy you. This does not work that is too expensive, that must
there. I call this "whining". So if you do not have the money than
take what's available for free, and invest your time.
>
> Now to answer you question:
>
> A studied the manuals for ECL. At the beginning they say
> that ECL /was/ designed to be embeddable but it is not
> clear to me if it still is. Later in the manuals,
> /extending/ ECl is discussed at some length but /embedding/
> it is not mentioned any more. So I lost my courage.
Just a few links from the documentation:
http://ecls.sourceforge.net/ecldev.html#Building%20programs
embedding C code:
http://ecls.sourceforge.net/ecldev.html#Embedding%20C%20code
here's something to read about the C-side calling Lisp:
http://ecls.sourceforge.net/ecldev.html#Objects%20representation
Than there is a mailing list in which you could ask for an example of
how to embedd it.
>
> Again the same attitude. Why are you doing this? (I remember
> that I once had a problem with a German guy on c.l.l and
> finally I wrote him a private letter in which I politely
> asked him to shut the **** up. I do not remember whether
> that were you.)
Well even if I had been that, what does it have to do with your
problem? You got more than one good suggestion. Everything was not
right, and if one had a suggestion you come with a new requirement.
This is what gets on my nerves.
Friedrich
William D Clinger
> Let's be serious: he needs his stuff for a school. They are not
> braindamaged that they will spend many thousands of dollars for a
> LispWorks or Franz Allegro distribution; an excecutable requires the
> full licence.
In my experience, it is not unusual for a school, corporation, or
other institution to balk at paying a few thousand dollars to buy
the right tool for the job, while paying its employees tens of
thousands, or hundreds of thousands, or sometimes even millions
of dollars to work around the problems that result from using the
wrong tool. Why this "brain-damage"? The tool budget may be too
small, or there may be some penny-wise/pound-foolish bean counter
whose approval is needed for each purchase, or some suit may be
prejudiced against the right tool, or whatever.
I am not suggesting that the specific case we are discussing is
an example of this, but I do not think we have enough information
to dismiss the possibility out of hand.
Will
Neil W. Van Dyke
> MzScheme look interesting and I shall take a closer look at it. Didi I
> understand the user manual correctly: I should need embedding and extension
> at the same time?"
You can embed and extend MzScheme at the same time, yes.
This is all documented in "Inside PLT MzScheme":
http://download.plt-scheme.org/doc/202/html/insidemz/index.htm
There is also some helpful example code when you instead MzScheme.
Other PLT documentation (including on the DrScheme programming
environment and the MrEd graphical toolkit) is available at:
http://download.plt-scheme.org/doc/
You may even find that PLT's existing GUI toolkit and pedagocical tools
already do what you want, or are a good starting point.
Good luck.
JB
> JB <jbl...@hotmail.com> writes:
>
>>
>> You are writing to me as though I were not a sincere
>> person.
> ?
>
>> You are not putting it explicitly but I have a fine
>> antenna for this as everybody else has, I suppose. I do
>> not think that I was inpolite to you even on one
>> occasion. (Though I must admit that I may have forgotten
>> it.)
> Well to put it as clear as possible.
> - you do not want to spend any money
> - you do have problems with any of the free alternatives
>
> So I pointed out more than one alternative, but all things
> do not satisfy you. This does not work that is too
> expensive, that must there. I call this "whining". So if
> you do not have the money than take what's available for
> free, and invest your time.
I did not ask you for your "help". I know whom you are
imitating but without the master's strange nordic charm,
technical knowledge and genuine devotion this looks less
than half as good.
Now let us proceed. I started with Guile as Guile has the
reputation of being *the* scripting language. I experienced
problems and I asked for help. You did not offer any
technical help on this.
Then other people suggested MsScheme that looked very good.
Now I admit to having overseen one of the pages in the ECL
manual and you gave a link to this page. Thank you very
much. I am also taking a look at OpenLisp. At the same
time I am having other problems too and as I wrote twice in
this thread, I shall need time to evaluate all this. So
while nobody could tell me how to solve my Guile problem, I
feel that I have made some headway.
