This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [rvskmbrly3 at gmail dot com: Re: Type-in programs using BASH]
- From: Ryan Cunningham <rvskmbrly3 at gmail dot com>
- To: "Eduardo A. Bustamante LÃpez" <dualbus at gmail dot com>
- Cc: Greg Wooledge <wooledg at eeg dot ccf dot org>, "gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>, "bug-bash at gnu dot org" <bug-bash at gnu dot org>
- Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2015 16:12:45 -0800
- Subject: Re: [rvskmbrly3 at gmail dot com: Re: Type-in programs using BASH]
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <6ACCC899-C8BB-4F70-B098-39BA5EECCA60 at gmail dot com> <46A90029-0F52-47DD-87CD-72345C420509 at gmail dot com> <20150126182514 dot GD13956 at eeg dot ccf dot org> <AA4B2EC3-7A5B-46B4-B1E4-78CA841C5291 at gmail dot com> <20150126184325 dot GE13956 at eeg dot ccf dot org> <CAMTwUcJ6Wk++=gqDR2QV7JwpRs0J-SfpQKER+v1wNNZX64RNfg at mail dot gmail dot com> <20150126202932 dot GA32410 at hali> <CAMTwUcLTtTaeMgwu2z2EQKWB4KMQ3POMmquVjPkbPrvCKLFUvQ at mail dot gmail dot com> <20150126214515 dot GG13956 at eeg dot ccf dot org> <CAMTwUcLSyAPcDPCkuXkUBH7LD5jrj73=ta0=7FyXjBq-J_kmCQ at mail dot gmail dot com> <20150126230317 dot GB32410 at hali> <801284FC-D85D-46FD-8E0F-A0FB2B810735 at gmail dot com>
I would also like the discussion on the GCC mailing list to end. The discussion on /source/ code, however, should remain alive and well.
Sorry for all the confusion.
And by "type-in programs", I don't mean example programs like "Hello world" programs. I mean real programs with real purpose.
Programs written by freelance authors that program for a living, to (hopefully) find a user base among even the newest of GNU/Linux users.
One day we'll be able to type in programs like these that are encoded in machine code. But that day is not now. For portability reasons, I'd prefer source code for print publication.
But, in case we ever reach that day, I won't modify my proposed GPL addendum on this topic.
This discussion is on a Bash mailing list, but for the same reason as above, it could be possible that a type-in program is published in a source code language, like C, that /compiles/ into machine language. In that case, it would have to be typed into a text editor instead of a here-document (unless your compiler supports reading input from here-documents).
As I pointed out to Mr. Stallman, I'd like to encourage everyone who reads these messages to spread the word about the idea.
Sent from my iPod
> On Jan 26, 2015, at 3:50 PM, Ryan Cunningham <email@example.com> wrote:
> No, no, not on the Internet---I mean in a paper magazine, which Internet users can also get.
> I'd like the machine code discussion to end.
> Sent from my iPod
> On Jan 26, 2015, at 3:03 PM, Eduardo A. Bustamante LÃpez <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>>> I am proposing this as a possible alternative or complement to publication
>>> on the Internet to take into account those without Internet access, though
>>> those *with* Internet access also get the benefit.
>> So you want to publish stuff on the Internet for people that don't have access
>> to the Internet? Right.
>> This all sounds like a waste of time. Don't type machine code. Also, in the
>> remote case that people will type machine code into their terminal, what does
>> heredocs have to do with that? Bash doesn't understand machine code.