[Caml-list] Repeat: is there a Qt binding for OCaml?

[Caml-list] Repeat: is there a Qt binding for OCaml?

[Adriaan de Groot]

It was last asked midway through 2000: is there a Qt binding for OCaml? 

Within the KDE community there are several developers who would really be 
interested in working on Qt -- and KDE -- bindings for OCaml, but there's no 
sense in that if they already exist. In particular, there was mention of a 
partially working Qt binding -- perhaps the author of that could give me a 
ring?

What's the point, you ask, of Qt bindings (as opposed to Gtk bindings which 
we all know exist already)? It's probably a religious thing. But I know C++ 
gets me down some days, and I'd like to do something functional and OO at the 
same time. Besides, I think OCaml + Qt is a good choice vs. Clean + w98, but 
that's a whole other flamewar.

-- 
[ade] at home, probably hacking at KPilot
-------------------
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs  FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr  Archives: http://caml.inria.fr

Re: [Caml-list] Repeat: is there a Qt binding for OCaml?

[Jacques Garrigue]

> It was last asked midway through 2000: is there a Qt binding for OCaml? 
> 
> Within the KDE community there are several developers who would really be 
> interested in working on Qt -- and KDE -- bindings for OCaml, but there's no 
> sense in that if they already exist. In particular, there was mention of a 
> partially working Qt binding -- perhaps the author of that could give me a 
> ring?

I was probably the one.
All I did was an embryo of interface, entirely hand written.
So if you are courageous, go ahead. There will be no duplication.
If you're curious, I can send you my attempt.

> What's the point, you ask, of Qt bindings (as opposed to Gtk
> bindings which we all know exist already)? It's probably a religious
> thing. But I know C++ gets me down some days, and I'd like to do
> something functional and OO at the same time. Besides, I think OCaml
> + Qt is a good choice vs. Clean + w98, but that's a whole other
> flamewar.

I see perfectly the point. The trouble is that C++ is rather hard to
interface to, due to the staticness of its compilation. You may have
to write several wrappers for methods, depending on the position of
the class in the hierarchy... Gtk's dynamic model is easier.
Anyway, Qt is a wonderful toolkit, and having an interface to it would
be nice.

Another interesting work to do is building an interface for Cocoa
(Nextstep by its old name). This might prove much easier, since
Objective C is more dynamic, and a closer match for ocaml's OO.

Cheers,

Jacques Garrigue
-------------------
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs  FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr  Archives: http://caml.inria.fr

Re: [Caml-list] Repeat: is there a Qt binding for OCaml?

[leary]

Any chance of changing to or adding GPL?

Anyone written/writing a wrapper?

-------------------
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs  FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr  Archives: http://caml.inria.fr

Re: [Caml-list] Caml toplevel and readline

[Jacques Garrigue]

It looks like you've got the wrong subject line.
>From the context, you seem to be talking about GNU readline.

From: leary@nwlink.com
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Repeat: is there a Qt binding for OCaml?

> Any chance of changing to or adding GPL?

To what? To the caml toplevel? And the bytecode compiler since it is
included? I'm in no position to answer, but if the goal is only to use
GNU readline, then I do not really see the point. There are many
alternatives avilable. Only very few libraries are distributed under
the GPL, and most of them you would not want to include by default in
the ocaml toplevel. (It might be OK to link with them as long as
you do not distribute the result, but I'm no expert in GPL.)

> Anyone written/writing a wrapper?

I don't know of any. Again, GNU readline, while being a useful tool,
is not unique, and making ledit into a library might be more
interesting.

Best regards,

Jacques Garrigue
-------------------
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs  FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr  Archives: http://caml.inria.fr

Re: [Caml-list] Repeat: is there a Qt binding for OCaml?

[Chris Curtis]

On Thu, 14 Jun 2001 15:57:44 +0900
 Jacques Garrigue <garrigue@kurims.kyoto-u.ac.jp> wrote:
> Another interesting work to do is building an interface
> for Cocoa
> (Nextstep by its old name). This might prove much easier,
> since
> Objective C is more dynamic, and a closer match for
> ocaml's OO.

As the proud owner of a new G4 Macintosh running OS X, I
think I'd agree. I've spent a day or two playing in
Objective-C and Cocoa and am quite impressed. In contrast to
C++-torture, ObjC is a marvelous experience - if you really
need to do C. It's still not OCaml. :)  One of the most
interesting aspects of Cocoa/OpenStep is the Interface
Builder ... you can build, prototype, & test the GUI pieces
without any of the background code written. Being relatively
new to both Cocoa and OCaml I have no idea how hard it would
be to build that interface, but I'm sure willing to give it
a go.

--chris
Chris Curtis
Senior Consultant
Satel Corporation
<chris@satel.com>
-------------------
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs  FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr  Archives: http://caml.inria.fr

Re: [Caml-list] Repeat: is there a Qt binding for OCaml?

[Chris Curtis]

On Thu, 14 Jun 2001 00:51:54 -0700
 leary@nwlink.com wrote:
> Any chance of changing to or adding GPL?

PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE don't. I agree that readline would be
cool, but in return you give up the ability to use the
toplevel in any non-GPL environment.  GPL is a very big
hammer; let's not go swinging it hastily.

--chris
Chris Curtis
Senior Consultant
Satel Corporation
<chris@satel.com>
-------------------
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs  FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr  Archives: http://caml.inria.fr

Re: [Caml-list] Repeat: is there a Qt binding for OCaml?

[Sven LUTHER]

On Thu, Jun 14, 2001 at 09:25:06AM -0600, Chris Curtis wrote:
> On Thu, 14 Jun 2001 00:51:54 -0700
>  leary@nwlink.com wrote:
> > Any chance of changing to or adding GPL?
> 
> PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE don't. I agree that readline would be
> cool, but in return you give up the ability to use the
> toplevel in any non-GPL environment.  GPL is a very big
> hammer; let's not go swinging it hastily.

Unless you dual license like TrollTech finally did for Qt.

This said, i am not asking for a GPLed version of ocaml, please don't take it
so.

That said, i have just checked, the toplevel directory is under the QPL, i
suppose it links also to all the LGPLed part of the ocaml runtime, altough a
quick glance at the corresponding makefile don't show that clearly.

Would a LGPLed version of the toplevel files solve this, i don't know, i just
aksed the debian legal mailing list about this, will forward what they tell me
about it.

Friendly,

Sven Luther
-------------------
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs  FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr  Archives: http://caml.inria.fr

Re: [Caml-list] Caml toplevel and readline

[Sven LUTHER]

On Fri, Jun 22, 2001 at 08:36:39AM -0700, Brian Rogoff wrote:
> On Fri, 22 Jun 2001, Sven LUTHER wrote:
> > In the end the ledit option seems the more attractive, being written in ocaml
> > and all. I would love to have it included in the base ocaml tarball.
> 
> I agree, but that would also mean having CamlP4 in the base ocaml tarball. 
> That isn't a complaint, I'd be perfectly happy with CamlP4 in there. Keeping 
> the size of that tarball down ceased being an issue with me since 2.99/3.0 
> or thereabouts, when the gzipped tarball became slightly bigger than a
> double density floppy. And besides, I like P4 and Revised.  

but it could be kind of preprocessed before distributing the tarball, isn't
it ? I am not that familiar with camlp4 though to know if thisis possible.

Friendly,

Sven Luther
-------------------
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs  FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr  Archives: http://caml.inria.fr

Re: [Caml-list] Caml toplevel and readline

[Daniel de Rauglaudre]

On Fri, Jun 22, 2001 at 04:56:48PM +0200, Sven LUTHER wrote:

> In the end the ledit option seems the more attractive, being written in ocaml
> and all. I would love to have it included in the base ocaml tarball.

BTW, ledit can absolutely be used as a library. You can use Ledit.input_char
instead of input_char (of Pervasives), and you have a line editing.

-- 
Daniel de RAUGLAUDRE
daniel.de_rauglaudre@inria.fr
http://cristal.inria.fr/~ddr/
-------------------
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs  FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr  Archives: http://caml.inria.fr

Re: [Caml-list] Caml toplevel and readline

[Brian Rogoff]

On Fri, 22 Jun 2001, Sven LUTHER wrote:
> In the end the ledit option seems the more attractive, being written in ocaml
> and all. I would love to have it included in the base ocaml tarball.

I agree, but that would also mean having CamlP4 in the base ocaml tarball. 
That isn't a complaint, I'd be perfectly happy with CamlP4 in there. Keeping 
the size of that tarball down ceased being an issue with me since 2.99/3.0 
or thereabouts, when the gzipped tarball became slightly bigger than a
double density floppy. And besides, I like P4 and Revised.  

-- Brian


-------------------
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs  FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr  Archives: http://caml.inria.fr

Re: [Caml-list] Caml toplevel and readline

[Sven LUTHER]

On Thu, Jun 14, 2001 at 02:37:21AM +1000, John Max Skaller wrote:
> I find the ocaml top level 'ocaml' very clumbsy to use,
> compared with, say, Python's top level, because it
> doesn't understand line editing. Any chance of optionally
> building it with gnu_readline?

Note :

There is also libeditline as an option. It comes under an BSD without ad
clause, and as thus is prefectly compatible with the current ocaml code and is
source-cod compatible with the basic features of readline.

If you want to use libreadline, well, the toplevel parts must be released
under a GPL compatible licence, which i suppose will not happen. It could be
possible to do some tricks to offer at configuration time the ability to link
with libreadline, so that people can built it for themselves, but not
distribute it. I don't know how much work this is and if the caml team may be
willing to apply a patch providing such.

One could imagine a default build using libeditline and a switch for linking
against libreadline, but disabled by default, and with a warning about the non
distribuability of it.

In the end the ledit option seems the more attractive, being written in ocaml
and all. I would love to have it included in the base ocaml tarball.