By the way: I knew about LispWorks and my scripting needs
are so minimal that the memory restrictions of the personal
edition would not pose any problems. But I did not know
that LispWorks was embeddable. Is it? You have not aswered
this question yet. I am not looking for /some/ programming
language, I am looking for scripting a C++ application from
Scheme or Lisp. (I have a working prototype in Python
already where scripting is no problem.)
> Well even if I had been that, what does it have to do with
> your problem?
If you were that person, that would mean a lot. That would
mean that I had told to you that I did not wish any
communication with you until you send me your apology and
this would mean that you are intruding. (Then you should
watch your idol more closely as he may be rude and callous
at times, but he is never indecent.)
But, sigh, this belongs to usenet. So thank you for your
valuable ECL hint.
--
J.... B....
Shriram Krishnamurthi
Siegfried Gonzi <siegfri...@kfunigraz.ac.at> writes:
> Let's be serious: he needs his stuff for a school. They are not
> braindamaged that they will spend many thousands of dollars for a
> LispWorks or Franz Allegro distribution; an excecutable requires the
> full licence.
Maybe you don't appreciate how harsh the term "braindamaged" is -- or
maybe you do. But if a bunch of professionals want to put in the time
to actually produce an implementation, why should they not be
compensated for it? I don't know many university professors (which is
what you seem to be) who work for free, or who do research without any
kind of grant support. Calling the fruits of those labors "free" is
utterly false anyway. The companies just make the costs more
explicit.
(There may be one difference, which is that the professor will
probably continue to *think* about the same set of things with or
without funding -- at least until it becomes too cold because there's
no money to buy oil for the wick lamps. At the same time, it's
interesting to see how "Lisp thinking" continues to influence the many
people who work at companies like Sun, some even openly admitting to
it. So even that difference may not count.)
Okay, sorry, off-topic. I couldn't resist.
Shriram
JB
> Maybe you don't appreciate how harsh the term
> "braindamaged" is -- or
> maybe you do. But if a bunch of professionals want to put
> in the time to actually produce an implementation, why
> should they not be compensated for it?
Nobody denies that. But we simply cannot afford it. I think
the prices are made for US universities and then of course
the company cannot say that for German highschools they
make a special price and this is less than one tenth of the
price for US universities.
The funny thing is that as far my problem is concerned, the
product we are talking about, is /free/, but probably of no
use.
--
JB
Rainer Joswig
JB <jbl...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> So paying even $54 is completely out of question. As far as
> I am concerned, I think that volunteering my time is enough
> and do not want to support the community financially.
> Let me tell you an example: When I want to use a coloured
> chalk, I have to use thick and cheap ones as the thin
> pieces of chalk are a bit more expensive and we cannot
> afford it. I also have to pay for the tranparecies I use in
> my classes.
>
> I am sure that the price for an academic license is
> justified, but I do not think that they have sold many
> licenses in Bavaria.
Janos, just a guess. If you develop a Lisp application for
use in schools, Xanalys might be interested in supporting you.
Just a guess, since I can't speak for Xanalys.
This also depends whether LispWorks is a useful
tool for your application. *IFFFFFF* you were interested why not
contact Xanalys in Germany? They have a very helpful sales
person here - Rolf Mach ( rmach @ xanalys.com ).
JB
I reread the ECL manual. I had not overseen it, I did not
understand it. From the explanations there my way to
something like
--- c-code ---
void start_interpreter(char *str)
{
lisp_eval_buffer(str);
// catch errors from the interpreter
}
where lisp_eval_buffer will call C++-functions (this seems
to be well documented: the tak example),
is very, very long.
By reading the manual, I had the impression that though ECL
was designed to be embeddable (when it was called EcoLisp)
this idea was given up and it is no more embeddable or at
least the author does not care.