CONTACTS 

SUBJECTS
Knowledge Management
Subject Index Navigation Problem
Improvements
Deleting Subjects in SDS Records

0706 -
0706 -    ..
0707 - Summary/Objective
0708 -
070801 - Follow up ref SDS 36 0000. ref SDS 34 0000.
070802 -
070803 - I have considered several approaches to enhancing or rewriting SDS.
070804 - Here I intend to review them, and maybe add a few more.
070805 -
070806 -
070807 -
070808 -
070809 -
0709 -

SUBJECTS
DOS Extender to Solve Memory Problems
Launch Other Programs from Within SDS Using Windows Start Command

0904 -
090501 -  ..
090502 - Enchancing the current program
090503 -
090504 -
090505 -
090507 -  ..
090508 - Add DOS Extender
090509 -
090510 - This essentially means adding a DOS Extender to get around the memory
090511 - problem. Until that is done, modifying the current program is a very
090512 - ticklish operation, as we are constantly fighting memory issues in
090513 - one way or another.
090515 -  ..
090516 - The best candidate for a 16-Bit DOS Extender I have found so far is
090517 - DOS/16M from http://www.tenberry.com
090518 -
090519 -    Includes the development tools and two run-time licenses for $375
090520 -
090521 -    Additional run-times are normally $25 each.
090523 -     ..
090524 -    DOS/16M is sold with a full 60-day no-questions-asked return
090525 -    privilege.
090527 -  ..
090528 - I have the following notes on converting to DPMI:
090529 -
090530 -    http://saturn.spaceports.com/~dosuser/dpmiconv.htm
090532 -     ..
090533 -    If you have a lot of code in compiled form, such as libraries (.LIB
090534 -    or .OBJ files) purchased from third-party vendors (ie. not the
090535 -    compiler makers), or if you use a lot of assembly language, then
090536 -    you'd do best to go for 16-bit DPMI.
090538 -     ..
090539 -    In this case, you should be able to link the old modules with your
090540 -    program to get a working DPMI executable.
090542 -  ..
090543 - If this works, it would give us room to grow for some time to come.
090544 -
090545 -
090547 -  ..
090548 - Use external programs
090549 -
090550 - Since much of SDS operates on files to create other files or to
090551 - extract information, it is possible to use external programs to do
090552 - those operations. These can be Windows programs which don't have the
090553 - memory limitations of DOS. This has been demonstrated with both
090554 - Delphi and Perl scripts.
090556 -  ..
090557 - The prototypes use a macro to write information to a file, which the
090558 - application reads. The application can then read SDS records, and
090559 - place information on the Windows clipboard for other programs or
090560 - write a file that can be used by SDS.
090562 -  ..
090563 - Related Records:
090564 -
090565 -    021125, ref SDS 4 0001
090566 -    021126, ref SDS 5 0001
090567 -    030103, ref SDS 7 0001
090568 -    030105, ref SDS 8 0001
090569 -
090570 -
090571 -
090572 -
0906 -

