[9fans] Plan9 Programming languages !

[9fans] Plan9 Programming languages !

[D De Villiers]

Hello!

I just got my first copy of Plan9 - I am a software developer/programmer and
wanna know what languages are there avialable for Plan9 development? Any
Delphi/Pascal, Java, Perl implementation etc ? (only know about C language).

Regards,

Lennie De Villiers

--- Remove ~ and 9s from e-mail address to reply ---

Re: [9fans] Plan9 Programming languages !

[Matt Senecal]

>Any
>Delphi/Pascal, Java, Perl implementation etc ? (only know about C language).

Re. Perl: Take a look at:

    http://cpan.valueclick.com/ports/index.html#plan9

and

    http://www.caldo.demon.co.uk/plan9/soft/

for a Perl 4 port.

---Matt


----------------------------------------------------------
  There's nothing more dangerous than a resourceful idiot.
----------------------------------------------------------
Matt Senecal
Northrop Grumman Information Technology
Logicon-INRI Division

E-mail: msenecal@logicon.com
Web: http://msenecal.tripod.com/
Phone: (619)-553-4891

Re: [9fans] Plan9 Programming languages !

[William S .]

I have seen Limbo mentioned before. I am not a
programmer but it might be worth checking out.
Perhaps others could elaborate more.

Bill
Amsterdam, NL

On Thu, Dec 06, 2001 at 05:13:44PM +0000, D De Villiers wrote:
> Hello!
>
> I just got my first copy of Plan9 - I am a software developer/programmer and
> wanna know what languages are there avialable for Plan9 development? Any
> Delphi/Pascal, Java, Perl implementation etc ? (only know about C language).
>

Re: [9fans] Plan9 Programming languages !

[D De Villiers]

Bill,

Far has I know -- Limbo is only use with the Inferno OS (not Plan9).

Regards,

Lennie De Villiers

--- Remove ~ and 9s from e-mail address to reply ---

> I have seen Limbo mentioned before. I am not a
> programmer but it might be worth checking out.
> Perhaps others could elaborate more.

[9fans] Re: Plan9 Programming languages !

[Douglas A. Gwyn]

D De Villiers wrote:
> (only know about C language).

Be sure to learn to program in "rc" langauge as well!

Re: [9fans] Re: Plan9 Programming languages !

[Boyd Roberts]

D De Villiers wrote:
> (only know about C language).

Don't forget 'awk' and 'sed' too.

[9fans] Re: Plan9 Programming languages ! -- PASCAL?

[D De Villiers]

No Pascal implementation ? Pascal compiler etc etc ?

Regards,

Lennie De Villiers

--- Remove ~ and 9s from e-mail address to reply ---

[9fans] Re: Plan9 Programming languages ! -- PASCAL?

[Douglas A. Gwyn]

D De Villiers wrote:
> No Pascal implementation ? Pascal compiler etc etc ?

Why?  What use would it be?

[9fans] Re: Plan9 Programming languages ! -- PASCAL?

[Thomas Bushnell, BSG]

"Douglas A. Gwyn" <DAGwyn@null.net> writes:

> D De Villiers wrote:
> > No Pascal implementation ? Pascal compiler etc etc ?
>
> Why?  What use would it be?

It would let you run Pascal programs.  (No wonder Plan 9 hasn't caught
on, with such simple things not noticed. ;))

[9fans] Re: Plan9 Programming languages ! -- PASCAL?

[Douglas A. Gwyn]

"Thomas Bushnell, BSG" wrote:
> "Douglas A. Gwyn" <DAGwyn@null.net> writes:
> > D De Villiers wrote:
> > > No Pascal implementation ? Pascal compiler etc etc ?
> > Why?  What use would it be?
> It would let you run Pascal programs.

And what use would *that* be?
Seriously, are there any major apps written in Pascal?

[9fans] Re: Plan9 Programming languages ! -- PASCAL?

