Re: Programming?

[awilliam@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]

> > Since this question has produced such an interesting
> > thread, when will there be a KLUG meeting on it?
> > :)
> I WOULD be interested in a sequence of sessions, each dedicated to a
> different language with emphasis on its implementation(s) in LINUX.

> Perl has been covered.
> C is commonly known; 

And is a VAST topic.
> BASIC is out of it; 

I'm not convinced of this.  I've seen X-and some other VB like basics 
for Linux, and while I never really tried them,  they might be perfect 
for low-end applications.  In this category I might also include 
Pascal (and certainly Delphi), as I think the demise of Pascal is 
greatly exaggerated.

> Visual Basic I don't know but

VB is an M$ and Win32 only deal, and I suspect always will be.  It 
relies on things like ActiveX controls, and such, which are so tightly 
bound to MFC and Win32 that you really can't have one without the 
other.

> appears of interest; FORTRAN is alive in some engineering circles; 

I don't even think I've ever seen one  line of FORTRAN code.

> LISP
> lingers, according to President Bob; 

I'd be interested in a session on LISP, if more out of curiosity than 
anything else.

> LOGO is fun & might be a way to get
> your spouse/kids involved in your favorite sport; 

ucblogo (Berkley Logo) for UNIX is still around on some aging FTP 
servers, but was last updated in 1993.  It never really compared to 
the CBM or Apple versions.  You know your in trouble when the README 
file has the following lines:

	This version of Logo is designed for a machine with adequate memory.  
It is
	not likely to be usable as the basis for a 64K microcomputer 
implementation.
	The files ztc* and mac* are for toy-computer versions of Logo.  But 
if you
	are trying to compile for those machines you probably also need some 
extra
	help beyond what's in here.  You can get complete PC and Mac versions 
by
	anonymous FTP from anarres.cs.berkeley.edu.

It also won't compile:

gcc -O -g -I /usr/include/X11 -L/usr/sww/X11R4/lib   -c libloc.c -o 
libloc.o
gcc -O -g -I /usr/include/X11 -L/usr/sww/X11R4/lib   -c parse.c -o 
parse.o
parse.c:30: initializer element is not constant
parse.c:31: initializer element is not constant
parse.c:32: initializer element is not constant
make: *** [parse.o] Error 1

And I'm really not that motivated to figure out why.

> APL is intriguing and
> might be presented as a puzzle session:  what does this rather long 
line
> do/mean?  Only non-APL's allowed to answer.  That session might have 
only
> one question for the whole evening.

Didn't we do an APL session once?

> Has Java been tackled by KLUG?

I don't think so, but it's been talked about.

> ML and J might be covered in the LISP evening.  Surely ADA should not 
be
> in the series;  it would take at least a year.
> I suggest we NOT talk about real dinosaur languages such as ALGOL,
> COBOL,...

I wouldn't call COBOL a dinosaur,  it will probably still be around 
when I'm in about the same shape as the dinosaurs/

> Surely this proposal will be rejected as peripheral to LINUX but if 
LINUX
> is to be a development tool, some programming is necessary and C/C++ 
might
> not be the best way to go for a particular project.

I think C is very often NOT the best approach to a problem,  but it 
certainly is the safest.