SUBJECTS
Functionality for New SDS

1003 -
100401 -  ..
100402 - Rewriting SDS
100403 -
100404 - Since SDS is based on an editor, and there seems to be no better
100405 - base, the issue of a new SDS revolves around the issue of *what*
100406 - editor to use as a base.
100408 -  ..
100409 - Rod has argued that we need control of the editor code base.
100410 -
100411 -
100413 -  ..
100414 - Use a commercial editor
100415 -
100416 - Regardless of that I think that experimenting with an existing
100417 - (commercial) programming text editor could have some advantages.
100418 -
100419 -    •  MultiEdit -- Because I know and like it. I would have to learn
100420 -       the macro language far better than I know it now, but that is
100421 -       something I have threatened to do for some time.
100423 -        ..
100424 -       The macro source is available and includes everything but the
100425 -       core editing engine.
100427 -        ..
100428 -    •  CodeWright -- Supports Perl as a macro language, and I am
100429 -       fluent in Perl. There is the editor interface to learn, but
100430 -       that would need to be done for any approach.
100431 -
100432 -
100434 -  ..
100435 - Editor with source code
100436 -
100437 - We can write an editor from scratch or start with editor code that we
100438 - can obtain and control.
100439 -
100440 - Most of the editor source code that is freely available is Gnu Public
100441 - License (GPL), and requires that source be made available if there
100442 - are any modifications made.
100444 -  ..
100445 - There may be commercial packages that could be used. Most of what I
100446 - have seen is for word processing. TxText is one of the better known
100447 - and expensive) Rich Text editing components. Could SDS be based on a
100448 - Rich Text editor?
100450 -  ..
100451 - There is a free editor component, written in Delphi, called TMemoEx
100452 -
100453 -    http://www.tmemoex.com/
100455 -  ..
100456 - It is an enhanced version of the TMemo control that comes with
100457 - Delphi.
100459 -  ..
100460 - This, of course, determines the source language for the program,
100461 - which is an issue in any case.
100462 -
100464 -  ..
100465 - Choice of programming language
100466 -
100467 - There is a strong argument that this is as important or more so than
100468 - selecting an editor to use as a base.
100469 -
100470 -     [On 081120 followed up. ref SDS 37 HH6I
100472 -  ..
100473 - If we use a commercial editor, we are stuck with whatever it supports
100474 - as a macro language.
100476 -  ..
100477 - If we choose an existing editor component, we choose its language as
100478 - well. We could choose to translate the structure, but we should then
100479 - use it only for guidelines.
100481 -  ..
100482 - The language options appear to be:
100483 -
100484 -    •  Assembler -- Not a good choice. Hardly anybody knows it, and it
100485 -       can be inordinately difficult to program.
100486 -
100487 -    •  Visual Basic -- Included only for the sake of completeness. I
100488 -       don't consider it a serious candidate.
100490 -        ..
100491 -    •  C / C++ -- There are lots of programmmers. C++ is extremely
100492 -       complex. With appropriate discipline it can be a good language.
100494 -        ..
100495 -    •  Objective C -- Built on C. Status of Windows development
100496 -       environment not known.
100498 -        ..
100499 -    •  C# -- A decent language, but that requires buying into the
100500 -       entire Microsoft .NET scheme, and that has a horrendous
100501 -       learning curve. I don't know about its performance. If we bite
100502 -       the bullet on .NET, I would prefer to use Eiffel.
100504 -        ..
100505 -    •  Java -- Widely used. Lots of code both free and GPL. Lot of
100506 -       programmers (not me). Performance stinks. I have seen a few
100507 -       editors written in Java, and they are painfully slow.
100509 -        ..
100510 -    •  Delphi -- Object Pascal for Windows and Linux. It, too, has a
100511 -       steep learning curve, but much of it is the same as any Windows
100512 -       visual environment. It is not as hard as C++, but it is not as
100513 -       widely used. It gets my vote only because I have free source to
100514 -       an editor component, and it is the language I settled on as a
100515 -       Windows development language.
100517 -        ..
100518 -    •  Eiffel -- The most elegant of the object oriented languages.  I
100519 -       have wanted to learn it for some time, but its use is limited in
100520 -       this country. I would have to investigate it further before
100521 -       deciding to use it. It was rejected for a trial rewrite of Perl,
100522 -       but I am not certain that the reasons were accurate. At one time
100523 -       it required a C / C++ compiler in addition.
100525 -        ..
100526 -    •  Perl (or Python) -- I know Perl and could learn Python.
100527 -       Interfacing it with an editor involves using a windows
100528 -       component. There is an interface to wxWindows, which is a
100529 -       cross-platform GUI toolkit. I have used an outliner deveoped in
100530 -       Python using the package, so it can be done.
