Re: Source Code [was: Re: "Query Replace Regexp" command in LW 4.2]

Unable to parse email body. Email id is 299

Re: Source Code [was: Re: "Query Replace Regexp" command in LW 4.2]

davef@xanalys.com writes:

> If you could confirm this, that would be helpful. Does MCL come with
> source code for any other modules?

See Carl Shapiro's reply.

> We have had several requests for LispWorks source code, for various
> modules, over the years. Would people want the sources for:
> 
> - The core LispWorks engine?
> - CAPI and the IDE?
> - The Editor?
> - Enterprise modules?

I'd be interested in the Editor and maybe the CAPI/IDE stuff.

> Would they expect to pay for the inclusion of source code?

If Xanalys isn't willing to include the source code with their regular
release, I think the best solution would be to offer the source code
as an add-on for a reasonable fee.

But IMHO the best way would be to simply give the Editor source code
away to anyone who's interested in LispWorks. It'd be a nice showcase
about what you can achieve with LispWorks and it wouldn't be of much
help for people who use other CL implementations. If, in addition to
that, Xanalys would set up facilities for user-contributed code (see
<ftp://ftp.digitool.com/pub/mcl/contrib/> for an example), chances are
good that we'll soon see a lot of improvements and/or additions to the
Editor code, some of which might find their way back into the next LW
release.

Just my $.02,
Edi.

Re: Source Code [was: Re: "Query Replace Regexp" command in LW 4.2]

From: <davef@xanalys.com>

>    I've also asked this some time ago. I think it would be a good thing
>    to add for the next release (or earlier ...:)
> 
>    AFAIK, MCL comes with the sources for Fred (their editor).
> 
> If you could confirm this, that would be helpful. Does MCL come with
> source code for any other modules?

From what I heard, MCL comes with the sources for almost everything.

Franz offers the sources for ACL for free (= at no additional cost), after 
purchasing the product and signing a non disclosure agreement.

> We have had several requests for LispWorks source code, for various
> modules, over the years. Would people want the sources for:
> 
> - The core LispWorks engine?
> - CAPI and the IDE?
> - The Editor?
> - Enterprise modules?

All of them.  The editor source, in particular, would allow a lot of
potentially useful experimentation.  The other sources would promote
a better understanding of the system.

> Would they expect to pay for the inclusion of source code?

I think the regular purchase price should include sources.


Cheers
Pierpaolo

Re: Source Code [was: Re: "Query Replace Regexp" command in LW 4.2]

| We have had several requests for LispWorks source code, for various
| modules, over the years. Would people want the sources for:
|
| - The core LispWorks engine?
| - CAPI and the IDE?
| - The Editor?
| - Enterprise modules?
|

Though I would like to poke around in CAPI when I encounter a problem or some undocumented
feature, when I really think about it I would like better documentation for CAPI (more
precise statements of the function (protocol) like the CLHS has).  So I have to say, not
for me.

But I would like there to be docstrings attached to every external symbol supplied by
Xanalys so that I can use the function/class browsers to see meaningful descriptions of
classes, methods, slots, initargs, functions, constants and vars.  The LispWorks tools
would be a lot more useful with complete embedded docstring documentation.  Hopefully the
docstrings would match what is really there.  When I deliver a product I know I can strip
out those comments with a delivery keyword.

Wade

| Would they expect to pay for the inclusion of source code?
|
|
| Dave Fox                                Email: davef@xanalys.com
| Xanalys Inc, Barrington Hall,             Tel:   +44 1223 873879
| Barrington, Cambridge CB2 5RG, England.   Fax:   +44 1223 873873
| These opinions are not necessarily those of Xanalys.
|
|

Re: Source Code [was: Re: "Query Replace Regexp" command in LW 4.2]

davef@xanalys.com writes:
> 
> We have had several requests for LispWorks source code, for various
> modules, over the years. Would people want the sources for:
> 
> - The core LispWorks engine?
> - CAPI and the IDE?
> - The Editor?
> - Enterprise modules?
> 
> Would they expect to pay for the inclusion of source code?
> 
I guess the one 'enterprise module' I would be interested in seeing the code
to would be CLIM - but really that would be purely for my own interest. That
goes for most of the other code. 

Practically, the one module I would love to see would be the editor - I have
done quite a bit of customisation to Emacs over the years and this has been
aided greatly by access to its source code (or the elisp part of it
anyway). I am sure that having access to the code to the LW editor would be
very useful. This could lead to many people writing (and contributing)
'add-ins' to the LispWorks editor.

Barry.

-- 
If in the last few years you haven't discarded a major opinion or  
acquired a new one, check your pulse.  You may be dead.