[Wladimir Mutel]

Douglas A. Gwyn <DAGwyn@null.net> wrote:
> "Thomas Bushnell, BSG" wrote:
>> "Douglas A. Gwyn" <DAGwyn@null.net> writes:
>> > D De Villiers wrote:
>> > > No Pascal implementation ? Pascal compiler etc etc ?
>> > Why?  What use would it be?
>> It would let you run Pascal programs.

> And what use would *that* be?
> Seriously, are there any major apps written in Pascal?

	TEX was.

[9fans] Re: Plan9 Programming languages ! -- PASCAL?

[Douglas A. Gwyn]

Wladimir Mutel wrote:
> Douglas A. Gwyn <DAGwyn@null.net> wrote:
> > Seriously, are there any major apps written in Pascal?
>         TEX was.

Yes, but it was ported to C, so we don't need a Pascal
compiler even for TeX.

[9fans] Re: Plan9 Programming languages ! -- PASCAL?

[Thomas Bushnell, BSG]

"Douglas A. Gwyn" <DAGwyn@null.net> writes:

> "Thomas Bushnell, BSG" wrote:
> > "Douglas A. Gwyn" <DAGwyn@null.net> writes:
> > > D De Villiers wrote:
> > > > No Pascal implementation ? Pascal compiler etc etc ?
> > > Why?  What use would it be?
> > It would let you run Pascal programs.
>
> And what use would *that* be?
> Seriously, are there any major apps written in Pascal?

Um, TeX, as has already been noted.  I think Pascal is a pointless
silly language, myself.

But still--even if there are misguided people who want to use it for
teaching, the availability of a compiler makes a system more
attractive to those people.

It seems this discussion is of a schema that is very common on this
newsgroup:

A: Why doesn't Plan 9 have a fritz-widget?
B: A fritz-widget is useless.
A: Lots of people like fritz-widgets.
B: Those people are misguided.
A: But I want to use the wooble application, and it requires
   fritz-widgets.
B: The wooble application is a bad application.
A: What does Plan 9 have to do the things that the wooble application
   is for?
B: No.
A: Hmm.

[some time later]

B: I wonder why Plan 9 hasn't caught on more than it has.  Maybe it's
   because people reject our brilliance.

Thomas

[9fans] Re: Plan9 Programming languages ! -- PASCAL?

[Douglas A. Gwyn]

"Thomas Bushnell, BSG" wrote:
> B: I wonder why Plan 9 hasn't caught on more than it has.
> Maybe it's because people reject our brilliance.

I frankly don't want Plan 9 to become market-driven.
Better a good set of well-designed tools to do those
things that are worth doing than an inferior set of
poorly designed tools to do things that ought not to
be done.

[9fans] Re: Plan9 Programming languages ! -- PASCAL?

[Thomas Bushnell, BSG]

"Douglas A. Gwyn" <DAGwyn@null.net> writes:

> "Thomas Bushnell, BSG" wrote:
> > B: I wonder why Plan 9 hasn't caught on more than it has.
> > Maybe it's because people reject our brilliance.
>
> I frankly don't want Plan 9 to become market-driven.
> Better a good set of well-designed tools to do those
> things that are worth doing than an inferior set of
> poorly designed tools to do things that ought not to
> be done.

Is typesetting not something worth doing well?

[9fans] Re: Plan9 Programming languages ! -- PASCAL?

[D De Villiers]

There are many dialects of Pascal avialable - The mostly popular one use is
Borland's Delphi (Object Pascal) for writting MS Windows applications. Then
there are also Free Pascal etc.

> Seriously, are there any major apps written in Pascal?

Regards,

Lennie De Villiers

--- Remove ~ and 9s from e-mail address to reply ---

[9fans] Re: Plan9 Programming languages ! -- PASCAL?

[Daniel Warmuth]

Hi,

"Douglas A. Gwyn" wrote:
> Seriously, are there any major apps written in Pascal?