Friendly,

Sven Luther
-------------------
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs  FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr  Archives: http://caml.inria.fr

Re: [Caml-list] Caml toplevel and readline

[Jacques Garrigue]

From: leary@nwlink.com
> So, why not use a *compatible* license then...?

Because the GPL is only compatible with weaker licenses: LGPL, BSD,
and apparently the Python license now. (They list more, but most of
them are just variants of BSD or LGPL). This leaves you very little
choice.

There are lots of licenses, including the QPL used for ocaml's
compiler, which are recognized as free software by the FSF itself, but
are not compatible with the GPL.
See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/license-list.html for a list.
I really wish the GPL would include a special clause allowing linking
to any free software. That would simplify a lot of things.
Currently putting a library under the GPL not only means that you
cannot use it inside a closed source project, but you cannot even use
it in free software if it is not GPL'd.

Jacques Garrigue
-------------------
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs  FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr  Archives: http://caml.inria.fr

Re: [Caml-list] Caml toplevel and readline

[leary]

So, why not use a *compatible* license then...?
-------------------
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs  FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr  Archives: http://caml.inria.fr

Re: [Caml-list] Caml toplevel and readline

[Marcin 'Qrczak' Kowalczyk]

Tue, 19 Jun 2001 12:06:14 +0200, Sven LUTHER <luther@dpt-info.u-strasbg.fr> pisze:

> Python was just released under the GPL ...

No.

Date: Sat, 16 Jun 2001 11:46:14 -0400
From: Guido van Rossum <guido@digicool.com>
Subject: 2.0.1's GPL-compatibility is official!
Newsgroups: comp.lang.python

Richard Stallman, Eben Moglen and the FSF agree: Python 2.0.1 is
compatible with the GPL.  They've updated the text about the Python
license on http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/license-list.html, stating in
particular:

    GPL-Compatible, Free Software Licenses

    [...]

    The License of Python 1.6a2 and earlier versions.
          This is a free software license and is compatible with the
          GNU GPL. Please note, however, that newer versions of Python
          are under other licenses (see below).
    The License of Python 2.0.1, 2.1.1, and newer versions.
          This is a free software license and is compatible with the
          GNU GPL. Please note, however, that intermediate versions of
          Python (1.6b1, through 2.0 and 2.1) are under a different
          license (see below).

I would like to emphasize and clarify (again!) that Python is *not*
released under the GPL, so if you think the GPL is a bad thing, you
don't have to worry about Python being contaminated.

The GPL compatibility is important for folks who distribute Python
binaries: e.g. the new license makes it okay to release Python
binaries linked with GNU readline and other GPL-covered libraries.

We'll release the final release of 2.0.1 within a week; so far we've
had only one bug reported in the release candidate.

I expect that we won't have to wait long for 2.1.1, which will have
the same GPL-compatible license as 2.0.1.

--Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)

-- 
 __("<  Marcin Kowalczyk * qrczak@knm.org.pl http://qrczak.ids.net.pl/
 \__/
  ^^                      SYGNATURA ZASTĘPCZA
QRCZAK

-------------------
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs  FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr  Archives: http://caml.inria.fr

Re: [Caml-list] Caml toplevel and readline

[Sven LUTHER]

On Tue, Jun 19, 2001 at 10:39:08AM +0900, Jacques Garrigue wrote:
> > 	Alternatively, why not build the toplevel
> > with ledit?
> 
> I suppose that most people at INRIA are already using it with ledit,
> so they didn't think of including it. Also, ledit requires libunix,
> but I don't know if the terminal capacities included in ocamlrun
> would be enough in this case. The way it works currently, you probably
> need pipes. But all this should be solvable.

And ledit needs camlp4, right, but i gues syou could preprocess it or
something like that ?

> > > But the first man making a custom toplevel is dead: 
> > > having both in the same file won't do.
> > 
> > 	I am the one linking it into the toplevel, not INRIA.
> > It will have no impact on me, since I do not use the top
> > level for producing code (only for testing the occasional
> > small fragments).
> 
> The standard distribution already contains a labltk toplevel, linked
> in custom mode. And INRIA distributes binaries.

But they could distribute them without libreadline being used.

Sure this would mean more work, but i think if someone contribute a patch for
supporting it, they would gladly accept it.

That said adding ledit or something similar to ocaml would be nice.

Did not some incarnation of caml-light had some kind of librealine like
functionality ? what happened to that ?

Or was it just librealine and it was removed, because of the licensing issue ?

Friendly,

Sven Luther
-------------------
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs  FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr  Archives: http://caml.inria.fr

Re: [Caml-list] Caml toplevel and readline

[Sven LUTHER]

On Tue, Jun 19, 2001 at 02:34:38AM +1000, John Max Skaller wrote:
> Jacques Garrigue wrote:
> 
> > As long as you distribute the special runtime containing readline
> > separately from the toplevel, this reasoning is OK. 
> 
> 	Hang on! I already have libreadline.
> I don't want INRIA to distribute it, just detect if I already
> have it. If I do, I would like to be able to link it in
> to the top level.
> 
> 	Alternatively, why not build the toplevel
> with ledit?
> 
> > But the first man making a custom toplevel is dead: 
> > having both in the same file won't do.
> 
> 	I am the one linking it into the toplevel, not INRIA.
> It will have no impact on me, since I do not use the top
> level for producing code (only for testing the occasional
> small fragments).