-- Gelett Burgess (1866-1951)

Re: Source Code [was: Re: "Query Replace Regexp" command in LW 4.2]

Am Die, 2002-04-23 um 19.16 schrieb davef@xanalys.com:
> 
>    > Incidentally, I realize this is probably a question for the Xanalys
>    > sales folks, but does the professional version of Lispworks include
>    > the sources to the editor package?  If not, is that available
>    > separately?
> 
>    I've also asked this some time ago. I think it would be a good thing
>    to add for the next release (or earlier ...:)
> 
>    AFAIK, MCL comes with the sources for Fred (their editor).
> 
> If you could confirm this, that would be helpful. Does MCL come with
> source code for any other modules?
> 
> We have had several requests for LispWorks source code, for various
> modules, over the years. Would people want the sources for:
> 
> - The core LispWorks engine?
> - CAPI and the IDE?
> - The Editor?
> - Enterprise modules?

I think the Editor sources would be a good idea because it would make it
easier for other people to enhance it (like it happened with Fred in
MCL).

Including the CAPI sources would help understanding it better.
Furthermore I see opportunities for projects like writing a GTK backend
additional to the Motif one.

The IDE sources would be nice because it would enable (similar to the
editor) users to extend it.

Another interesting thing to see would be the COMM module. Think of
enhancements like well integrated SSL support.

In the core engine I would find the bignum stuff the most interesting
because it would enable writing highly efficient implementations of
particular facilities like modular exponentiation (important for
cryptography).

The ANSI-CL library would be interesting because it would allow writing
extenstions like hash-tables with arbitrary hash-functions or if one
wants it the "simple-streams" stuff of Xanalys (which is not easy to do
without source access).

A very good thing would be the sources to CLIM - it seems that there are
no plans to develop it further (e.g. Pixmap support or other backends).
With the source available such things could be done by the users of
CLIM. (Digitool provides the sources of CLIM)
 
> Would they expect to pay for the inclusion of source code?

I would prefer a non-disclosure agreement and a license that states that
enhancements to the sources have to go back to the original sources (If
wanted).
I think at least the Enterprise Edition should come with sources.

Source access to certain parts would make the ACL-COMPAT library (the
library that implements an AllegroCL style portability API for other CL
systems) easier to write.

ciao,
Jochen

Re: Source Code [was: Re: "Query Replace Regexp" command in LW 4.2]

Carl Shapiro <cshapiro@panix.com> writes:

> 
> I certainly cannot speak for anybody else, but I would be willing to
> pay some sort of a nominal fee, or sign some sort of a non-disclosure
> agreement in order to gain access to the LispWorks source code.
I think this is quite a burden for Xanalys. Keep track of everyone and
having the signed such agreements...

Regards
Friedrich

Re: Source Code [was: Re: "Query Replace Regexp" command in LW 4.2]

davef@xanalys.com writes:

>    > Incidentally, I realize this is probably a question for the Xanalys
>    > sales folks, but does the professional version of Lispworks include
>    > the sources to the editor package?  If not, is that available
>    > separately?
> 
>    I've also asked this some time ago. I think it would be a good thing
>    to add for the next release (or earlier ...:)
> 
>    AFAIK, MCL comes with the sources for Fred (their editor).
> 
> If you could confirm this, that would be helpful. Does MCL come with
> source code for any other modules?
> 
> We have had several requests for LispWorks source code, for various
> modules, over the years. Would people want the sources for:
> 
> - The core LispWorks engine?
> - CAPI and the IDE?
> - The Editor?
> - Enterprise modules?

This is  a very interesting question. And the answers tell that I'm
not alone with that opinion. 

So here it goes. I would appriciate getting all source if I want. 
Because I would like to have an Emacs written in Common Lisp I would
prefer at the moment the sources in this order
- Editor
- CAPI, CLIM, IDE
- CommonSQL
- rest

> 
> Would they expect to pay for the inclusion of source code?
Well I would think the prices of the Enterprise Edition should cover
that. For the Professional Version I could imagine some extra
payments. Well you maybe know better than me that Symbolics Open
Genera costs as much as your Enterprise Edition and it included all
sources but CLIM (IIRC), that's quite a bunch of sources.

But let's see it from your side. I would be interested what you
(Xanalys) thought about it. What would you expect?

I know that in OS circles one of the regular answers to how to do this
or that is. "Read the sources, Luke". I think this is not a good
answer. Not everyone is intersted in having to find out information by
trial and error and or looking into a mountain of sources. As others
have mentioned I would like a more worked out Documentation. Too many
things are not documented or underdocumented. The examples are not
well choosen often. (I suggest looking into the COM/Automation stuff,
the documentation is not very helpful here)


Just to make things clear. I like LispWorks and I would like it even
more if 
a) I can see how things have been done
b) Use the elements to build Common Lisp solutions.

