There are already (I assume) at least two very powerful scripting
languages on the OpenMoko.
The first is sh in whatever variant they decide to include. I've used
sh to write CGI scripts on a couple of deeply embedded web servers;
you'd be surprised how much can be done with just boa+busybox.
* Derek Pressnall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [070122 19:40]:
> Seeing as how there has been interest in including an interpreted
> language with the default software install (such as Python or Perl,
> etc.), and the fact that they are too big to fit in the built-in
> flash, I would like to offer up an alt
* Andreas Kostyrka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [070122 21:30]:
> * Derek Pressnall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [070122 19:40]:
> > Seeing as how there has been interest in including an interpreted
> > language with the default software install (such as Python or Perl,
> > etc.), and the fact that they are too big
On Monday 22 January 2007 13:28, Andreas Kostyrka wrote:
> * Derek Pressnall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [070122 19:40]:
> > Seeing as how there has been interest in including an interpreted
> > language with the default software install (such as Python or Perl,
> > etc.), and the fact that they are too bi
Dnia poniedziałek, 22 stycznia 2007 21:45, Corey napisał:
> I would recommend lua, it's extremely light-weight ( we're talking
> about 6 megs here )
6M???
http://openzaurus.linuxtogo.org/feed-browser/?name=lua&action=search
show that it will take much less then 1M
--
JID: hrw-jabber.org
OpenE
On Monday 22 January 2007 14:03, Marcin Juszkiewicz wrote:
> Dnia poniedziałek, 22 stycznia 2007 21:45, Corey napisał:
>
> > I would recommend lua, it's extremely light-weight ( we're talking
> > about 6 megs here )
>
> 6M???
>
> http://openzaurus.linuxtogo.org/feed-browser/?name=lua&action=sear
On 10:12:00 pm 2007-01-22 Corey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Monday 22 January 2007 14:03, Marcin Juszkiewicz wrote:
> > Dnia poniedziałek, 22 stycznia 2007 21:45, Corey napisał:
> >
> > > I would recommend lua, it's extremely light-weight ( we're talking
> > > about 6 megs here )
> >
> > 6M
* Corey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [070122 22:17]:
> On Monday 22 January 2007 14:03, Marcin Juszkiewicz wrote:
> > Dnia poniedzia?ek, 22 stycznia 2007 21:45, Corey napisa?:
> >
> > > I would recommend lua, it's extremely light-weight ( we're talking
> > > about 6 megs here )
> >
> > 6M???
> >
> > http
* "Andra?? 'ruskie' Levstik" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [070122 22:52]:
> On 10:12:00 pm 2007-01-22 Corey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Monday 22 January 2007 14:03, Marcin Juszkiewicz wrote:
> > > Dnia poniedzia??ek, 22 stycznia 2007 21:45, Corey napisa??:
> > >
> > > > I would recommend lua, it's
On Monday 22 January 2007 14:49, Andraž 'ruskie' Levstik wrote:
> Why is this even being discused... you have the ability to add anything to
> the phone once you get your hands on it... SO any scripting languages one
> desires can be added.
>
It's true that you have the ability to add anything to
On Jan 22, 2007, at 2:49 PM, Andraž 'ruskie' Levstik wrote:
Personaly by default there should be none. And let the user decide
what he
wants. For example I prefer ruby over perl, lua or python and I
like using
bash scripts for a lot of stuff. So having lua on my system would
be more
or less
Ted Lemon writes:
>
>So in order to agree with this, we nevertheless have to talk about
>the problem: how do we ensure that if an end-user wants to run an app
>written in python, and another written in ruby, and a third written
>in python, that they get exactly two interpreters installed on t
> Also realize that though _you_ may not be directly using this
> hypothetical scripting language, it is more than likely that one or
> more of the standard apps that ship with the phone will be using it,
> and that other 3rd party software that you may or may not install may
> also be using it.
>
On Monday 22 January 2007 15:33, Andraž 'ruskie' Levstik wrote:
> Let me rephrase then. Have it defined as a standard-optional component that
> can be used. But isn't installed by default. Won't ipkg have dependency
> resolution etc?