Yes, it is ok to use, as long as you don't distribute it. So it is ok for you,
but not for INRIA rpms or such, nor for my debian packages :(((

Thats said, i would like such a feature a lot even if i have to rebuild the
package to have it.

> 	It's doubtful if the FSF licences mean much
> anyhow. Python uses readline by default in its top level,
> if available. There are lots of Python programs out there,
> being run with a binary with readline linked in, which
> are not licenced GPL, Python itself being an example.

Python was just released under the GPL ...

And because other people do it, doesn't mean that it is legal.

Friendly,

Sven Luther
-------------------
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs  FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr  Archives: http://caml.inria.fr

Re: [Caml-list] Caml toplevel and readline

[Jacques Garrigue]

From: John Max Skaller <skaller@ozemail.com.au>
> Jacques Garrigue wrote:
> 
> > As long as you distribute the special runtime containing readline
> > separately from the toplevel, this reasoning is OK. 
> 
> 	Hang on! I already have libreadline.
> I don't want INRIA to distribute it, just detect if I already
> have it. If I do, I would like to be able to link it in
> to the top level.

With the FSF definition of linking, linking with a dll is exactly the
same as including the object code. Otherwise the GPL would be nothing
more than the LGPL.

Here is the relevant quote from the GPL FAQ:

Q. If a library is released under the GPL (not the LGPL), does that mean
that any program which uses it has to be under the GPL?

A. Yes, because the program as it is actually run includes the library. 

> 	Alternatively, why not build the toplevel
> with ledit?

I suppose that most people at INRIA are already using it with ledit,
so they didn't think of including it. Also, ledit requires libunix,
but I don't know if the terminal capacities included in ocamlrun
would be enough in this case. The way it works currently, you probably
need pipes. But all this should be solvable.

> > But the first man making a custom toplevel is dead: 
> > having both in the same file won't do.
> 
> 	I am the one linking it into the toplevel, not INRIA.
> It will have no impact on me, since I do not use the top
> level for producing code (only for testing the occasional
> small fragments).

The standard distribution already contains a labltk toplevel, linked
in custom mode. And INRIA distributes binaries.

> 	It's doubtful if the FSF licences mean much
> anyhow. Python uses readline by default in its top level,
> if available. There are lots of Python programs out there,
> being run with a binary with readline linked in, which
> are not licenced GPL, Python itself being an example.

As was pointed out recently, Python has just switched to GPL.
I don't know whether this is related to readline, but clearly if you
start using GPL'd libraries, you should expect a strong pressure for
making everything GPL'd.
As section 5 of the GPL states, you do not have to accept the license.
But if you do not accept it you shouldn't use the code. I think this
is clear enough in spirit, and I see nothing wrong in that.

Cheers,

Jacques Garrigue
-------------------
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs  FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr  Archives: http://caml.inria.fr

Re: [Caml-list] Caml toplevel and readline

[John Max Skaller]

Jacques Garrigue wrote:

> As long as you distribute the special runtime containing readline
> separately from the toplevel, this reasoning is OK. 

	Hang on! I already have libreadline.
I don't want INRIA to distribute it, just detect if I already
have it. If I do, I would like to be able to link it in
to the top level.

	Alternatively, why not build the toplevel
with ledit?

> But the first man making a custom toplevel is dead: 
> having both in the same file won't do.

	I am the one linking it into the toplevel, not INRIA.
It will have no impact on me, since I do not use the top
level for producing code (only for testing the occasional
small fragments).

	It's doubtful if the FSF licences mean much
anyhow. Python uses readline by default in its top level,
if available. There are lots of Python programs out there,
being run with a binary with readline linked in, which
are not licenced GPL, Python itself being an example.

> Even distributing libreadline inside the ocaml distribution might
> be a problem: 

	Please don't. 

-- 
John (Max) Skaller, mailto:skaller@maxtal.com.au
10/1 Toxteth Rd Glebe NSW 2037 Australia voice: 61-2-9660-0850
checkout Vyper http://Vyper.sourceforge.net
download Interscript http://Interscript.sourceforge.net
-------------------
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs  FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr  Archives: http://caml.inria.fr

Re: [Caml-list] Caml toplevel and readline

[Jacques Garrigue]

Whow, even Xavier wants to have fun interpreting the GPL.