It's nice that Xanalys plays a bit around with the idea opening
LispWorks.

Regards
Friedrich

Re: Source Code [was: Re: "Query Replace Regexp" command in LW 4.2]

Friedrich Dominicus <frido@q-software-solutions.com> writes:

> davef@xanalys.com writes:
> 
> > We have had several requests for LispWorks source code, for various
> > modules, over the years. Would people want the sources for:
> > 
> > - The core LispWorks engine?
> > - CAPI and the IDE?
> > - The Editor?
> > - Enterprise modules?
> 
> So here it goes. I would appriciate getting all source if I want. 

ditto here.

> Because I would like to have an Emacs written in Common Lisp I would
> prefer at the moment the sources in this order
> - Editor

Yes, would be a good start.

> I know that in OS circles one of the regular answers to how to do
> this or that is. "Read the sources, Luke". I think this is not a
> good answer. Not everyone is intersted in having to find out
> information by trial and error and or looking into a mountain of
> sources. As others have mentioned I would like a more worked out
> Documentation. Too many things are not documented or
> underdocumented.

Well, yes, the documentation is lacking.  However, GNU Emacs, for
instance, comes with excellent documentation, but... nowadays most of
the time when I have an Emacs question I don't bother reading it
because finding the answer in the sources is so much quicker and more
accurate.  The Linux kernel comes with pretty much no documentation
whatsoever, but working with it is so much more pleasant and easy
than, say, digging through MSDN and the DDK *shudder*...  What do you
do when MSDN has no answer?  You desperately step through the machine
code of the Windows kernel trying to find the answer there.  No,
source is the best documentation.

Regards,
-- 
Nils Goesche
"Don't ask for whom the <CTRL-G> tolls."

PGP key ID 0x42B32FC9

Re: Source Code [was: Re: "Query Replace Regexp" command in LW 4.2]

On Tue, Apr 23, 2002 at 06:16:49PM +0100, davef@xanalys.com wrote:

> We have had several requests for LispWorks source code, for various
> modules, over the years. Would people want the sources for:
>
> - The core LispWorks engine?
> - CAPI and the IDE?
> - The Editor?
> - Enterprise modules?

No for the internal stuff like the compiler, GC, etc....
Yes for all the stuff dealing with the outside world like streams, sockets,
COM, CAPI, etc.

Maybe not all the sources of a module but at least enough sources to be able
to customize them and to add functionalities. I think all the messages I've
seen on this thread are more or less on this line (being able to customize
and improve these modules).

For instance rather than annoying Xanalys with requests to be able to do
write-sequence of strings _and_ arrays of (unsigned-byte 8) to a character
stream, I would have added it myself and even sent the modifications to you.
(BTW it's not a request, you already have done it :)).

I would also have used CAPI rather than writing my own system from the WIN32
API if I had the CAPI sources.

Sources code can also be a substitute for documentation on some parts.

> Would they expect to pay for the inclusion of source code?

As others have suggested, the inclusion of the sources in the Enterprise
edition would be a good idea. I would upgrade my LWW pro to enterprise just
to have them. I have no pb signing a NDA either.

Maybe you should look at what the other Lisp vendors do ?

Marc

Re: Source Code [was: Re: "Query Replace Regexp" command in LW 4.2]

> On Tue, Apr 23, 2002 at 06:16:49PM +0100, davef@xanalys.com wrote:
>> We have had several requests for LispWorks source code, for various
>> modules, over the years. Would people want the sources for:
>> 
>> - The core LispWorks engine?
>> - CAPI and the IDE?
>> - The Editor?
>> - Enterprise modules?

I myself have made such requests in the past.  In our case, we don't
really want to see the sources for LW itself, but would have loved
to see the sources to the layered products, especially CORBA and SQL.

The single most important reason for this, in my mind, is that,
unfortunately, these packages are not documented at a sufficient level
of detail.  For SQL, for example, our company was responsible for two
significant (IMO) improvements over the behaviour of SQL.

(Neither of which yet public, AFAIK, so I won't mention them,
 but DaveF knows what they are)

Having the sources would of course bring a certain level of tension;
developers would (naturally) develop solutions based on the actual
implementation of the modules rather than the published API, which
would put pressure on Xanalys to not change these internals.  I'm
guessing this is partly why they do not currently release the sources.

As a customer, I'd be willing to "take my life in my own hands", as it
were.  On one occasion I did just that, and explained to Xanalys how I
was using their undocumented internals (sometimes you don't need
sources, CLOS and the inspector will do :-) and they replied by giving
me a standardized, published (one day, I'm sure) fix to my problem.

So, all in all, I think publishing sources would leverage the work of
your customers, and improve LW tremendously.

--
			Alain Picard
			Memetrics