Five 1.0 32-bit Windows Clipper Compiler Demo! 
Author Message
 Five 1.0 32-bit Windows Clipper Compiler Demo!

I just wanted to let everyone know that there is
a Five 1.0 demo at: http://www.*-*-*.com/

The file's name is FIVE10.ZIP and there are some
PRGs and EXEs in it. Interesting information in
the README.TXT file.

The exe files are fast and small!

Armando



Sat, 18 Dec 1999 03:00:00 GMT  
 Five 1.0 32-bit Windows Clipper Compiler Demo!

Quote:

> I just wanted to let everyone know that there is
> a Five 1.0 demo at: http://www.ozs.com

> The file's name is FIVE10.ZIP and there are some
> PRGs and EXEs in it. Interesting information in
> the README.TXT file.

> The exe files are fast and small!

> Armando

I looked at it and saw nothing _really_ impressing. They are fast and
small because they do almost nothing !

?????????????????????????? What should this demo show ?!???

regds
thomas



Sat, 18 Dec 1999 03:00:00 GMT  
 Five 1.0 32-bit Windows Clipper Compiler Demo!


Quote:
> The file's name is FIVE10.ZIP and there are some PRGs and EXEs in
> it. Interesting information in the README.TXT file.

> The exe files are fast and small!

Small, fast and incredibly unimpressive. I don't wish to put down the
work being done but those demo files, IMHO, say nothing about the
product to come. I would have been a lot more impressed if there had
been a demo compiler that I could have downloaded and tested. As it
is, all we see are some PRG files and some EXE files which, if I were
more paranoid than I am, I could be inclined to believe that they had
been created with anything. [1]

I don't know about anyone else, but I think I'll start getting e{*filter*}d
and using exclamation marks when I've compiled my own PRGs and seen
the size and the speed of the resulting EXE.

[1] For the humor impaired, that was a 1/2 joke.

--
Take a look in Hagbard's World: |     w3ng - The WWW Norton Guide reader.
http://www.*-*-*.com/ |  ng2html - The NG to HTML converter.
Also available in the UK:       |       eg - Norton Guide reader for Linux.
http://www.*-*-*.com/ |   dgscan - DGROUP scanner for Clipper.



Sun, 19 Dec 1999 03:00:00 GMT  
 Five 1.0 32-bit Windows Clipper Compiler Demo!

Quote:


>> The file's name is FIVE10.ZIP and there are some PRGs and EXEs in
>> it. Interesting information in the README.TXT file.

>> The exe files are fast and small!

>I don't know about anyone else, but I think I'll start getting e{*filter*}d
>and using exclamation marks when I've compiled my own PRGs and seen
>the size and the speed of the resulting EXE.

Yeah i've seen the demo's as well, my own thoughts were what a waste of a
phone call downloading them!

However, I have just one more comment to make... The "adverts" (for want of
a better word) being banded around this NG, claim it to be a 32-bit Clipper
Compiler .... My question is this, given that the demo's were all WINDOWS
executables, I take it that there will be no ability within this product to
create 32-Bit or even 16-bit DOS applications ? ....  So the claims of this
product to be a 100% Clipper compiler, are not strictly true??

Whilst I can see the NEED to make any NEW clipper compiler able to create
full-blown Win apps, I would have thought that including the ability to
create DOS apps was also fairly essential in order to get developers to move
over!

Or am I missing something very obvious??

Bri.
--

              http://www.*-*-*.com/

My ideas are my own, my thoughts are my own! Nobody wants em!



Sun, 19 Dec 1999 03:00:00 GMT  
 Five 1.0 32-bit Windows Clipper Compiler Demo!

Quote:

> I would have been a lot more impressed if there had
>been a demo compiler that I could have downloaded and tested.

I hope they are listening and make a demo compiler a
available.

Armando



Sun, 19 Dec 1999 03:00:00 GMT  
 Five 1.0 32-bit Windows Clipper Compiler Demo!


Quote:
> Small, fast and incredibly unimpressive. I don't wish to put down the

So I don't have to botehr to look at them as yet ?
Thanks Dave & Brian.

Anne.

