www.digitalmars.com         C & C++   DMDScript  

digitalmars.D.announce - Programming language made in D!

reply "Harpo" <roederharpo gmail.com> writes:
Hello. Here is a programming language that is coded in D. The 
documentation is included in the file. It is ment to be used as a 
general purpose scripting language. Its name is HarpoScript. It 
has enough features for general purpose work at the moment, 
however its not exactly efficient. If you are interested check it 
out! Note it is only compiled for 64bit Linux.

Link: 
http://www.mediafire.com/download/cjae0pnxmjpl7au/HarpoScriptR2.tar.gz
Apr 09 2014
next sibling parent Walter Bright <newshound2 digitalmars.com> writes:
On 4/9/2014 5:31 PM, Harpo wrote:

 Hello. Here is a programming language that is coded in D. The documentation is
 included in the file. It is ment to be used as a general purpose scripting
 language. Its name is HarpoScript. It has enough features for general purpose
 work at the moment, however its not exactly efficient. If you are interested
 check it out! Note it is only compiled for 64bit Linux.

 Link: http://www.mediafire.com/download/cjae0pnxmjpl7au/HarpoScriptR2.tar.gz


A link to some design documentation would be appreciated, rather than just a 
compressed file.
Apr 09 2014
prev sibling next sibling parent =?UTF-8?B?QWxpIMOHZWhyZWxp?= <acehreli yahoo.com> writes:
On 04/09/2014 05:31 PM, Harpo wrote:


 a programming language that is coded in D.


Congratulations! :)

Another one by a high school student:

   https://github.com/Rhodeus/Script

The author had won first place among high school students in TÜBİTAK 
competition.

Ali
Apr 09 2014
prev sibling next sibling parent reply Timur Gafarov <gecko0307 gmail.com> writes:
On 10.04.2014 04:31, Harpo wrote:

 Hello. Here is a programming language that is coded in D. The
 documentation is included in the file. It is ment to be used as a
 general purpose scripting language. Its name is HarpoScript. It has
 enough features for general purpose work at the moment, however its not
 exactly efficient. If you are interested check it out! Note it is only
 compiled for 64bit Linux.

 Link:
 http://www.mediafire.com/download/cjae0pnxmjpl7au/HarpoScriptR2.tar.gz


Man, why no source code? Or, at least, API documentation or usage example?
Apr 10 2014
parent reply "Harpo" <roederharpo hushmail.com> writes:
What do you mean? There are a couple demo programs. I also
include some individual doc that explains what the different
features are. The project may be creative commons at some point.
Running a program is just running the executable with the program
name as the parameter.
Apr 10 2014
parent Timur Gafarov <gecko0307 gmail.com> writes:
On 10.04.2014 18:47, Harpo wrote:

 What do you mean? There are a couple demo programs. I also
 include some individual doc that explains what the different
 features are. The project may be creative commons at some point.
 Running a program is just running the executable with the program
 name as the parameter.


I mean without source or library/API it seems no way to embed it in 
host application, which is the point of any scripting language.
Apr 10 2014
prev sibling next sibling parent reply "Chris" <wendlec tcd.ie> writes:
On Thursday, 10 April 2014 at 00:31:34 UTC, Harpo wrote:

 Hello. Here is a programming language that is coded in D. The 
 documentation is included in the file. It is ment to be used as 
 a general purpose scripting language. Its name is HarpoScript. 
 It has enough features for general purpose work at the moment, 
 however its not exactly efficient. If you are interested check 
 it out! Note it is only compiled for 64bit Linux.

 Link: 
 http://www.mediafire.com/download/cjae0pnxmjpl7au/HarpoScriptR2.tar.gz


I'm on 64bit Linux. Result:

Segmentation fault (core dumped)
Apr 10 2014
parent reply "Harpo" <roederharpo hushmail.com> writes:
I found a small glitch, and fixed some stuff. Here is the new 
link.
http://www.mediafire.com/download/gkptmp52744ihqt/HarpoScriptR3.tar.gz
To run the demo program just do ./main program.hs
Apr 10 2014
next sibling parent "Harpo" <roederharpo hushmail.com> writes:
Note this requires the SDL2 runtime libraries to be installed.
Apr 10 2014
prev sibling parent reply "Chris" <wendlec tcd.ie> writes:
On Thursday, 10 April 2014 at 15:12:21 UTC, Harpo wrote:

 I found a small glitch, and fixed some stuff. Here is the new 
 link.
 http://www.mediafire.com/download/gkptmp52744ihqt/HarpoScriptR3.tar.gz
 To run the demo program just do ./main program.hs


Downloaded new version. Result still


$ ./main program.hs
./main
Segmentation fault (core dumped)

The hint about the library is something that might be of interest 
to people. I suggest you mention it earlier the next time. Also, 
after extracting the archive the folder is called "release". One 
would expect HarpoScript/release/. Little annoyances put people 
off.
Apr 10 2014
parent reply Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:
On 4/10/2014 11:23 AM, Chris wrote:

 Also, after
 extracting the archive the folder is called "release". One would expect
 HarpoScript/release/. Little annoyances put people off.


