This library is a must for every unix C programmer.
seriously.
libclear.c->
#include <stdlib.h>
clear(void)
{
(void)system("clear");
}
clear_version(void)
{
(void)clear();
(void)system("echo Libclear version 1.00 by Michael Freeman\n");
(void)system("echo Press Control-D to continue\n");
(void)system("cat");
(void)clear();
}
Description: libclear lets you clear the screen in ANY unix/linux application! Developed especially for linux though! Libclear is NOT freeware!! You are encouraged to send $5 to the author!
>>44
The README only mentions that ``Libclear is NOT freeware!! You are encouraged to send $5 to the author!'' It doesn't explicitly grant you any rights on the source code, which implicitly (due to the crappy copyright laws) means that you have none. Open source doesn't mean having the source to some program, it means having certain rights the do things with the said source.
14:25, 15 July 2007 C.Fred (Talk | contribs) deleted "Libclear" (CSD G11 - non-notable software as subject, and the registration fees for said software apparently go to the article's original editor. Blatant advertising.)
Factor is cool and all, but i prefer Forth. I like to have a standardised language with more than one commercially-supported compiler available in case there is a problem with the compiler I've chosen. Also, I can understand what's going on in my Forth compiler, I'm not so sure about Factor's compiler & VM.
>>66
how easy is it to use opengl in forth?
and how's the unicode support?
Name:
Anonymous2007-07-16 13:32 ID:5KNWFfZH
>>67
An FFI hasn't been standardised, so this is specific to the compiler. OpenGL is the major motivation for upgrading GForth's foreign function interface, and I know other non-toy compilers have an FFI too, but I don't know their exact capabilities. (Note: there are lots of toy compilers, don't go near them.)
Forths are just starting to support Unicode now. An XCHAR wordset will be part of the revised Forth200x standard, for which a reference implementation exists (and is in GForth CVS).
I'm not trying to convert people to Forth, as "de gustibus non est disputandum". Still, I think it's at least worth looking at.
Name:
Anonymous2007-07-16 13:46 ID:KOgZz3yX
too bad gforth.el bails with any recent emacs build
Name:
Anonymous2007-07-16 13:50 ID:5KNWFfZH
>>69
Works for me with Carbon GNU Emacs 22.1 installed from MacPorts and GForth installed from CVS.
Name:
Anonymous2007-07-16 15:26 ID:KOgZz3yX
% ./elisp-comp gforth.el
In toplevel form:
gforth.el:62:15:Warning: `string-to-int' is an obsolete function (as of Emacs
22.1); use `string-to-number' instead.
gforth.el:76:19:Error: Symbol's function definition is void: forth-emacs-older
And no, simply replacing string-to-int with string-to-number is not enough. Meh, I'll see if I can whip this into shape. GNU Emacs 23.0.51.1, multi-tty branch.
Name:
Anonymous2007-07-16 15:43 ID:KOgZz3yX
This is getting ridiculous. After a trip to the elisp manual, replacing (string-to-int ...) with (truncate (string-to-number ...)) solved that particular issue, but now it complains the some function definitions are void. After forcing those to evaluate with C-x e one by one, it compiles to an .elc with some warnings, and forth-mode seems to work, but elisp-comp still bails.
Name:
Anonymous2007-07-16 16:49 ID:4ZZftYJT
>71
Sorry, you misunderstood me. I got those warnings too, but the .elc file works ok for me. I long ago gave up trying to understand Emacs (maybe part of the reason why I like minimalist software like Forth).
>>8
# 14:25, 15 July 2007 C.Fred (Talk | contribs) deleted "Libclear" (CSD G11 - non-notable software as subject, and the registration fees for said software apparently go to the article's original editor. Blatant advertising