* If you don't pay the exorcist are you reposessed? *



Sun, 19 Dec 1999 03:00:00 GMT  
 Five 1.0 32-bit Windows Clipper Compiler Demo!

Quote:

> However, I have just one more comment to make... The "adverts" (for
> want of a better word) being banded around this NG, claim it to be a
> 32-bit Clipper Compiler .... My question is this, given that the
> demo's were all WINDOWS executables, I take it that there will be no
> ability within this product to create 32-Bit or even 16-bit DOS
> applications ? ....  So the claims of this product to be a 100%
> Clipper compiler, are not strictly true??

If it creates DOS, Windows, OS/2, Unix, Hurd, CP/M or VMS executables,
that isn't the issue. If it can compile Clipper syntax then that's as
close as you get to being 100% Clipper. However, I would have liked to
have seen mention of support for Win32 console mode, much like xBase++
supports VIO mode applications under OS/2.

I don't know about the Win32 version of xBase++, but I know that the
Win32 version of FlagShip won't be supporting console mode which I
think is a bit of a loose situation. The ability to take existing DOS
Clipper apps and re-compile them as "true" 32bit apps, still in text
mode, but with access to the Win32 API would be cool and potentially
very handy.

One other question that was raised while I was chatting to DrDebug
about this yesterday was multi-threading. No mention was made of any
support for threads and Ian made an observation about the core
architecture they outline on the web pages that, in theory, would mean
that multi-threading either wouldn't be there or would not work too
well. Personally I can't comment on that, so I'll how to bow to Ian's
greater experience and we'll just have to watch as this product
develops and see what comes of it.

Quote:
> Whilst I can see the NEED to make any NEW clipper compiler able to
> create full-blown Win apps, I would have thought that including the
> ability to create DOS apps was also fairly essential in order to get
> developers to move over!

I'm not so sure that creating 32bit DOS apps is that important at this
late stage, creating Win32 console apps could turn out to be handy.

--
Take a look in Hagbard's World: |     w3ng - The WWW Norton Guide reader.
http://www.acemake.com/hagbard/ |  ng2html - The NG to HTML converter.
Also available in the UK:       |       eg - Norton Guide reader for Linux.
http://www.hagbard.demon.co.uk/ |   dgscan - DGROUP scanner for Clipper.



Mon, 20 Dec 1999 03:00:00 GMT  
 Five 1.0 32-bit Windows Clipper Compiler Demo!

Quote:

> > Small, fast and incredibly unimpressive. I don't wish to put down the

> So I don't have to botehr to look at them as yet ?  Thanks Dave &
> Brian.

They are worth looking at from a curiosity point of view. But, be
warned, all they really do is pop up some alert boxes and IIRC one of
them pops up a Window. Nothing to get e{*filter*}d about.

--
Take a look in Hagbard's World: |     w3ng - The WWW Norton Guide reader.
http://www.*-*-*.com/ |  ng2html - The NG to HTML converter.
Also available in the UK:       |       eg - Norton Guide reader for Linux.
http://www.*-*-*.com/ |   dgscan - DGROUP scanner for Clipper.



Mon, 20 Dec 1999 03:00:00 GMT  
 Five 1.0 32-bit Windows Clipper Compiler Demo!

Quote:


>If it creates DOS, Windows, OS/2, Unix, Hurd, CP/M or VMS executables,
>that isn't the issue. If it can compile Clipper syntax then that's as
>close as you get to being 100% Clipper.

Hmm, so if it's 100% clipper compatible then where would the following
output go ?

#include <simpleio.ch>

function main()
   ? "Hello World"

return NIL


different meaning inside a windows GUI app than it does inside a DOS text
mode application.

Now unless it creates a Win32 CONSOLE app, then we have code that would not
work or not do the same as it did in its CA-Clipper counterpart, so is that
100% clipper compatibility??

I know I may be "attempting" to stretch a point out of proportion here, but
in my view the Syntax of a language is just as important as the functions
bound to that syntax, another words, if all it claims to be is a 32-bit
compiler that can compile 100% CA-Clipper apps, but decides to alter the
meaning of the functions being called, is this 100% Clipper???