100532 -        ..
100533 -       Since Perl is an interpreter, is could have performance issues
100534 -       similar to Java. I haven't seen a full editing environment
100535 -       built using Perl, so I don't know if this is an issue. Python
100536 -       can load precompiled modules, which improves startup time.
100538 -        ..
100539 -       Perl under CodeWright is also possible.
100541 -        ..
100542 -    •  Smalltalk -- Lots of people swear by it. There are powerful
100543 -       compiled environments. It is a strange language, and I wouldn't
100544 -       recommend using it.
100546 -  ..
100547 - There are other contenders, but they start getting into diminishing
100548 - returns very quickly.
100549 -
100550 -
100552 -  ..
100553 - Controlling the source code
100554 -
100555 - Perl application have to be delivered with source code. It can be
100556 - encrypted in various ways, but that is a losing proposition.
100557 -
100558 - Python and Java can be delivered with only "compiled" code, but
100559 - decompiling them is fairly easy with readily available tools.
100561 -  ..
100562 - The ,NET languages compile to a bytecode which is also likely to be
100563 - readily decompiled. This includes C# and the .NET version of Eiffel.
100565 -  ..
100566 - The true compilers, assembler, C / C++, Delphi, and Eiffel (non-.NET)
100567 - all produce object code which is essentially imposible to decompile
100568 - and is therefore secure.
100570 -  ..
100571 - Depending on how paranoid we choose to be, there is a spectrum of
100572 - protection for the source code. One could argue that much of the code
100573 - for SDS is available with the product, but it is effecively
100574 - obfuscated for all but the extremely dedicated.
100575 -
100576 -
100578 -  ..
100579 - Ease of learning important
100580 -
100581 - The choice of language depends largely on the people doing the work
100582 - and their preferences. It would be nice if we could have all the
100583 - developers on the same page so far as language is concerned, but that
100584 - might not be easy. It may, however, be essential.
100586 -  ..
100587 - Trying to pick a language that people at all levels of skill can
100588 - manage is a challenge. Rod is not a programmer, though he has done an
100589 - amazing job with the tools at hand. His comfort with learning the
100590 - language we choose should get a great deal of consideration.
100592 -  ..
100593 - I think this rules out C++. I have studied the language, and it has
100594 - entirely too many nooks and crannies to trap the unwary. I have
100595 - resisted learning it until and unless somebody is willing to pay me
100596 - to do it.
100598 -  ..
100599 - C#, Java, Delphi, and Eiffel are all relatively easy as OO languages
100600 - go. There is the learning curve for objects in all of them, but the
100601 - languages are not huge. The libraries for any of them are substantial,
100602 - and about equivalent. There are string packages for them, but that is
100603 - generally not their strength.
100605 -  ..
100606 - Perl has some strange syntax, but is manageable with some simple
100607 - rules. Python is not much more difficult. The libraries are about
100608 - equivalent in complexity. The wxWindows toolkit is about the same
100609 - level as other GUI packages.
100611 -  ..
100612 - C lacks many of the capabilities of C++, but there has been an
100613 - incredible amount done using it. It is a relatively simple langauge,
100614 - but it does have its pitfalls. C doesn't have garbage collection
100615 - natively, though there are garbage collectors for it. Lack of garbage
100616 - collection can make memory management extremely difficult to debug.
100617 - It is not object oriented, and learning a language that doesn't
100618 - support OO would have to have some good arguments to support it.
100620 -  ..
100621 - By adding techniques to C, many of the difficulties can be overcome.
100622 - Objective C is an OO language built on top of C (it was used in the
100623 - Next system) that is well regarded in some circles. I haven't
100624 - determined the status of a Windows development environment for it.
100625 -
100627 -  ..
100628 - A modern language preferred
100629 -
100630 - I think there is value to learning a current, modern, language if a
100631 - new language needs to be learned.
100632 -
100633 - That would mean C++, Java, C#, Delphi, or Eiffel among the compiled
100634 - languages, and Perl or Python in the interpreters.
100636 -  ..
100637 - I seem to be back to Delphi, Eiffel, and Perl. I have been through
100638 - this exercise from the start several times, and I always come to the
100639 - same set. I could be in a rut, but I think that these are the only
100640 - viable choices for learning a new language.
100642 -  ..
100643 - If a group of developers decided to work on SDS and had strong
100644 - desires for a different, language, I can learn anything. Still the
100645 - concerns raised above need to be addressed in selecting a language.
100646 - Simple popularity among developers (even me) isn't enough of a reason
100647 - to choose a specific language.
100648 -
100649 -
100650 -
100651 -
1007 -