> > No. Gnu-readline is a well-known example of library released under the
> > GPL, which makes it incompatible with the caml toplevel, which is
> > covered by the QPL :-)
> 
> Waitaminute.  The Caml toplevel doesn't *link* with the Caml runtime
> system and bytecode interpreter -- just like a shell script doesn't link
> with the Bash shell.
> 
> That is, we have a piece of LGPL'd C code (the Caml bytecode
> interpreter and runtime system) that links with whatever C libraries
> happen to be LGPL-compatible and interprets bytecode for a QPL'd
> program (the toplevel) produced by a QPL'd compiler (ocamlc).
> What can possibly be wrong with that?

As long as you distribute the special runtime containing readline
separately from the toplevel, this reasoning is OK. But the first man
making a custom toplevel is dead: having both in the same file won't
do. Even distributing libreadline inside the ocaml distribution might
be a problem: the intent of using readline inside the toplevel is
clear enough that the whole thing can be seen as a whole work (cf
paragraph 2b).

> (Unless a GPL'd library cannot be linked with a LGPL'd program, which
> would be a surprise to me, but you never know with those FSF licenses :-)

I don't know either :-)

Best regards,

     Jacques Garrigue
-------------------
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs  FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr  Archives: http://caml.inria.fr

Re: [Caml-list] Caml toplevel and readline

[Xavier Leroy]

> No. Gnu-readline is a well-known example of library released under the
> GPL, which makes it incompatible with the caml toplevel, which is
> covered by the QPL :-)

Waitaminute.  The Caml toplevel doesn't *link* with the Caml runtime
system and bytecode interpreter -- just like a shell script doesn't link
with the Bash shell.

That is, we have a piece of LGPL'd C code (the Caml bytecode
interpreter and runtime system) that links with whatever C libraries
happen to be LGPL-compatible and interprets bytecode for a QPL'd
program (the toplevel) produced by a QPL'd compiler (ocamlc).
What can possibly be wrong with that?

(Unless a GPL'd library cannot be linked with a LGPL'd program, which
would be a surprise to me, but you never know with those FSF licenses :-)

- Xavier "license to link" Leroy
-------------------
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs  FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr  Archives: http://caml.inria.fr

Re: [Caml-list] Caml toplevel and readline

[leary]

Fyi, fwiw, Python is now GPL-compatible.

http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-list/2001-June/048419.html
-------------------
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs  FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr  Archives: http://caml.inria.fr

Re: [Caml-list] Caml toplevel and readline

[John Max Skaller]

Pierre Weis wrote:
> 
> > > ledit is a tool written in camlp4 by Daniel de Raglaudre
> > > which allows line editing on any program.
> > >   http://cristal.inria.fr/~ddr/index-english.html
> >
> >       I've tried that and couldn't get it to work.
> > That goes for about half the C/Ocaml packages I've tried,
> > including, of all things, CamlImages.
> [...]
> > John (Max) Skaller, mailto:skaller@maxtal.com.au
> 
> Hi Max,
> 
> This is really a pity you've found half the Ocaml packages you've
> tried broken and impossible to install. I'm very sorry for that and I
> consider it a shame for us, as we consider ourselves as highly
> competent professionals ...

	Please note I said Ocaml/C packages. And I was NOT
refering to INRIA distributions particularly, but generally
available packages including those from third parties.

	Above it is said ledit is writtin in camlp4,
another package I've had trouble installing. I'm now using
the CDK release of Ocaml. Perhaps that comes bundled with p4:

root@pelican] ~/ledit/ledit-1.8>make
ocamlc -pp "camlp4r pa_extend.cmo q_MLast.cmo" -I `camlp4 -where` -c
pa_local.ml/bin/sh: camlp4: command not found
sh: camlp4r: command not found
Preprocessing error
make: *** [pa_local.cmo] Error 2

	No, it looks like it doesn't. So I build camlp4 (no problems).
Now I can build ledit (although it isn't clear that I should
run 'make install' to use it). I try 

	ledit ocaml

and I have line editing. So this time, I have no problems with
either camlp4 or ledit.

> Also for CamlImages, please report us your problems, we will help you
> and fix the library for everybody.

	OK. I try again. The .configure summary is surprising:

Language: ocaml version 3.01
Installed in: /usr/local/lib/ocaml/camlimages
External libraries: bmp png jpeg tiff xpm ps
Lablgtk: Not found

No Lablgtk? Hmm. I have gtk. (My WM is Enlightenment :-)

OK, try the make:

ocamlc  -I corelib -I ppm -I jpeg -I tiff -I bmp -I gif -I png -I xpm -I
xvthumb -I ps -I graphics -I freetype  -c corelib/camlimages.ml
File "corelib/camlimages.ml", line 24, characters 0-3:
Syntax error
make: *** [corelib/camlimages.cmo] Error 2

Oops. Without even looking, the code is probably using pre 3.01 syntax.
I'll check. Here's the file:

(* Supported libraries *)
let lib_gif = false
let lib_png = true
let lib_jpeg = true
let lib_tiff = true
let lib_freetype = 
let lib_ps = true

(* External files *)
let path_rgb_txt = "/usr/X11R6/lib/X11/rgb.txt"
let path_gs = "/usr/bin/gs"