Quote:
>However, I would have liked to
>have seen mention of support for Win32 console mode, much like xBase++
>supports VIO mode applications under OS/2.

ditto.

Quote:

>I don't know about the Win32 version of xBase++, but I know that the
>Win32 version of FlagShip won't be supporting console mode which I
>think is a bit of a loose situation. The ability to take existing DOS
>Clipper apps and re-compile them as "true" 32bit apps, still in text
>mode, but with access to the Win32 API would be cool and potentially
>very handy.

Well that is a shame, whilst we have to acknowledge the shift from text
based apps to GUI based apps, there are still valid markets for creating
text based apps, and continuing to maintain existing apps, whilst new GUI
versions are being developed.

Quote:

>One other question that was raised while I was chatting to DrDebug
>about this yesterday was multi-threading. No mention was made of any
>support for threads and Ian made an observation about the core
>architecture they outline on the web pages that, in theory, would mean
>that multi-threading either wouldn't be there or would not work too
>well. Personally I can't comment on that, so I'll how to bow to Ian's
>greater experience and we'll just have to watch as this product
>develops and see what comes of it.

Whilst Multi-threading is important and very handy, surely that should be
viewed as an EXTENSION.  What Five claims to be is a 100% 32-bit clipper
compiler.

Quote:
>I'm not so sure that creating 32bit DOS apps is that important at this
>late stage, creating Win32 console apps could turn out to be handy.

Perhaps not, but I wonder just how much work would have been involved in
allowing the creation of 32bit DOS apps .... Would that sort of
functionality not broaden the martket for such a compiler, would it not
assist the migration of systems from a 16bit DOS world, upwards??

Bri.
--

              http://www.crox.demon.co.uk/cellar

My ideas are my own, my thoughts are my own! Nobody wants em!



Mon, 20 Dec 1999 03:00:00 GMT  
 Five 1.0 32-bit Windows Clipper Compiler Demo!

Quote:

> >If it creates DOS, Windows, OS/2, Unix, Hurd, CP/M or VMS
> >executables, that isn't the issue. If it can compile Clipper syntax
> >then that's as close as you get to being 100% Clipper.

> Hmm, so if it's 100% clipper compatible then where would the following
> output go ?

> #include <simpleio.ch>

Nowhere, this line should break the compiler.

Quote:
> function main()
>    ? "Hello World"

> return NIL

Thinking of a theoretical Windows oriented Clipper compiler (because
the one we are talking about doesn't "exist" at the moment), it could
do what a lot of C/WinSDK systems have done in the past and work
inside a simple window. In fact, thinking about it a little more, it
should do exactly what the above code says (when the bugs are fixed)
and write "Hello World" to stdout for the application and place "HELLO
WORLD!" at position "10,10", whatever the meaning of that position is
in the current environment.

Quote:

> different meaning inside a windows GUI app than it does inside a DOS
> text mode application.

Correct, but that has nothing to do with the compiler as such and
everything to do with what you do with the compiler. The important
thing is that the compiler is 100% language compatible. A C compiler
that compiles for DOS, Windows or Unix won't guarantee that the code
you've written will run in the new environment, or that it will even
make sense in the new environment. It's important to make the
distinction between 100% language compatible and providing a
multi-platform framework. They are two different things.

Quote:
> Now unless it creates a Win32 CONSOLE app, then we have code that
> would not work or not do the same as it did in its CA-Clipper
> counterpart, so is that 100% clipper compatibility??

See above. Besides, Clip4Win (and possibly FiveWin, can't remember)

Quote:
> I know I may be "attempting" to stretch a point out of proportion
> here, but in my view the Syntax of a language is just as important
> as the functions bound to that syntax,

I'd sort of agree. However, there is no "standard" for the language
and no standard what functions are part of "Clipper", so you have to
think a little about what makes sense. Don't forget, it would be more
than acceptable to have a function "do nothing" given the environment
in which it's being used. Anyone who has ever used DJGPP will
understand that concept.

Quote:
> another words, if all it claims to be is a 32-bit compiler that can
> compile 100% CA-Clipper apps, but decides to alter the meaning of
> the functions being called, is this 100% Clipper???

