Re: GTM on OSX WAS: [Hardhats-members] more M read questions

Mon, 22 Aug 2005 22:24:48 -0700

I certainly intend to stay with OS X as long as it's practical to do so, and I know that there is a contingent of clinicians out there that would very much prefer to not give up their Macs.
I'd like to request a separately mailing list for us Mac fanatics so that we don't bore the snot out of the rest of you. 


I had started to looking at porting the RPC client code to OS X, but  
now I've been enchanted by the Siren Song of the Widget.  :-)




On Aug 22, 2005, at 6:58 PM, David Sommers wrote:


I believe the issue was related to compiler specific  
"optimizations" in
the C implementation of the M compiler.  Bhaskar's been quiet  
lately but

we've discussed this on the list before.  I was interested because I
simply love my MAC.

Even though I'm about to paste in part of the discussion to port, I

think we should just wait.  Apple will switch to x86 next year and  
they

will more than likely follow in the footsteps of Sun - by providing a

run-time library that can execute linux compiled code natively.  On  
top
of that, FreeBSD so closely matches that Apple documents the  
differences

easily enough to scope the port:


http://developer.apple.com/documentation/Darwin/Conceptual/ 
KernelProgram

ming/BSD/chapter_11_section_3.html


Here's a piece of our previous discussion...

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

On Wed, 2005-04-13 at 01:46 -0500, chuck5566 wrote:


Agree wholeheartedly, Chris.  I would suggest:

         1st - Determining that level of interest, and where it's at.
                  Are people really interested in a GT.M for OS X,
                  or would clients on OS X that could converse
                  with GT.M and the RPC broker (on a Linux box
                  elsewhere) be enough?  Or both?
                  Might be time for a "Hardhats-OSX" list.




[KSB] Since there is a GT.M (non open source; non free) for IBM  
eServer

pSeries (nee RS/6000) AIX, a port to Mac OS X from this would be
straightforward, but would need to be performed by Fidelity.


A port to Mac OS X from GT.M on x86 GNU/Linux (open source & free)  
would

require retargeting the M compiler (the database would just go over,
since it vanilla UNIX for the most part).  So, creating a client would
be almost as much work as porting GT.M.



          2nd - If the interest for GT.M on OS X is sufficient, I'd


first


                    straighten out the legalities before starting any
                    work or even looking for funding.

Chuck



GT.M on x86 GNU/Linux is released under the GNU General Public License
(GPL).  If it is used to port GT.M to Mac OS X by anyone other than
Fidelity, then the resulting work would be covered by the GPL, and is
best released under the GPL.

-- Bhaskar

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


David Sommers, Architect  |  Dialog Medical

-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of  
Greg

Woodhouse
Sent: Monday, August 22, 2005 7:15 PM
To: hardhats-members@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: RE: [Hardhats-members] more M read questions

No, the issue is that it's necessary to compile MUMPS (not C). In
principle, there's no reason why it can't be done.

--- Ruben Safir <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:



 Unlike GT.M, it does not generate machine language in
compiling MUMPS source routines so I would expect no special


surprizes due to the shift


from X86 on FreeBSD to PPC on OS/X.




Why can't the complier generate the correct machine code for the RISK
?
Is binary outputs embedded into the source code of GM.T?

Ruben




-------------------------------------------------------
SF.Net email is Sponsored by the Better Software Conference & EXPO
September 19-22, 2005 * San Francisco, CA * Development Lifecycle
Practices
Agile & Plan-Driven Development * Managing Projects & Teams * Testing
& QA
Security * Process Improvement & Measurement *
http://www.sqe.com/bsce5sf
_______________________________________________
Hardhats-members mailing list
Hardhats-members@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/hardhats-members






===
Gregory Woodhouse  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

"Design quality doesn't ensure success, but design failure can ensure
failure."

--Kent Beck








-------------------------------------------------------
SF.Net email is Sponsored by the Better Software Conference & EXPO
September 19-22, 2005 * San Francisco, CA * Development Lifecycle
Practices

Agile & Plan-Driven Development * Managing Projects & Teams *  
Testing &

QA
Security * Process Improvement & Measurement *
http://www.sqe.com/bsce5sf
_______________________________________________
Hardhats-members mailing list
Hardhats-members@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/hardhats-members


-------------------------------------------------------
SF.Net email is Sponsored by the Better Software Conference & EXPO

September 19-22, 2005 * San Francisco, CA * Development Lifecycle  
Practices
Agile & Plan-Driven Development * Managing Projects & Teams *  
Testing & QA
Security * Process Improvement & Measurement * http://www.sqe.com/ 
bsce5sf

_______________________________________________
Hardhats-members mailing list
Hardhats-members@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/hardhats-members




-------------------------------------------------------
SF.Net email is Sponsored by the Better Software Conference & EXPO
September 19-22, 2005 * San Francisco, CA * Development Lifecycle Practices
Agile & Plan-Driven Development * Managing Projects & Teams * Testing & QA
Security * Process Improvement & Measurement * http://www.sqe.com/bsce5sf
_______________________________________________
Hardhats-members mailing list
Hardhats-members@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/hardhats-members






















					Reply via email to