(* They are written in ML, so always supported *)
let lib_ppm = true
let lib_bmp = true
let lib_xvthumb = true

(* Word size, used for the bitmap swapping memory management *)
let word_size = 4 


Well, the error isn't where the compiler says it is,
but the file is small, and the bug is easy to spot:
the line

	lib_freetype =

should have 'false' as the value, not a blank. I'll edit it.
OK, now it compiles. Try the test as indicated in the INSTALL notes:

>root@pelican] ~/camlimages-1.02/test>make test
ocamlc  -custom -I ../corelib -I ../gif -I ../jpeg -I ../tiff -I ../bmp
-I ../ppm -I ../png -I ../graphics -I ../freetype -I ../xpm -I
../xvthumb -I ../ps -cclib "-L../corelib -L../gif -L../jpeg -L../tiff
-L../png -L../freetype -L../xpm" img.cma graphics.cma graphic_image.cma
freetype.cma gif_img.cma jpeg_img.cma tiff_img.cma bmp_img.cma
ppm_img.cma png_img.cma xvthumb_img.cma xpm_img.cma ps_img.cma -o test
test.ml
/tmp/cc5Dv2bQ.o(.data+0x3c4): undefined reference to
`set_Instance_PixelSizes'
/tmp/cc5Dv2bQ.o(.data+0x3e4): undefined reference to
`get_Big_Glyph_Metrics'
/tmp/cc5Dv2bQ.o(.data+0x3f8): undefined reference to `get_Outline_BBox'
/tmp/cc5Dv2bQ.o(.data+0x3fc): undefined reference to
`get_Face_Properties'
/tmp/cc5Dv2bQ.o(.data+0x400): undefined reference to
`get_Outline_Contents'
collect2: ld returned 1 exit status
Error while building custom runtime system
make: *** [test] Error 2

Hmmm. I know nothing about building runtimes: I use the 
optimising compiler exclusively. 

> Last, please feel free to publicly cite in this mailing list the name
> of all the bogous libraries you've ever found in the INRIA
> distributions or Web sites. We'll be glad to hear about that and then
> to fix the faulty programs, or even remove them from our distributions
> if they are too bogous to be fixed.
> 
> Thank you for helping us to fix our bogous software.

Sigh. I am now using Ocaml to produce software I want other
people to use. I also happen to be using a literate
programming tool written in Python.

I am going to have to ask developers to

	a) download and install Python
	b) download and install interscript
	c) download and install Ocaml
	d) download and install any other third party
		packages I might be using
	e) download and install Felix
	f) download and install Boost (a public set of C++ libraries)

Luckily, Felix is a 'pure Ocaml' program: it only
includes a couple of minor hacks that might be
platform dependent, so at present, I probably don't
need anything under item (d).

I provide python scripts to build Felix -- but they'll
probably only work under Linux, and probably only
on my box. I'm going to have enough trouble making
everything work on other platforms (esp. Windows)
-- assuming the tool chain above is all correctly
installed.

So when people say 'use ledit' I have to ask:
Why should I have to? Why isn't this functionality
standard? 

Basically, I can't use Ocamlp4 in my project,
because it adds yet another step into the tool chain.
It looks frightening enough already. 

I do understand that Ocaml is basically a research project.
And it is a superb package for production use as well,
a rare combination! And I'm really happy that there is now
a comprehensive compilation of third party libraries,
(CDK) so that it is possible that step (d) above
can be kept empty.

-- 
John (Max) Skaller, mailto:skaller@maxtal.com.au
10/1 Toxteth Rd Glebe NSW 2037 Australia voice: 61-2-9660-0850
checkout Vyper http://Vyper.sourceforge.net
download Interscript http://Interscript.sourceforge.net
-------------------
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs  FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr  Archives: http://caml.inria.fr

Re: [Caml-list] Caml toplevel and readline

[Brian Rogoff]

Being even lazier, I just type 

ledit ocaml

which works great for me ;-).

On Fri, 15 Jun 2001, Alan Schmitt wrote:

> Being lazy, I just installed the cdk, and typing
> ledit | ocaml
> works great for me.
> 
> Alan
> 
> >>using ledit.
> >> ledit is a tool written in camlp4 by Daniel de Raglaudre
> >> which allows line editing on any program.
> >>   http://cristal.inria.fr/~ddr/index-english.html
> >
> >	I've tried that and couldn't get it to work.
> >That goes for about half the C/Ocaml packages I've tried,
> >including, of all things, CamlImages. 
> 
> 
> --
> The hacker: someone who figured things out and made something cool happen.
> -------------------
> Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs  FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
> To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr  Archives: http://caml.inria.fr
> 

-------------------
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs  FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr  Archives: http://caml.inria.fr

Re: [Caml-list] Caml toplevel and readline

[Daniel de Rauglaudre]

Hi,

On Thu, Jun 14, 2001 at 10:05:06PM -0700, leary@nwlink.com wrote:

> Not to pick on ledit but it's not up to date with the current syntax
> (singular ; rather than ;;, and extra ; where none might be needed.  But
> then, I'm hardly one to know.  Anyhow, it still works fine.  :o)

It uses the "revised syntax", an alternative syntax proposed by Camlp4,
and the only syntax I use.

