Subject: Re: Emacs etc.

From: "Daniel Gudlat" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 5 Sep 2000 12:27:00 +0200

coi rodo
.i la pycyn cu cusku di'e

> <snip>... In any case, the thousandfold plus increase in potential
> users does make Windows design appealing. It would be nice -- going
> back to programming languages -- if at least they had gotten
> standardized enough that a program (I mean just the marks on paper
> or screen) written in one environment would actually run as well in
> another environment of the same name -- stories of trying to take a
> BASIC program from CPM to DOS spring to mind.

Hmm, there aren't all that many programming environments out there
which promise out of the box portability across umpteen systems for
nontrivial programs with a GUI:

a) Java: as long as you have a JVM of a suitable version, i.e.
1.1.8 or thereabouts, I don't think 1.2 has yet been ported to
all platforms in question (*nices, Linux, *BSD, WinXX, MacOS),
you are all set. This is probably the first choice for truly
platform independent programming.
b) Python + wxPython (the wxWindows bindings for Python): for those
who prefer scripting languages, this is probably the way to go.
Runs on *nices, Linux, *BSD, WinXX and probably also MacOS (I'm
unsure about the status of the Mac port of wxWindows).
d) Tcl/Tk: another widespread scripting language which runs on lots
of platforms. I can't say much else about it, though.
c) Rebol: another scripting language running on lots of platforms.
May not be entirely appropriate for things like LogFlash,
jbofi'e and similar tasks, as it looks a heaviliy geared towards
all things networks/communication oriented.

Hmm, that makes 1 "normal" and 3 scripting languages, all of them
interpreted, that I can remember off the top of my head.

Bye,
-- 
Daniel Gudlat
[email-masked]
"people who quote, unlike people who are quoted, are aware of what they
are doing" the Lojban Reference Grammar (Online Version)