Creating a subdirectory with the same name as the archive is the job of 
an extracting tool. Archives with a redundant internal directory are 
annoying.
Apr 10 2014
next sibling parent reply Ben Boeckel <mathstuf gmail.com> writes:
On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 18:42:14 -0400, Nick Sabalausky wrote:

 Creating a subdirectory with the same name as the archive is the job
 of an extracting tool. Archives with a redundant internal directory
 are annoying.


Maybe in a perfect world. We do not live in such a place (especially
since tools don't flag 'tarbombs' as anything different). Either way,
get a flag added to tar for such a thing and maybe folks wouldn't care
so much about tarbombs anymore.

--Ben
Apr 10 2014
parent reply Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:
On 4/11/2014 1:41 AM, Ben Boeckel wrote:

 On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 18:42:14 -0400, Nick Sabalausky wrote:

 Creating a subdirectory with the same name as the archive is the job
 of an extracting tool. Archives with a redundant internal directory
 are annoying.


 Maybe in a perfect world. We do not live in such a place (especially
 since tools don't flag 'tarbombs' as anything different). Either way,
 get a flag added to tar for such a thing and maybe folks wouldn't care
 so much about tarbombs anymore.


It's just that...It never made any sense to me whatsoever that an 
archive extractor should *EVER* fail to implicitly create a same-named 
directory for all the archive's contents - except when the user 
*specifically* says not to.

The convention of expecting *people* (or even archivers for that matter) 
to always stick a redundant dummy directory into their archives (and, 
naturally, to keep its name reasonably in sync with the archive's 
filename - which rules out automatically handling the matter on the 
archiver's end) is guaranteed to be error-prone. And yet, AFAICS, it 
exists *purely* as a workaround for extractors failing to, by default, 
do the *only* thing that really makes sense as a default in the first place.

Illustrating this, here's how I have my system working: I only ever use 
the "extract to a new same-named directory" feature of an extractor (in 
my case, that's generally WinRAR's or 7-Zip's Explorer shell 
integration). The only exception is the *rare* special-case where an 
archive is intended to be extracted overtop a specific existing 
directory - and even that's a questionable practice anyway. Whenever 
possible, I avoid extractors that don't have this "to a new same-named 
directory" feature.

What that means is I'm guaranteed to *never* have archives clobber, or 
spew files into, the wrong directory. And yet I get that *without* 
relying on a human convention that will *never* reliably reach a 100% 
adoption rate anyway.

The only downside I face is that extracting archives from those trying 
to workaround ill-behaved extractors results in an extra superfluous 
directory. An annoyance (well, a pet-peeve TBH), but clearly not 
anywhere near as bad.

I just don't see how it could *possibly* make any sense to NOT do it 
this way.

Well, that's my rant about it, anyway. ;)
Apr 11 2014
next sibling parent reply Rory McGuire <rjmcguire gmail.com> writes:
On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 9:26 AM, Nick Sabalausky <
SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> wrote:


 The only downside I face is that extracting archives from those trying to
 workaround ill-behaved extractors results in an extra superfluous
 directory. An annoyance (well, a pet-peeve TBH), but clearly not anywhere
 near as bad.

 I just don't see how it could *possibly* make any sense to NOT do it this
 way.

 Well, that's my rant about it, anyway. ;)


:) on Ubuntu the default extractor always creates a new directory and if it
finds a single directory inside that new directory after extraction is
moves that directory out of the new directory and deletes the now empty new
directory.
Apr 11 2014
parent Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:
On 4/11/2014 3:39 AM, Rory McGuire wrote:

 :) on Ubuntu the default extractor always creates a new directory and if it
 finds a single directory inside that new directory after extraction is
 moves that directory out of the new directory and deletes the now empty new
 directory.