Depends on what you thinks is a "major app" ;-) E.g., Pixel32 is written in
Free Pascal (pixel32.box.sk).
--
Ciao, Daniel

[9fans] Re: Plan9 Programming languages ! -- PASCAL?

[D De Villiers]

> Depends on what you thinks is a "major app" ;-) E.g., Pixel32 is written
in
> Free Pascal (pixel32.box.sk).

The terms "major app" or "minor app" doesn't really exist ! (both
understatements). In Pascal (any dialect) or in any programming language
(Forth, Java, C/C++ etc etc) can write both "major app" or "minor app" -
These * understatements* only refer to the complexity of the program in its
goal to solve the programming problem at hand. The more code you write etc.
the more complex the application gets...This is way techique like
module-programming, object-oriented programming (OOP) etc. has developed (in
all languages) to brake the big complexity of any application (or the
problem) into smaller parts (smaller problems).

Remember: Those old days when we wrote programs in GW-BASIC etc. Just a bush
of line-after-line codes...Reading or understanding those programs was a big
challenge (not even talking about debugging etc!) because they wasn't wrote
in small parts (routines, functions, units, objects etc). So you needed (at
that time) think about the problem has a owl (everything in considiration)
but now (this present time) programs are broken in small parts - Easy to
program, easy to understand, easy to debug, easy to maintain, easy to...etc.

Just may 3 cents ! :-))

Regards,

Lennie De Villiers

--- Remove ~ and 9s from e-mail address to reply ---

Re: [9fans] Re: Plan9 Programming languages ! -- PASCAL?

[Matt]

> Remember: Those old days when we wrote programs in GW-BASIC etc.

nope, when I started back in '82 I had BBC basic which was procedural [even
had inline 6502 assembler] and I've never looked back.

M

[9fans] Re: Plan9 Programming languages ! -- The Future !

[D De Villiers]

Hello...

According to my opinion - The success, future etc etc. of any operating
system (Plan9 in this case) depends on its ability to be programmed by all
possible programmers (in more languages has possible etc) No Software !! -
No Users etc !!! :-}

Regards,

Lennie De Villiers

--- Remove ~ and 9s from e-mail address to reply ---

Re: [9fans] Re: Plan9 Programming languages ! -- The Future !

[George Michaelson]

> According to my opinion - The success, future etc etc. of any operating
> system (Plan9 in this case) depends on its ability to be programmed by all
> possible programmers (in more languages has possible etc) No Software !! -
> No Users etc !!! :-}

success is very subjective. the Apollo-11 OS was a fantastic success
given the engineering constraints but the UI was maybe a bit tortuous.

language plethora is a good thing in research space and usually a bad
thing in deployment. my experience is that it massively increases the
opportunity for bad behaviour. GC/VM models, IPC, program-system boundarie
turn out not to be completely abstract but reflect the language of
implementation (is that unfair?)

My brother is a lamda calculus expert. I would find it very hard to
survive in his domain, but I also suspect good programmers would achieve
very very good things if that was the 'one true way'

The Pascal discussion reminded me of my first feelings on the apparent
convergeance of the algol-60 and fortran i/o binding mechanisms. How wierd!
two languages so different yet one apparent method to say how to connect
to a punch or a reader. Then to get Pascal, and have to come to terms with
its bindings..

I suspect any language with i/o or IPC a first-class concept in the language
and not buried under methods or procedure call interfaces would blow my
lobes. rendesvous between asynchronous real-world events, or the emulation
of parallelism in a serial instruction machine and how that exposes to
the apparently discrete programs is a wonderful opportunity for language
designers to play the deity and show their view of 'how it is done wrong'

I hope P9 remains a small-set-of-ported-languages space. I think it will be
better for it. One from the lisp family, one from the interpreter space,
one from the C gang, one for old timers. one shell/rc to bind them. one
namespace scheme to find them.

cheers
	-George

[9fans] Re: Plan9 Programming languages ! -- PASCAL?

[D De Villiers]

> Why?  What use would it be?

