[clean-list] Wish list, part 3

[Rinus Plasmeijer]

Hi Marco,


----- Original Message -----
From: "Marco Kesseler" <m.wittebrood@mailbox.kun.nl>
To: <romildo@uber.com.br>
Cc: <clean-list@cs.kun.nl>
Sent: Sunday, April 07, 2002 10:42 PM
Subject: Re: [clean-list] Wish list, part 3


> >I wish the Linux platform was better supported, with
> >releases of the Clean compiler immediatelly following
> >the Windows ones.


> Considering the number of people that have brought this up in some
> form or another in the past, I think this definitely needs to be on
> the wish list (see the list below).
>
> I am not entirely sure however whether the Clean compiler (as opposed
> to IO libs and IDE) is indeed that much behind for Linux. As far as I
> know, maintaining the compiler alone for different platforms is not
> such a big issue. It's the libraries where the trouble begins.

You are right. We will soon release a 2.0 version for Linux and Mac.
In general it does not take much work to make a new release of a compiler
for either Linux or Mac.
Most of the work is in the libraries, more precisely in the IO libraries.

We will release the 2.0 compiler with the old 0.8 IO library which is
actually very out of date.
It would be nice if we would have Linux and Mac versions of the Object IO
libraries.
The Object IO library is spilt into a platform dependent and platform
independent part.
So, it is clear what has to be done for a port.

But, nevertheless it is alot of work, even if you know the GUI API on the
platform.
We do not have resources for doing this.
It would be great if someone would make the port for Linux.
All source code is on the net and we will be glad to help you if you have
any questions.

Gooed news for the Mac fans: Diederik van Arkel has made a port of the
Object IO lib for the Mac.
It is still a big buggy, but a lot of things work.
He will make it available on his home page soon
(http://www.cs.kun.nl/~diederik/).

>
> This suggests that it is a good idea to divide the wish list in 4
> categories:
>
> - language issues. In my humble opinion, this is where the priorities
> should be for the Clean research team, which includes ensuring that
> up-to-date versions are available for ALL major platforms.
>
> - the IO libraries (and the runtime in general). Maintaining these
> for different platforms is a lot of work, and not research per se. I
> understand if the Clean research team does not put an equal amount of
> work in all versions. Delays in IO library development however,
> should not hold back new releases of the compiler, and I do think
> that they should at least put SOME effort in all variants (Linux
> too). It would be best if additional parties get involved.
>
> - IDE. It is nice that it exists (perhaps even essential for some),
> but as with the IO libs, it should not hold back new releases of the
> compiler. I would rather have this kind of thing maintained and
> developed by some of its users.
>
> - other libraries: written by us, the users. It is probably useful to
> maintain a wish-list for this too.
>

This is helps a lot. Well done Marco.

> -----------------------------------------------------------
>
> assuming we are going to do this, here is the current list:
>
> language:
> - up-to-date compilers for all major platforms (Windows, Linux and Mac).
> - better interfacing with imperative (object-oriented) languages (at
> least allowing Clean to be called from these languages).
> - support for exceptions.
> - compile-time evaluation of constant expressions.
> - conditional compilation.
> - better keywords and symbols
>
> IO libs/runtime:
> - IO lib support for Linux
> - no more 'press any key to continue' in console programs.
>
> IDE:
> - Linux version
>
> other libs:
> ..?

See my previous mail for a first reaction on this wish list.

Greetings,

Rinus