"...it does seem a pity to let a perfectly good and useful tool like BST needlessly die..."
I totally agree. BradC has put a lot of work into BST. Given that it is never going to be a money making proposition I do not understand why he does not publish and freely license the source. So what if it is an ugly mess, as Brad has said if I remember correctly, it works. That's enough.
I totally agree. BradC has put a lot of work into BST. Given that it is never going to be a money making proposition I do not understand why he does not publish and freely license the source. So what if it is an ugly mess, as Brad has said if I remember correctly, it works. That's enough.
Only Brad could say, of course. But I can see where there might be other issues/feelings that have weighed on his decision not to.
Object Pascal that is and an absolute joy writting programs over 10k SLOC, much better than portable assembler i.e. c ++ and as you all have remarked a wonderful x-platform gui.
I can see where there might be other issues/feelings that have weighed on his decision not to.
Call me dense but I have no idea what those other issues/feelings might be.
Is it like Bill Gates never releasing his source code for the 4K BASIC on the Altair?
Well, hey, I don't understand that either.
Call me dense but I have no idea what those other issues/feelings might be.
Is it like Bill Gates never releasing his source code for the 4K BASIC on the Altair?
Well, hey, I don't understand that either.
Apparently, he used lots of tricks to save memory, like jumping in and out of code in sub-routines that he could re-use. It made it rather slow, of course.
KC_Rob,
Call me dense but I have no idea what those other issues/feelings might be. ..
Well, for one, it could have something to do with what Peter alluded to - Brad felt he'd been disrespected, taken for granted, or taken advantage of. Hard feelings are what they are, and while often there isn't any obvious "logic" to them, nonetheless they can be very real.
All pure speculation, of course, as I'm not privy to any of this and have no idea what, in fact, took place (if anything).
Apparently there were other things we were not privvy too. Brad put in a huge amount of time and all he received from some was pure flack, so he moved on. I think it is now way past getting Brad to share his code.
Homespun was also a mavellous piece of code. Both of these have been pretty much lost. We now await Roy's version - and he has the benefit of Chips original code.
Apparently there were other things we were not privvy too. Brad put in a huge amount of time and all he received from some was pure flack, so he moved on. I think it is now way past getting Brad to share his code.
Homespun was also a mavellous piece of code. Both of these have been pretty much lost. We now await Roy's version - and he has the benefit of Chips original code.
Yes, this is always the problem with anything "free" in that the provider rarely gets any or much respect, a few token thanks perhaps which quickly turns to vapour when something doesn't work the way someone expects. I note that the most respected doctors are the ones that charge the most, the more they charge, the more they are respected. Doc "Ang Wu Fu" down the street may actually cure you completely but his $30 fee gains him little respect in general! Likewise Microsoft vs Linux, IOS vs Android, C$$$$ compilers vs Forth etc (I had to throw that one in).
Peter is right, people don't respect stuff that's free. If they have to pay for it they start respecting it. It's just too bad shareware fell to the wayside, Brad could have released a limited copy for free and a full version for say $30.
Still, if you're gonna write a application in the hopes that some company will be amazed and compensate you for it, you're asking for serious disappointment. You get a contract first, if they won't and you don't like working for zilch. Then let the company swing and keep your work to yourself.
.
Or open this as GPL, or MIT, so someone can continue developing this soft. Free, closed software is not good, it always ends like this. No motivation to develop and no new enthusiast can continue.
The software has to be closed commercial or free open source, or die fast.
BST was made with Lazarus, free, LGPLed Pascal IDE based on FPC compiler.
It's just too bad shareware fell to the wayside, Brad could have released a limited copy for free and a full version for say $30.
Agreed. The shareware model worked just fine for many things. If the product died, after having had some success, ordinarily it was because people had lost interest and/or moved on to something else anyway. Those days, I fear, are long gone, however.
Not quite over yet, there is still Sublime Text 2. It's quite cool. I'd give you the link but that's a bit hard on this phone.
Yes, indeed - it is very cool! We talked about Sublime Text recently. Beautiful editor with tremendous potential... can't wait to see what Sublime Text 3 is like!
My solution to this will be the ol' standby, hang onto my Mac that runs bst for as long as possible. I'm a slow adopter anyway, so it won't cramp my style. For some projects the winnowing out of unused methods is a gotta-have.
I always figured that after an immense effort, a 77 page thread Mac-Linux-Windows-IDE-Ver-0.19.3-quot-Now-with-new-improved-PropBasic-quot-release with 1532 posts of detailed and responsive back and forth, and increasing support issues related to operating systems and features--Brad would take a new year's resolution to focus on his music or moving on with life.
Brad was really nice to add PropBasic to BST.
The only thing is, I had to send him the source files and he had to add some "magic" code and re-compile it to work in BST.
So now I cannot update PropBasic for BST...
It really is a shame because it was (in my opinion) the best IDE.
Thanks for the link re the open source compiler. BST also includes a command line downloader which I am finding very useful for the multiple propeller project. Does the open source compiler have this as an option by any chance?
C:\>spin
Propeller Spin/PASM Compiler (c)2012 Parallax Inc. DBA Parallax Semiconductor.