>
Yes, so the dependency aspect will likely be a non-issue; hope
On Jan 22, 2007, at 3:28 PM, Joe Pfeiffer wrote:
So when you put your first python
application on, ipkg will conclude you need python. When you put your
second on, it will conclude you've alrady got python.
Sure. So in that case it does make sense to talk about standard
versions of each in
So have official/unofficial packages that handle the major scripting
languages. That way it's possible to have any scripting language used.
The only potential downfall may be that everyone ends up with quite a
few interpreters on their poor little phones... python, ruby, rhino,
lua, perl,
* Ted Lemon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [070122 23:21]:
> On Jan 22, 2007, at 2:49 PM, Andra? 'ruskie' Levstik wrote:
> >Personaly by default there should be none. And let the user decide what he
> >wants. For example I prefer ruby over perl, lua or python and I like using
> >bash scripts for a lot of stuf
Ted Lemon writes:
>On Jan 22, 2007, at 3:28 PM, Joe Pfeiffer wrote:
>> So when you put your first python
>> application on, ipkg will conclude you need python. When you put your
>> second on, it will conclude you've alrady got python.
>
>Sure. So in that case it does make sense to talk about sta
On 1/22/07, Derek Pressnall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On a different (but related) track, I've always wanted to have a web
browser that was capable of executing local cgi scripts without the
need for client-side http server.
Pah! Internet Explorer has had that for *ages*.
But for non-windows,
On Monday 22 January 2007 16:07, Ben Burdette wrote:
> > The only potential downfall may be that everyone ends up with quite a
> > few interpreters on their poor little phones... python, ruby, rhino,
> > lua, perl, etc, etc..
>
> That's all well and good when everyone has SPACE for every scripting
On 1/23/07, "Andraž 'ruskie' Levstik" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 10:12:00 pm 2007-01-22 Corey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Monday 22 January 2007 14:03, Marcin Juszkiewicz wrote:
> > Dnia poniedziałek, 22 stycznia 2007 21:45, Corey napisał:
> >
> > > I would recommend lua, it's extremely li
On Tue, 2007-01-23 at 10:12 +0800, Ben Lau wrote:
> I also think that it should come with none of any scripting language
> beside shell script and Javascript (by web browser). Python/Perl is
> too huge.
It's a balance. Size utilization against use. So, the questions I
would ask if I were a propo
Subject: Re: built-in scripting languages
Date: lun 22 gen 07 04:07:26 -0700
Quoting Ben Burdette ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> I'm all for allowing people to use whatever scripting language they
> want. But I'd like the peace of mind of knowing I can write a scripted
My opinion -as an end user & as programmer with medium experience- is that the
phone should implement a stable version of a known& widelly accepted scripting
language and it should stick with it.
That way the masses of users & developers will have a stable point of
reference. If they don't like
Richard Franks wrote:
> On 1/22/07, Derek Pressnall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On a different (but related) track, I've always wanted to have a web
>> browser that was capable of executing local cgi scripts without the
>> need for client-side http server.
>
> Pah! Internet Explorer has had that
2007/1/23, Jay Trister <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
My opinion -as an end user & as programmer with medium experience- is that
the phone should implement a stable version of a known& widelly accepted
scripting language and it should stick with it.
I'm affraid of using interpreted and dynamically typed
Quote :
"Yeah, like times when we were stuck with buggy and poor Java 1.1 in"
Quoting myself :
"1. Decide which version of a tested & widelly accepted script-language will be
used and will be pre-installed (I suggest perl)."
Perl for example (you can suggest another lang) is used widelly. If th
Quote :
"Yeah, like times when we were stuck with buggy and poor Java 1.1 in"
Forgot to mention that I think that a Java implementation is more important
than a scripting language. (had to say that again :-) ).
-
Sucker-punch spam with award-winning protect
2007/1/23, Jay Trister <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Perl for example (you can suggest another lang) is used widelly. If the last
stable version was ...unstable we would know it.
There is no GTK connector for any interpreted language tested against
*OpenMoko platform*. So if OM team decide to embed Per
Sorry, I have to completely disagree with you.