-- 
Daniel de RAUGLAUDRE
daniel.de_rauglaudre@inria.fr
http://cristal.inria.fr/~ddr/
-------------------
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs  FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr  Archives: http://caml.inria.fr

Re: [Caml-list] Caml toplevel and readline

[Sven LUTHER]

On Thu, Jun 14, 2001 at 03:45:25PM +0900, Jacques Garrigue wrote:
> From: John Max Skaller <skaller@ozemail.com.au>
> 
> > I find the ocaml top level 'ocaml' very clumbsy to use,
> > compared with, say, Python's top level, because it
> > doesn't understand line editing. Any chance of optionally
> > building it with gnu_readline?
> 
> No. Gnu-readline is a well-known example of library released under the
> GPL, which makes it incompatible with the caml toplevel, which is
> covered by the QPL :-)

mmm,

did not the kde guys take the version of libreadline that was distributed with
libc6 (which is under lgpl i think) and work from that ? But then it was
during the horrible kde/qt vs FSF war, so ...

Also notice, i think to remember, would need checking though, that if you
allow a program to link to a GPLed library as an alternative, then there is no
problem, so some people may be able to build ocaml with libreadline, and other
without, without further complication on the ocaml lincencing status. Not sure
though. 

If the ocaml team want to have more information on this issue, i can ask
advice on debina-legal, if you want ?

Friendly,

Sven Luther
-------------------
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs  FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr  Archives: http://caml.inria.fr

Re: [Caml-list] Caml toplevel and readline

[Alan Schmitt]

Being lazy, I just installed the cdk, and typing
ledit | ocaml
works great for me.

Alan

>>using ledit.
>> ledit is a tool written in camlp4 by Daniel de Raglaudre
>> which allows line editing on any program.
>>   http://cristal.inria.fr/~ddr/index-english.html
>
>	I've tried that and couldn't get it to work.
>That goes for about half the C/Ocaml packages I've tried,
>including, of all things, CamlImages. 


--
The hacker: someone who figured things out and made something cool happen.
-------------------
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs  FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr  Archives: http://caml.inria.fr

Re: [Caml-list] Caml toplevel and readline

[leary]

On Thu, Jun 14, 2001 at 11:03:28PM +0200, Pierre Weis wrote:
> help us to improve
> the quality of ledit nad more generally of our Caml packages.

/me interjects: Ledit needs a vi mode. :)  Doesn't look like it would be
too hard, except for maybe the modes.

Not to pick on ledit but it's not up to date with the current syntax
(singular ; rather than ;;, and extra ; where none might be needed.  But
then, I'm hardly one to know.  Anyhow, it still works fine.  :o)
-------------------
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs  FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr  Archives: http://caml.inria.fr

Re: [Caml-list] Caml toplevel and readline

[Pierre Weis]

> > ledit is a tool written in camlp4 by Daniel de Raglaudre
> > which allows line editing on any program.
> >   http://cristal.inria.fr/~ddr/index-english.html
> 
> 	I've tried that and couldn't get it to work.
> That goes for about half the C/Ocaml packages I've tried,
> including, of all things, CamlImages. 
[...]
> John (Max) Skaller, mailto:skaller@maxtal.com.au

Hi Max,

This is really a pity you've found half the Ocaml packages you've
tried broken and impossible to install. I'm very sorry for that and I
consider it a shame for us, as we consider ourselves as highly
competent professionals ...

Concerning ledit in particular, I'm extremely surprised since I use it
for years now with absolutely no problems. I think I installed it on
more than 50 machines and 5 different Unix architectures right out of
the box. So, please explain us your problems and help us to improve
the quality of ledit nad more generally of our Caml packages.

Also for CamlImages, please report us your problems, we will help you
and fix the library for everybody.

Last, please feel free to publicly cite in this mailing list the name
of all the bogous libraries you've ever found in the INRIA
distributions or Web sites. We'll be glad to hear about that and then
to fix the faulty programs, or even remove them from our distributions
if they are too bogous to be fixed.

Thank you for helping us to fix our bogous software.

Pierre Weis

INRIA, Projet Cristal, Pierre.Weis@inria.fr, http://pauillac.inria.fr/~weis/


-------------------
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs  FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr  Archives: http://caml.inria.fr

Re: [Caml-list] Caml toplevel and readline

[John Max Skaller]

Jacques Garrigue wrote:
> 
> From: John Max Skaller <skaller@ozemail.com.au>
> 
> > I find the ocaml top level 'ocaml' very clumbsy to use,
> > compared with, say, Python's top level, because it
> > doesn't understand line editing. Any chance of optionally
> > building it with gnu_readline?
> 
> No. Gnu-readline is a well-known example of library released under the
> GPL, which makes it incompatible with the caml toplevel, which is
> covered by the QPL :-)

	So much for 'free software'. :-(
 
	But how come Python uses it?
Python is (effectively) public domain!

