I just downloaded and had a play with the release version 1.0 of Komodo for
Windows (The Linux one is still in the RC phase) and i have to say that I'm
impressed.
I know that a lot of the list are devoted to using text editors rather than
these 'new fangled' IDE's :) but i re
On Tue, Apr 17, 2001 at 05:57:17PM +0100, Dean wrote:
> Has anyone got an views on it or the Linux version?
The Linux version is broken; it won't install, claiming you need a new
license.
lathos: I just talked to the Komodo lead. He suggests a) don't evaluate
Komodo on the Linux
downloaded this and tried to install, at least i know it wasn't
me now ;)
> Komodo on the Linux version, yet. b) we changed licnese schemes recently. If
> absolutely necessary we can send you a new license.
I'm semi patient :)
Dean
--
Profanity is the one language all programmers understand
--- Anon
On Tue, Apr 17, 2001 at 05:57:17PM +0100, Dean wrote:
> I just downloaded and had a play with the release version 1.0 of Komodo for
> Windows (The Linux one is still in the RC phase) and i have to say that I'm
> impressed.
>
> Has anyone got an views on it or the Linux versio
On Tue, Apr 17, 2001 at 07:12:32PM +0100, David Cantrell wrote:
> Methinks Activestate are too much in the Windows world
I note that the Linux distribution of Kodomo contained complete distributions
of Mozilla, Perl and Python.
--
The sky already fell. Now what? -- Steven Wright
On Tue, Apr 17, 2001 at 07:17:37PM +0100, Simon Cozens wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 17, 2001 at 07:12:32PM +0100, David Cantrell wrote:
>
> > Methinks Activestate are too much in the Windows world
>
> I note that the Linux distribution of Kodomo contained complete distributions
> of Mozilla, Perl and Py
On Tue, Apr 17, 2001 at 07:12:32PM +0100, David Cantrell wrote:
> > Has anyone got an views on it or the Linux version?
> I haven't looked at it, but will. However, it does look from the web pages
> as if it requires me to download Activestate's distribution of perl. This
> is a Bad Thing. If
> > I note that the Linux distribution of Kodomo contained
> complete distributions
> > of Mozilla, Perl and Python.
>
> /me cancels the download, suggests Activestate acquire some Clue
>
Isn't that a bit harsh? If the Linux version is a Beta / Alpha type deal it
seems fair enough they want peop
On Tue, Apr 17, 2001 at 07:12:32PM +0100, David Cantrell wrote:
>Rip, Mix, Burn, unless you're using our latest and greatest
> operating system which we couldn't be arsed to complete
You mean, "...if you choose to install an OS over the one we're
actually supporting for those ope
On Wed, Apr 18, 2001 at 02:16:39AM -0700, Paul Makepeace wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 17, 2001 at 07:12:32PM +0100, David Cantrell wrote:
> >Rip, Mix, Burn, unless you're using our latest and greatest
> > operating system which we couldn't be arsed to complete
>
> You mean, "...if you ch
On Wed, Apr 18, 2001 at 10:52:58AM +0100, David Cantrell wrote:
> > actually supporting for those operations"?
>
> No, I mean "unless you're using our latest and greatest operating system
> which, despite us only supporting a limited number of systems to make it
This is specious. The ad is runni
On Wed, Apr 18, 2001 at 02:59:51AM -0700, Paul Makepeace wrote:
> Who said "release early, release often". Apple are doing the right
> thing, IMO.
Probably Eric Raymond.
Which reminds me, there used to be a comment in the code for an
authentication server at Demon:
/* fork early, fork often
On Wed, 18 Apr 2001, you wrote:
> > > I note that the Linux distribution of Kodomo contained
> > complete distributions
> > > of Mozilla, Perl and Python.
> >
> > /me cancels the download, suggests Activestate acquire some Clue
> >
>
> Isn't that a bit harsh? If the Linux version is a Beta / Alph
On Wed, Apr 18, 2001 at 11:12:30AM +0100, Robin Szemeti wrote:
> if it doesn't work on a standard Perl install its dead in the water IMHO
FWIW, I agree. Not only that, if it conflicts with existing
distribution's package management that'd be a nightmare.
Paul
On Wed, Apr 18, 2001 at 11:12:30AM +0100, Robin Szemeti wrote:
> umm .. for a windows install where Activestate Perl seems to be the
> standard then yes, its fair enough. For a *nix tool it MUST work with a
> standard Perl install or it is of zero use (to me) .. I do not have any
> intention of in
On Wed, Apr 18, 2001 at 02:59:51AM -0700, Paul Makepeace wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 18, 2001 at 10:52:58AM +0100, David Cantrell wrote:
>
> > No, I mean "unless you're using our latest and greatest operating system
> > which, despite us only supporting a limited number of systems to make it
>
> This i
On Wed, Apr 18, 2001 at 11:44:38AM +0100, David Cantrell wrote:
> The iMac is one of the platforms supported by OS X.