On Tue, 2007-01-23 at 11:21 +0100, Tomasz Zielinski wrote:
> I'm affraid of using interpreted and dynamically typed languages in
> embedded environment, like cellphone. Especially when using GSM API --
> it's much easier to omit bug in interpreted la
On 4/3/07, Bryan Larsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[...] However, developers who choose one of these languages for
their applications will not be able to see their applications included
in the standard ROM nor available for use by those without an external
microSD card.
[...]
I'm not sure why y
Steven ** wrote:
I'm not sure why you need an external MicroSD card, but all Neo's come
with a 512 MB MicroSD card. Sean mentioned that in the FOSDEM
presentation. Also, see
http://wiki.openmoko.org/wiki/FAQ#Q:_How_much.3F
Sure, the developer's kit comes with a microSD card. I expect all
Steven ** wrote:
On 4/3/07, Bryan Larsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[...] However, developers who choose one of these languages for
their applications will not be able to see their applications included
in the standard ROM nor available for use by those without an external
microSD card.
[...]
I would like to propose a number of bindings a preferred scripting language
should have
- Bluetooth bindings
- Webservice bindings, 'lightweight' request/response access to networked
services
- Persistence bindings, optimized access to large datasets (sqlite?)
On Tuesday 03 April 2007 21:54:26
Bryan Larsen wrote:
[...]
A scripting language should be chosen as the default. Yes, it'll be a
hard choice, but there's also no 'wrong choice' (except for "none").
I've put a lot of work into
http://wiki.openmoko.org/wiki/Wishlist:BuiltInScriptingLanguage. Please
comment here or on the discus
Jamie Allsop пишет:
Yes this page is very good. One thing you might want to note also is
that there is a nice C++ binding for Python in boost .
Please don't infer from this that I am a big Python fan, most of my
scripting to date has been with Perl, however I do see Python as being
a language
Is there a way to add a poll feature to the wiki? This would give a
quantitative about the community's opinion...
Cheers
Florent
___
OpenMoko community mailing list
community@lists.openmoko.org
http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
What about:
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Poll
Seems strange not to have this extension in the wiki...
Florent
___
OpenMoko community mailing list
community@lists.openmoko.org
http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
On Apr 18, 2007, at 1:44 AM, Dmitri Hrapof wrote:
Jamie Allsop пишет:
Yes this page is very good. One thing you might want to note also
is that there is a nice C++ binding for Python in boost
. Please don't infer from this that I am a big
Python fan, most of my scripting to date has been
PyGTK looks like the most likely contender to me -- not just because I
wrote a book about it and I'm the author of almost everything
Python-related in OE, but also because PyGTK is pretty mature and
easy to extend (you probably have seen Zecke's work in wrapping the Moko
classes did you?).
The thi
On Apr 18, 2007, at 2:41 AM, Michael 'Mickey' Lauer wrote:
PyGTK looks like the most likely contender to me -- not just because I
wrote a book about it and I'm the author of almost everything
Python-related in OE, but also because PyGTK is pretty mature and
easy to extend (you probably have see
I think maybe we need a new version of Godwin's law... "any
discussion about scripting languages should stop as soon as someone
mentions Lisp (or Smalltalk.)"
But seriously... speed probably shouldn't be THE deciding factor in a
built-in scripting language. It's the ability to get things do
Am 18.04.2007 um 19:02 schrieb Matthew S. Hamrick:
I think maybe we need a new version of Godwin's law... "any
discussion about scripting languages should stop as soon as someone
mentions Lisp (or Smalltalk.)"
Well, as a Mac addict, I propose to consider AppleScript, Automator
and F-Scri
Well, that's "official" enough for me. I'll develop new apps in PyGTK
for now. If I need to, I'll port to C later.
The announcement today of the Gnome Mobil & Embedded Initiative
(http://www.gnome.org/mobile/) also shows Python in its block diagram,
right below a picture of a neo1973. Pytho
Bah, forgot to reply all.
I think that's an excellent idea actually... A website where you can log
into, set up preferences about the packages you have installed and build
an image based on that.
Is that ability already in existence? I mean, I am sure ipkg has the
ability to update all of y
45 matches
Mail list logo