> But there are plenty of external alternatives: using emacs, 

	I don't... I know it's probably better than vim,
but not enough to bother switching.

> using ocamlbrowser's shell, 

	.. messy .. it does weird things, like most X windows
software :-( I hit up arrow, the cursor moves up. Why?
I cut and paste a line, I get 'bad character' errors.

>using ledit.
> ledit is a tool written in camlp4 by Daniel de Raglaudre
> which allows line editing on any program.
>   http://cristal.inria.fr/~ddr/index-english.html

	I've tried that and couldn't get it to work.
That goes for about half the C/Ocaml packages I've tried,
including, of all things, CamlImages. 

> Linking the editing code of ledit with the toplevel might also be an
> option.

	Only if it is done in the standard distribution,
or in CDK (I'm using the CDK distribution). I don't want to 
patch around, and then have my fiddling undone by the
next distribution I build.

-- 
John (Max) Skaller, mailto:skaller@maxtal.com.au
10/1 Toxteth Rd Glebe NSW 2037 Australia voice: 61-2-9660-0850
checkout Vyper http://Vyper.sourceforge.net
download Interscript http://Interscript.sourceforge.net
-------------------
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs  FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr  Archives: http://caml.inria.fr

Re: [Caml-list] Caml toplevel and readline

[Brian Rogoff]

On Thu, 14 Jun 2001, Jacques Garrigue wrote:
> From: John Max Skaller <skaller@ozemail.com.au>
> > I find the ocaml top level 'ocaml' very clumbsy to use,
> > compared with, say, Python's top level, because it
> > doesn't understand line editing. Any chance of optionally
> > building it with gnu_readline?
> 
> But there are plenty of external alternatives: using emacs, using
> ocamlbrowser's shell, using ledit.
> ledit is a tool written in camlp4 by Daniel de Raglaudre
> which allows line editing on any program.
>   http://cristal.inria.fr/~ddr/index-english.html
> Linking the editing code of ledit with the toplevel might also be an
> option.

There's also ILE, which is available at one of the OCaml sites. I used to
use ILE, but then I switched to ledit, since I'd like to have an "as much
OCaml as possible" tool chain. But ile is pretty good, and may even be 
on your *nix system already.

-- Brian


-------------------
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs  FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr  Archives: http://caml.inria.fr

Re: [Caml-list] Caml toplevel and readline

[leary]

On Thu, Jun 14, 2001 at 03:45:25PM +0900, Jacques Garrigue wrote:
> But there are plenty of external alternatives: using emacs, using
> ocamlbrowser's shell, using ledit.
> ledit is a tool written in camlp4 by Daniel de Raglaudre
> which allows line editing on any program.
>   http://cristal.inria.fr/~ddr/index-english.html
> Linking the editing code of ledit with the toplevel might also be an
> option.

OK, I've got ledit working. :)

Anyone made a vi mode/version?
-------------------
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs  FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr  Archives: http://caml.inria.fr

Re: [Caml-list] Caml toplevel and readline

[Jacques Garrigue]

From: John Max Skaller <skaller@ozemail.com.au>

> I find the ocaml top level 'ocaml' very clumbsy to use,
> compared with, say, Python's top level, because it
> doesn't understand line editing. Any chance of optionally
> building it with gnu_readline?

No. Gnu-readline is a well-known example of library released under the
GPL, which makes it incompatible with the caml toplevel, which is
covered by the QPL :-)

But there are plenty of external alternatives: using emacs, using
ocamlbrowser's shell, using ledit.
ledit is a tool written in camlp4 by Daniel de Raglaudre
which allows line editing on any program.
  http://cristal.inria.fr/~ddr/index-english.html
Linking the editing code of ledit with the toplevel might also be an
option.

Cheers
-------------------
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs  FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr  Archives: http://caml.inria.fr

Re: [Caml-list] Caml toplevel and readline

[Mark Wotton]

On Thu, 14 Jun 2001, John Max Skaller wrote:

> I find the ocaml top level 'ocaml' very clumbsy to use, compared with,
> say, Python's top level, because it doesn't understand line editing.
> Any chance of optionally building it with gnu_readline?

<AOL>

This would be great. Really.

mrak


-------------------
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs  FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr  Archives: http://caml.inria.fr

[Caml-list] Caml toplevel and readline

[John Max Skaller]

I find the ocaml top level 'ocaml' very clumbsy to use,
compared with, say, Python's top level, because it
doesn't understand line editing. Any chance of optionally
building it with gnu_readline?

-- 
John (Max) Skaller, mailto:skaller@maxtal.com.au
10/1 Toxteth Rd Glebe NSW 2037 Australia voice: 61-2-9660-0850
checkout Vyper http://Vyper.sourceforge.net
download Interscript http://Interscript.sourceforge.net
-------------------
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs  FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr  Archives: http://caml.inria.fr