Depends on what you mean by "the meaning of the functions". If a
version of this mythical compiler "transformed" a function call into
something that made sense for the current platform I'd call that
correct, change of meaning or not. FlagShip, for example, appears to
do a very good job of this.

Quote:
> Whilst Multi-threading is important and very handy, surely that
> should be viewed as an EXTENSION.  What Five claims to be is a 100%
> 32-bit clipper compiler.

However, you have to consider that the target platform is Win95/NT. If
that is the intended target it makes sense that you should have access
to the abilities of that target environment.

Quote:
> >I'm not so sure that creating 32bit DOS apps is that important at
> >this late stage, creating Win32 console apps could turn out to be
> >handy.

> Perhaps not, but I wonder just how much work would have been
> involved in allowing the creation of 32bit DOS apps ....

I would hazard a guess that there would be more work than payback. One
would assume that the market for 32bit DOS compilers it pretty
thin. The market for Win32/x-platform xBase/Clipper compilers is
probably a lot bigger.

Quote:
> Would that sort of functionality not broaden the martket for such a
> compiler, would it not assist the migration of systems from a 16bit
> DOS world, upwards??

Up to what? Take a DOS application and make it a DOS application when
most people are now screaming out for Windows applications (for
reasons both good and bad)? Naa, sorry, as much as I like DOS I'd be
suprised if anyone thought it a good idea to introduce a DOS based
non-CA Clipper compiler. If someone does do it, more power to them,
but I can't imagine that they'd shift than many units.

Personally, I'm looking forward to the first Clipper compatible
compiler that compiles down to Java PCode.... :-)

--
Take a look in Hagbard's World: |     w3ng - The WWW Norton Guide reader.
http://www.acemake.com/hagbard/ |  ng2html - The NG to HTML converter.
Also available in the UK:       |       eg - Norton Guide reader for Linux.
http://www.hagbard.demon.co.uk/ |   dgscan - DGROUP scanner for Clipper.



Mon, 20 Dec 1999 03:00:00 GMT  
 Five 1.0 32-bit Windows Clipper Compiler Demo!


Quote:
> > So I don't have to botehr to look at them as yet ?  Thanks Dave &
> > Brian.
> They are worth looking at from a curiosity point of view. But, be

I'm a bit internetually impaired at the moment, so it would mean I'd would have
to install the software extra for it. So I won't bother for now :)

Anne.



Mon, 20 Dec 1999 03:00:00 GMT  
 Five 1.0 32-bit Windows Clipper Compiler Demo!

Quote:


> > Small, fast and incredibly unimpressive. I don't wish to put down the

> So I don't have to botehr to look at them as yet ?
> Thanks Dave & Brian.

> Anne.

> * If you don't pay the exorcist are you reposessed? *

Anne, just for me, would you post the phonetic spelling of your
surname?  Dutch nouns just give me a fit, but would you know
how to pronounce netewashte?


Mon, 20 Dec 1999 03:00:00 GMT  
 Five 1.0 32-bit Windows Clipper Compiler Demo!

This was probably just a "fishing" expedition, to see if there would be a
market IF they developed such a product.  There probably really is no
product yet, and if the hit counter isn't high on their web site, there
never will be.  

Or perhaps I've just become too cynical in my old age!

Bob B.


Quote:
>on.net!demon!news2.euro.net!wirehub!not-for-mail

>Newsgroups: comp.lang.clipper
>Subject: Re: Five 1.0   32-bit Windows Clipper Compiler Demo!
>Date: Wed, 02 Jul 1997 22:29:58 +0000
>Organization: Wirehub! Internet



>NNTP-Posting-Host: ht01-18.dial.xs4all.nl
>X-Newsreader: Virtual Access by Ashmount Research Ltd, http://www.ashmount.com
>Lines: 14


>> Small, fast and incredibly unimpressive. I don't wish to put down the

>So I don't have to botehr to look at them as yet ?
>Thanks Dave & Brian.

>Anne.