Compiled on Feb 27 2013
usage: spin
[ -I <path> ] add a directory to the include path
[ -o <path> ] output filename
[ -c ] output only DAT sections
[ -d ] dump out doc mode
[ -q ] quiet mode (suppress banner and non-error text)
[ -v ] verbose output
[ -p ] use preprocessor
[ -D <define> ] add a define (must have -p before any of these)
<name.spin> spin file to compile
Thanks for the link re the open source compiler. BST also includes a command line downloader which I am finding very useful for the multiple propeller project. Does the open source compiler have this as an option by any chance?
No. I use propeller-gcc's propeller-load program.
As I recall, Roy's SPIN also can include files with #include "filename.spin".
Gotta turn on the preprocessor with that -p flag though (gumble).
As I recall, Roy's SPIN also can include files with #include "filename.spin".
Gotta turn on the preprocessor with that -p flag though (gumble).
I wish we could convince Roy to give his compiler a real name. It's getting tiring to have to type "Roy's Spin Compiler" all the time. How about a clever name? :-)
Comments
"...it does seem a pity to let a perfectly good and useful tool like BST needlessly die..."
I totally agree. BradC has put a lot of work into BST. Given that it is never going to be a money making proposition I do not understand why he does not publish and freely license the source. So what if it is an ugly mess, as Brad has said if I remember correctly, it works. That's enough.
Seems I may be a little out of touch with progress on the Open Source Spin Compiler.
bst was written with Lazarus
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/
Object Pascal that is and an absolute joy writting programs over 10k SLOC, much better than portable assembler i.e. c ++ and as you all have remarked a wonderful x-platform gui.
Is it like Bill Gates never releasing his source code for the 4K BASIC on the Altair?
Well, hey, I don't understand that either.
C++ is much more complex than any assembler I have known:)
Object Pascal is cool but it offers little compared to C++ and friends.
Apparently, he used lots of tricks to save memory, like jumping in and out of code in sub-routines that he could re-use. It made it rather slow, of course.
All pure speculation, of course, as I'm not privy to any of this and have no idea what, in fact, took place (if anything).
Aren't unfulfilled expectations almost always the source of hurt or offense?
Homespun was also a mavellous piece of code. Both of these have been pretty much lost. We now await Roy's version - and he has the benefit of Chips original code.
Yes, this is always the problem with anything "free" in that the provider rarely gets any or much respect, a few token thanks perhaps which quickly turns to vapour when something doesn't work the way someone expects. I note that the most respected doctors are the ones that charge the most, the more they charge, the more they are respected. Doc "Ang Wu Fu" down the street may actually cure you completely but his $30 fee gains him little respect in general! Likewise Microsoft vs Linux, IOS vs Android, C$$$$ compilers vs Forth etc (I had to throw that one in).
That's what Brad told me. He also contributed that great Propeller USB Serial-dongle code.
Roy's Spin already works. Read Current Compiler State at https://code.google.com/p/open-source-spin-compiler/
Still, if you're gonna write a application in the hopes that some company will be amazed and compensate you for it, you're asking for serious disappointment. You get a contract first, if they won't and you don't like working for zilch. Then let the company swing and keep your work to yourself.
.
The software has to be closed commercial or free open source, or die fast.
BST was made with Lazarus, free, LGPLed Pascal IDE based on FPC compiler.
As I commented to him once, that's the problem with making a really nice and useful piece of code, people always want more!
At some point you are going to want to move on to other things, which I guess is what Brad has done.
I hope Brad knows we are very grateful. I for one would not have continued exploring the propeller without the cross platform support of BST.
Good observation that and one I have seen played out many times before.
Kind of ironic that it was developed with Lazarus as it looks like it will not rise from the dead.
As it was the easter holiday I was faintly hoping that it might:)
Touche.........
Not quite over yet, there is still Sublime Text 2. It's quite cool. I'd give you the link but that's a bit hard on this phone.
I always figured that after an immense effort, a 77 page thread
Mac-Linux-Windows-IDE-Ver-0.19.3-quot-Now-with-new-improved-PropBasic-quot-release
with 1532 posts of detailed and responsive back and forth, and increasing support issues related to operating systems and features--Brad would take a new year's resolution to focus on his music or moving on with life.
The only thing is, I had to send him the source files and he had to add some "magic" code and re-compile it to work in BST.
So now I cannot update PropBasic for BST...
It really is a shame because it was (in my opinion) the best IDE.
Bean
C:\>spin Propeller Spin/PASM Compiler (c)2012 Parallax Inc. DBA Parallax Semiconductor. Compiled on Feb 27 2013 usage: spin [ -I <path> ] add a directory to the include path [ -o <path> ] output filename [ -c ] output only DAT sections [ -d ] dump out doc mode [ -q ] quiet mode (suppress banner and non-error text) [ -v ] verbose output [ -p ] use preprocessor [ -D <define> ] add a define (must have -p before any of these) <name.spin> spin file to compileNo. I use propeller-gcc's propeller-load program.
As I recall, Roy's SPIN also can include files with #include "filename.spin".
Gotta turn on the preprocessor with that -p flag though (gumble).
I wish we could convince Roy to give his compiler a real name. It's getting tiring to have to type "Roy's Spin Compiler" all the time. How about a clever name? :-)
That is a clever idea - thanks++!