[M3devel] Rants about an improbable release

[Rodney M. Bates]

On 03/15/2017 04:14 AM, Jay K wrote:
> I don't think you should worry about when you make IR changes.
>
> Make them when you decide they are needed and you have them correct and working.
>
>
> The various build scripts are meant to build things properly no matter when/which such changes are presented.
>
>
> Just please try to update all 3 or 4 backends (gcc, integrated, C, llvm).

Well, yes, I was assuming that without saying.  The reason I would like to do as much
as can be anticipated in a single change, is that it entails making matching changes to the
front end, 4 back ends, 8 other smaller IR processing modules, and 2 declarations packages,
(if I didn't miss any).  That's a lot to do multiple times.

>
>  If not, then do so in some sort of optional way, like how Tony left LONGINT as 32bits on NT386.
>
>
> Regarding a release, I would really like to get the system sooner-than-later to a state where we can distribute it as C.
>
> So that installation does not require a working compiler.
>
>
> The 3.6 release was kind of like this, though not quite what I am after.
>
>  (it distributed C source for quake, assembly source for some parts -- C + assembly to build cm3 (m3build + m3?) -- and then cm3 to build everything else. In my vision, the C/assembly are just C, maybe the entire system...really need to sit a few days and script/python it all out -- I did get over some cmake/autoconf hump a few months -- such that the bootstrap system can use them instead of make directly...)
>
>
> There is still a fair amount of work needed to make this happen though, maybe not worth waiting for.
>
>
> I am somewhat encouraged by the fact that gradually more and more people have tried and succeeded at this.
>
> I know the system is confusing, but some people do understand.
>
>
>  - Jay
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From:* M3devel <m3devel-bounces at elegosoft.com> on behalf of Rodney M. Bates <rodney_bates at lcwb.coop>
> *Sent:* Friday, October 28, 2016 2:42 PM
> *To:* m3devel at elegosoft.com
> *Subject:* Re: [M3devel] Rants about an improbable release
>
> I agree, we very much need to make a new release.  There has been a lot
> of development since the last one, especially for having a small developer
> community.
>
> I have often thought I would be willing to do the work to do it, but every
> time, I get stuck not having any idea what needs to be done.  For one
> thing, I presume it entails verifying that things build and work on all
> the various targets, which would further entail having access to one
> of each of them.
>
> Are such machines available?  Any advice on how to proceed?
>
> On a related topic, we need to make some changes to the compiler IR, as defined
> in M3CG.i3 and M3CG_Ops.i3.  I have been collecting a list of my own for
> some time.  This is a lot of (mostly rather mundane) work, and it creates
> front/back end compatibility issues.  It would be best to do as many
> as possible at one time and get them in before a release, so those not
> doing compiler development could just use the release without being
> bothered.
>
> Anybody have any changes to propose?
>
> On 10/21/2016 12:56 PM, dirk muysers wrote:
>> If you want to improve your home you go to the builders market and acquire a drill, a hammer and so on. I you have taken a fancy to a programming language, you download and install --or pay for--  a compiler and start to program in it. Not so for Modula-3. Its source code is in the hands of a small community of dedicated people for which its maintenance has become an endeavour by itself. This is laudable and great, but what about the simple potential Modula 3 USER ? One cannot hope that he (or she, let's remain PC) will clone the whole shebang from Github and begin to dabble in configuration files, Python and Shell scripts to build his version of what represents only a tool after all. All he wants is to have a compiler and begin to work on his apps and favorite software projects. So keeping alive a language is not enough, it  has also to be made easily available to those wanting to use it as their tool and who are not interested in compiler building or simply have more urgent
>> things to do. So when will there be the next Modula 3 release?
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> M3devel mailing list
>> M3devel at elegosoft.com
>> https://m3lists.elegosoft.com/mailman/listinfo/m3devel
>>
>
> --
> Rodney Bates
> rodney.m.bates at acm.org
> _______________________________________________
> M3devel mailing list
> M3devel at elegosoft.com
> https://m3lists.elegosoft.com/mailman/listinfo/m3devel

-- 
Rodney Bates
rodney.m.bates at acm.org