One has to assume anyone installing an OS over a different is
intelligent enough to read the caveats.
> In fact, CD burning doesn't work under OS X on *any* machine and isn't
> s
On Wed, 18 Apr 2001, you wrote:
> IMHO the Linux port is an afterthought, most of the effort seems to have
> been focused on the Windows side, the integration with Visual Studio
> springs to mind.
umm ... since Linux accounts (at a guess) for 75% of Perl usauge, thats
quite an 'afterthought'. My
* at 18/04 11:58 +0100 Robin Szemeti said:
> On Wed, 18 Apr 2001, you wrote:
>
> > IMHO the Linux port is an afterthought, most of the effort seems to have
> > been focused on the Windows side, the integration with Visual Studio
> > springs to mind.
>
> umm ... since Linux accounts (at a guess)
>
> umm ... since Linux accounts (at a guess) for 75% of Perl
> usauge, thats
> quite an 'afterthought'. My guess is they see ActiveState
> Perl as taking
> over the world and these tools are simply there to help get it to that
> position.
I think it's more than Windows accounts for 75% of the ID
On 18/04/2001 at 15:58 +0100, Jonathan Peterson wrote:
>I mean how the hell do you install CPAN packges on EPOC perl or
>Mac Perl or any other platform that doesn't smell of Unix?
On MacPerl, non-XS modules install fine using Chris Nandor's CPAN-mac.
XS modules are, erm, tricky, and usually you w
On Wed, Apr 18, 2001 at 03:58:20PM +0100, Jonathan Peterson wrote:
> Anyway, I thought all this stuff about non-standard kinds of Win32 Perl was
> sorted out years ago. Activestate Perl is the same as anyone else's Perl,
> shurely?
It's more because I have a nicely working perl installation righ
On Wed, Apr 18, 2001 at 11:58:00AM +0100, Robin Szemeti wrote:
> umm ... since Linux accounts (at a guess) for 75% of Perl usauge, thats
> quite an 'afterthought'. My guess is they see ActiveState Perl as taking
> over the world and these tools are simply there to help get it to that
> position.
From: "Jonathan Peterson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Anyway, I thought all this stuff about non-standard kinds of Win32 Perl
was
> sorted out years ago. Activestate Perl is the same as anyone else's Perl,
> shurely? All the brain ache surrounding PPM and CPAN modules and XS is not
> strictly perl rela
On Wed, Apr 18, 2001 at 04:26:42PM +0100, Dean wrote:
> I've been using this for C coding recently and its not too bad. It has a
> couple of nice tricks though like clicking on the compile errors and being
> taken to the line.
Emacs has been able to do this for probably 10 years or more. I thin
On Wed, Apr 18, 2001 at 03:58:20PM +0100, Jonathan Peterson wrote:
> I think it's more than Windows accounts for 75% of the IDE market, rather
> than the Perl market...
> Anyway, I thought all this stuff about non-standard kinds of Win32 Perl was
> sorted out years ago. Activestate Perl is the s
On Wed, Apr 18, 2001 at 04:17:00PM +0100, Paul Mison wrote:
> On MacPerl, non-XS modules install fine using Chris Nandor's CPAN-mac.
> XS modules are, erm, tricky, and usually you wait for someone who can
> deal with MPW and who needs them to do the port, although it is
> possible to do it if you
Dean wrote:
> I've been using [Kdevelop] for C coding recently and its not too bad. It has a
> couple of nice tricks though like clicking on the compile errors and being
> taken to the line.
Ultraedit does this. It's great and I love it. And it works under Wine.
On 18/04/2001 at 16:36 +0100, Dean wrote:
>On Wed, Apr 18, 2001 at 04:17:00PM +0100, Paul Mison wrote:
>> On MacPerl, non-XS modules install fine using Chris Nandor's CPAN-mac.
>> XS modules are, erm, tricky, and usually you wait for someone who can
>
>> deal with MPW and who needs them to do the
On Wed, Apr 18, 2001 at 04:36:08PM +0100, Dean wrote:
> Whats MPW?
Macintosh Programmers' Workshop. Delicious...
> Does OS X come with GNU tools like GCC and make then?
Yes (on the optional developers CD)
.robin.