Writting software ! <G> What * use * else...

Pascal has been ported to many platforms - Borland's Delphi (Windows), Kylix
(Linux) etc with alot of Pascal dialects - Free Pascal etc.

Just wondering if Pascal compiler avialable for Plan9 OS.

Regards,

Lennie De Villiers

--- Remove ~ and 9s from e-mail address to reply ---

[9fans] Re: Plan9 Programming languages ! -- PASCAL?

[north_]

> Just wondering if Pascal compiler avialable for Plan9 OS.
>
> Regards,
>
> Lennie De Villiers
Sheesh,
    Is it just me or does did this thread lose focus
a long time ago. Look, just because Plan9 doesn't
come with Pascal doesn't mean Pascal is a bad lang
and has no use for implementation. Pascal, like any
other programming language, is an tool that makes
operating system use more satisfying for the user
of that language. If _you_ want Pascal on Plan9
then why don't _you_ take the time to port it to
Plan9? Not to sound rude, but, this is simply a
reality. People wanted Pascal on Linux yet no core
Linux team thought it necessary until Kylix came
about. *Shrug*. If the core OS team doesn't use
a proglang its most likely not to be implemented
in the core distribution. Pascal just happens to
fit that category :)
 - north_

http://blessedchildren.virtualave.net/

[9fans] Re: Plan9 Programming languages -- Anyother ?

[D De Villiers]

Any other programming languages avialable ? What about Java VM (run Java
applications in Plan9) etc etc.

Regards,

Lennie De Villiers

--- Remove ~ and 9s from e-mail address to reply ---

[9fans] Re: Plan9 Programming languages ! -- PASCAL?

[kim kubik]

D De Villiers wrote:
>
> No Pascal implementation ? Pascal compiler etc etc ?
>

My (admittedly weak) memory is that there existed
at one time a very short tome entitled something
like "Why Pascal Is Not My Favorite Programming
Language" and was part of the Bell Labs Technical
Reports.

But then I remember things that never existed and
have forgotten most of what little I did know . . .

 - kim

[9fans] Re: Plan9 Programming languages ! -- PASCAL?

[mark powers]

in article <3C23EA53.BC3FBFD9@jps.net>, kim kubik  <chaotrope@jps.net> sez ...
|D De Villiers wrote:
|>
|> No Pascal implementation ? Pascal compiler etc etc ?
|>
|
|My (admittedly weak) memory is that there existed
|at one time a very short tome entitled something
|like "Why Pascal Is Not My Favorite Programming
|Language" and was part of the Bell Labs Technical
|Reports.
|

http://cm.bell-labs.com/cm/cs/cstr/100.ps.gz
"Why Pascal Is Not My Favorite Programming Language", Brian Kernighan, 1981

|But then I remember things that never existed and
|have forgotten most of what little I did know . . .
|
| - kim

Re: [9fans] Re: Plan9 Programming languages ! -- PASCAL?

[Jon Snader]

On Wed, Jan 02, 2002 at 10:04:58AM +0000, kim kubik wrote:
> D De Villiers wrote:
> >
> > No Pascal implementation ? Pascal compiler etc etc ?
> >
>
> My (admittedly weak) memory is that there existed
> at one time a very short tome entitled something
> like "Why Pascal Is Not My Favorite Programming
> Language" and was part of the Bell Labs Technical
> Reports.
>

http://cm.bell-labs.com/cm/cs/cstr/100.ps.gz

Jon Snader

[9fans] Re: Plan9 Programming languages ! -- PASCAL?

[Ralph Corderoy]

> My (admittedly weak) memory is that there existed at one time a very
> short tome entitled something like "Why Pascal Is Not My Favorite
> Programming Language" and was part of the Bell Labs Technical
> Reports.

    http://cm.bell-labs.com/cm/cs/who/bwk/index.html
    http://cm.bell-labs.com/cm/cs/cstr/100.ps.gz

Cheers,


Ralph.