Personally, I'd prefer if it was the single lone directory *inside* the 
archive that was removed since their names aren't always the same as the 
archive, which is messy and just leads to pointless confusion. But yea, 
sounds like they definitely have the right idea.
Apr 11 2014
prev sibling parent "Ola Fosheim =?UTF-8?B?R3LDuHN0YWQi?= writes:
On Friday, 11 April 2014 at 07:26:08 UTC, Nick Sabalausky wrote:

 I just don't see how it could *possibly* make any sense to NOT 
 do it this way.


Tar is a tape archiver, for backups. So it makes sense. E.g. 
Backing up whole disks, piping from find to tar etc.

It makes sense, but it is annoying :-)
Apr 13 2014
prev sibling parent "Chris" <wendlec tcd.ie> writes:
On Thursday, 10 April 2014 at 22:42:19 UTC, Nick Sabalausky wrote:

 On 4/10/2014 11:23 AM, Chris wrote:

 Also, after
 extracting the archive the folder is called "release". One 
 would expect
 HarpoScript/release/. Little annoyances put people off.


 Creating a subdirectory with the same name as the archive is 
 the job of an extracting tool. Archives with a redundant 
 internal directory are annoying.


I simply expect MyArchive.tar.gz > MyArchive/

and not

MyArchive.tar.gz > release

Simply annoying when you cannot find the folder with the content, 
because it has a completely different name.
Apr 11 2014
prev sibling next sibling parent reply Iain Buclaw <ibuclaw gdcproject.org> writes:
On 10 April 2014 01:31, Harpo <roederharpo gmail.com> wrote:

 Hello. Here is a programming language that is coded in D. The documentation
 is included in the file. It is ment to be used as a general purpose
 scripting language. Its name is HarpoScript. It has enough features for
 general purpose work at the moment, however its not exactly efficient. If
 you are interested check it out! Note it is only compiled for 64bit Linux.

 Link: http://www.mediafire.com/download/cjae0pnxmjpl7au/HarpoScriptR2.tar.gz


I recommend putting the source somewhere, such as github. :)
Apr 10 2014
parent "asman" <lol.themask gmail.com> writes:
On Thursday, 10 April 2014 at 15:19:45 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote:

 On 10 April 2014 01:31, Harpo <roederharpo gmail.com> wrote:

 Hello. Here is a programming language that is coded in D. The 
 documentation
 is included in the file. It is ment to be used as a general 
 purpose
 scripting language. Its name is HarpoScript. It has enough 
 features for
 general purpose work at the moment, however its not exactly 
 efficient. If
 you are interested check it out! Note it is only compiled for 
 64bit Linux.

 Link: 
 http://www.mediafire.com/download/cjae0pnxmjpl7au/HarpoScriptR2.tar.gz


 I recommend putting the source somewhere, such as github. :)


I was going to suggest same but I think there's no source code 
available. At least, I can't find it.
Apr 10 2014
prev sibling next sibling parent reply "John Colvin" <john.loughran.colvin gmail.com> writes:
On Thursday, 10 April 2014 at 00:31:34 UTC, Harpo wrote:

 Hello. Here is a programming language that is coded in D. The 
 documentation is included in the file. It is ment to be used as 
 a general purpose scripting language. Its name is HarpoScript. 
 It has enough features for general purpose work at the moment, 
 however its not exactly efficient. If you are interested check 
 it out! Note it is only compiled for 64bit Linux.

 Link: 
 http://www.mediafire.com/download/cjae0pnxmjpl7au/HarpoScriptR2.tar.gz


You'll get a lot more interest if you put this somewhere a more 
public and reliable than a tarball on mediafire. Put the source 
in a github/bitbucket repo perhaps?

As it is, I'm wary of touching random mediafire links to binaries 
on a mailing list.
Apr 10 2014
parent Jacob Carlborg <doob me.com> writes:
On 11/04/14 00:17, John Colvin wrote:


 You'll get a lot more interest if you put this somewhere a more public
 and reliable than a tarball on mediafire. Put the source in a
 github/bitbucket repo perhaps?

 As it is, I'm wary of touching random mediafire links to binaries on a
 mailing list.


Yeah, I haven't bothered to look at this because I can't view the source 
code in a web browser.

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg
Apr 10 2014
prev sibling parent "bearophile" <bearophileHUGS lycos.com> writes:
Harpo:


 http://www.mediafire.com/download/cjae0pnxmjpl7au/HarpoScriptR2.tar.gz


The "hs" suffix is used by Haskell source code.

Bye,
bearophile
Apr 11 2014