--
Are we not drawn onward, we few, drawn onward to new era?
On Wed, Apr 18, 2001 at 04:34:49PM +0100, Dominic Mitchell wrote:
> Emacs has been able to do this for probably 10 years or more. I think
> even vim can do it now, too.
Never noticed that! I normally edit my code in emacs and do the compiling
on the command line in another term, never got too co
On Wed, Apr 18, 2001 at 04:47:57PM +0100, Dean wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 18, 2001 at 04:34:49PM +0100, Dominic Mitchell wrote:
> > Emacs has been able to do this for probably 10 years or more. I think
> > even vim can do it now, too.
>
> Never noticed that! I normally edit my code in emacs and do the
Jonathan Peterson wrote:
> I've I'm wrong and Activestate Perl is full of unreleased
> modifications to Perl itself or the core libs I'd like to
> know if it...
Well, not exactly unreleased, but ActivePerl AFAIK never corresponds to any
stock Perl. They often integrate patches from the developme
Barbie wrote:
> The good thing about PPM is that it does all the installation
> for you. the bad thing is that it doesn't run any tests. Then
> again seeing as they've done the job of porting the package
> you'd hope it was tested at their end. At least that's what
> _I'm_ hoping.
Yes. The PPM u
On Wed, 18 Apr 2001, you wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 18, 2001 at 11:58:00AM +0100, Robin Szemeti wrote:
> > umm ... since Linux accounts (at a guess) for 75% of Perl usauge, thats
> > quite an 'afterthought'. My guess is they see ActiveState Perl as taking
> > over the world and these tools are simply th
On Wed, Apr 18, 2001 at 11:58:00AM +0100, Robin Szemeti wrote:
> umm ... since Linux accounts (at a guess) for 75% of Perl usauge, thats
> quite an 'afterthought'.
That's irrelevant. ActiveState's business is 90% Windows, so they do Windows
first.
--
heh, yeah, but Aretha could be reading out
On Wed, Apr 18, 2001 at 07:12:27PM +0100, Robin Szemeti wrote:
>
> stop winding me up .. everyone knows emacs is a firewall configuration
> tool with some other bits bolted on ... dont you just press C-x C-alt-b
> C-shift-alt-z alt-y pageup-alt-escape-shift-~ to make it insert a space
> or somes
On Wed, 18 Apr 2001, you wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 18, 2001 at 11:58:00AM +0100, Robin Szemeti wrote:
> > umm ... since Linux accounts (at a guess) for 75% of Perl usauge, thats
> > quite an 'afterthought'.
>
> That's irrelevant. ActiveState's business is 90% Windows, so they do Windows
> first.
whi
On Wed, Apr 18, 2001 at 10:23:34PM +0100, Robin Szemeti wrote:
> I can not see however a place in linux for any perl IDE that doesnt use a
> standard perl install. simple as that.
Then don't buy one. Those who do, will. Isn't the free market great?
--
Doubt is a pain too lonely to know that fai
On Wed, 18 Apr 2001, you wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 18, 2001 at 10:23:34PM +0100, Robin Szemeti wrote:
> > I can not see however a place in linux for any perl IDE that doesnt use a
> > standard perl install. simple as that.
>
> Then don't buy one. Those who do, will. Isn't the free market great?
but I
On Wed, Apr 18, 2001 at 10:34:30PM +0100, Robin Szemeti wrote:
> but I should also add that I see anyhting which looks like splintering
> the nice world of One Big [*nix] Perl [1] into several different
> incompatible
AS Perl on Unix isn't incompatible.
--
Every little bit of seaweed kelps.
On Wed, 18 Apr 2001, you wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 18, 2001 at 10:34:30PM +0100, Robin Szemeti wrote:
> > but I should also add that I see anyhting which looks like splintering
> > the nice world of One Big [*nix] Perl [1] into several different
> > incompatible
>
> AS Perl on Unix isn't incompatible.
Robin Szemeti wrote:
> in the *nix variant can you load stuff from CPAN straight in ?
Lemme check... yep, you can. (Using the Solaris version of ActivePerl 618.)
I used a non-XS module, but I believe I've done it with XS modules as well.
Cheers,
Philip
--
Philip Newton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
All o
Paul Mison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On 18/04/2001 at 16:36 +0100, Dean wrote:
> >Does OS X come with GNU tools like GCC and make then?
>
> Yes, but they're not installed by default. (I can't remember if the
> 'BSD subsystem' is installed by default either though.) It comes on a
> seperate CD
On Wed, Apr 18, 2001 at 04:43:24PM +0100, Paul Mison wrote:
> You also get ProjectBuilder IDE.