>* If you don't pay the exorcist are you reposessed? *

--
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
     Check out the Buried Treasures sound clip link on my home page:
                    http://members.tripod.com/~HighRoad


Mon, 20 Dec 1999 03:00:00 GMT  
 Five 1.0 32-bit Windows Clipper Compiler Demo!

On Thu, 3 Jul 1997 15:43:53 GMT, Dave Pearson

Quote:

>However, you have to consider that the target platform is Win95/NT. If
>that is the intended target it makes sense that you should have access
>to the abilities of that target environment.

>> >I'm not so sure that creating 32bit DOS apps is that important at
>> >this late stage, creating Win32 console apps could turn out to be
>> >handy.

>> Perhaps not, but I wonder just how much work would have been
>> involved in allowing the creation of 32bit DOS apps ....

Oddly enough, NT (and I believe 95) allow 32 bit "console mode" apps
which run in what looks like a DOS window with a text mode screen and
keyboard interface, and read and write to stdin/stdout, etc, while
still allowing full access to the Win 32 API, and the entire real and
virtual flat address space of the machine.

It's used mostly for O/S utilities, and has been ignored by pretty
much all of the application developers.

Porting Clipper to 32 bit console mode would be trivial for CA to do,
and the apps should be blindingly fast and not run out of
resources.Unfortunately, I don't believe there's a very large market
for console apps anymore.

Terry

--------------------

Terry Carmen
Meadowbrook Software

NOTE TO SPAMMERS:
BAD THINGS will happen to any site that sends me email spam.



Tue, 21 Dec 1999 03:00:00 GMT  
 Five 1.0 32-bit Windows Clipper Compiler Demo!

Quote:

> Oddly enough, NT (and I believe 95) allow 32 bit "console mode" apps
> which run in what looks like a DOS window with a text mode screen and
> keyboard interface, and read and write to stdin/stdout, etc, while
> still allowing full access to the Win 32 API, and the entire real and
> virtual flat address space of the machine.

Not following the thread Terry? :-) From a couple of posts further up
this thread:

DP> If it creates DOS, Windows, OS/2, Unix, Hurd, CP/M or VMS
DP> executables, that isn't the issue. If it can compile Clipper
DP> syntax then that's as close as you get to being 100%
DP> Clipper. However, I would have liked to have seen mention of
DP> support for Win32 console mode, much like xBase++ supports VIO
DP> mode applications under OS/2.

Quote:
> Porting Clipper to 32 bit console mode would be trivial for CA to
> do, and the apps should be blindingly fast and not run out of
> resources.

The words "blindingly fast" lead me to assume that you've never run
any console mode software under Win95. It's a shame, but console mode
is badly broken under 95.

Quote:
> Unfortunately, I don't believe there's a very large market for
> console apps anymore.

Bingo. However, if a product were to support both console mode and GUI
mode (ie, a "true" 32bit compiler) it would be fully flexible and
would give people with aging DOS apps a nice upgrade route.

--
Take a look in Hagbard's World: |     w3ng - The WWW Norton Guide reader.
http://www.acemake.com/hagbard/ |  ng2html - The NG to HTML converter.
Also available in the UK:       |       eg - Norton Guide reader for Linux.
http://www.hagbard.demon.co.uk/ |   dgscan - DGROUP scanner for Clipper.



Tue, 21 Dec 1999 03:00:00 GMT  
 
 [ 37 post ]  Go to page: [1] [2] [3]

 Relevant Pages 

1. Five 1.0 first 32-bit Clipper Compiler

2. Five 1.0: The 32 bits Clipper-compatible compiler by FiveTech

3. 32 Bit ASM from 32 Bit Windows COBOL

4. 32 Bit ASM from 32 Bit Windows COBOL

5. FiveTech 32 Bit Clipper Compiler

6. 32 bit Clipper compatible compiler

7. Division 32-Bit/32-Bit with 16-Bit Register

8. Converting 16bit Clipper 5.2 Application to a 32 bit Windows Applicaton

9. Covert Clipper 5 application to 32 bit Windows

10. !CA-VO True 32-bit CA-Clipper for Windows

11. C compilers for 32-bit Windows, etc...

12. Stony Brook 32-bit Windows Modula-2 Compiler Update

 

 
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software