It's "Project Builder", read the release notes (they're quite funny).
I wish PB had integrated help that worked. I've never had Find by
Definitions work on anything except Frameworks (maybe it's not me
Dean <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Wed, Apr 18, 2001 at 04:34:49PM +0100, Dominic Mitchell wrote:
> > Emacs has been able to do this for probably 10 years or more. I think
> > even vim can do it now, too.
>
> Never noticed that! I normally edit my code in emacs and do the compiling
> on the
On Thu, Apr 19, 2001 at 11:02:03AM +0100, Piers Cawley wrote:
> Dean <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > On Wed, Apr 18, 2001 at 04:34:49PM +0100, Dominic Mitchell wrote:
> > > Emacs has been able to do this for probably 10 years or more. I think
> > > even vim can do it now, too.
> >
> > Never n
On Thu, Apr 19, 2001 at 10:56:51AM +0100, Piers Cawley wrote:
> Paul Mison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > You also get ProjectBuilder IDE.
> >
> > http://developer.apple.com/tools/projectbuilder/
>
> Which is very nice. Or at least it was, back when it was NeXTSTEP.
I had a little play with
On Thu, Apr 19, 2001 at 11:02:03AM +0100, Piers Cawley wrote:
> Then you're missing half the fun. Seriously. M-x compile was the
> reason I started using emacs in the first place.
And I \N{WHITE HEART SUIT} M-x gdb
--
I respect faith, but doubt is what gives you an education.
--
es as well.
well thats really good then. excellent in fact.
and to add icing on the cake I got a email from ActiveState :
>
> Versions of Perl and Python are siloed within Komodo. Having
> installations of Perl and Python allow you to do debugging.
>
> Either can be installed after Ko
> >
> > > you can write code in emacs?
> >
> > Apparently if you install enough major modes you
> can even edit text in
> > it... ;)
Theres a nasty rumor going about that its really just
a mail client.
D
=
"Artificial Intelligence is no match for human stupitity!"
David Cantrell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Thu, Apr 19, 2001 at 10:56:51AM +0100, Piers Cawley wrote:
> > Paul Mison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > > You also get ProjectBuilder IDE.
> > >
> > > http://developer.apple.com/tools/projectbuilder/
> >
> > Which is very nice. Or at least i
Simon Cozens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Thu, Apr 19, 2001 at 11:02:03AM +0100, Piers Cawley wrote:
> > Then you're missing half the fun. Seriously. M-x compile was the
> > reason I started using emacs in the first place.
>
> And I \N{WHITE HEART SUIT} M-x gdb
Oh, yes, baby. And M-x ediff
On Wed, 18 Apr 2001, Philip Newton wrote:
> Barbie wrote:
> > The good thing about PPM is that it does all the installation
> > for you. the bad thing is that it doesn't run any tests. Then
> > again seeing as they've done the job of porting the package
> > you'd hope it was tested at their end.
On Thu, Apr 19, 2001 at 01:46:03PM +0100, Piers Cawley wrote:
> Works with Objective C too. Which is still (for my money) the best way
> of messing with the NeXTSTEP object model.
s/best/only/
Paul
--- Robin Szemeti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, 18 Apr 2001, you wrote:
> > > > I note that the Linux distribution of Kodomo
> contained
> > > complete distributions
> > > > of Mozilla, Perl and Python.
> > >
> > > /me cancels the download, suggests Activestate
> acquire some Clue
> > >
>
http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1005-200-5729530.html
Makes bizarre reading after AS's press releases.
(I assume AOL's Komodo is some Mozilla repackaging? Anyone know
anything about this?)
Paul
On Thu, Apr 26, 2001 at 05:44:45PM -0700, Paul Makepeace wrote:
> (I assume AOL's Komodo is some Mozilla repackaging? Anyone know
> anything about this?)
theregister.co.uk has been running stories about it being used as a
possible alternative if AOL decides to stop bundling IE. N
On Fri, Apr 27, 2001 at 01:50:34AM +0100, Dean wrote:
> theregister.co.uk has been running stories about it being used as a
> possible alternative if AOL decides to stop bundling IE. No technical
> details though...
http://www.betanews.com/article.php3?sid=988225959
has a weensy bit at the last
On Wed, Apr 18, 2001 at 04:34:17PM +0100, Dean wrote:
>
> Your right, the perls are the same ActiveState are just a lot more aware of
> what the OS can do and lacks the ability to do and tries to compensate for
> them. If you have a stocked Windows box with nmake, VC++ and a bit of time
> you can
60 matches
Mail list logo
