Re: [Ql-Users] Software Preservation Project - Tasks
Take off the https:// bit and it should be OK On Sun, 10 Jul 2016 at 15:54, Norman Dunbar wrote: > Dilwyn, > > The link > https://quanta.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/QUANTA-HELPLINE-07.pdf > gets me to a security page telling me that quanta.org.uk is unsafe. It > seems that the security certificate - SSL? - expired some 129 days ago. Is > there ome one at Quanta who needs to know? > > > Cheers, > Norm. > -- > Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. > ___ > QL-Users Mailing List > ___ QL-Users Mailing List
Re: [Ql-Users] Software Preservation Project - Tasks
Dilwyn, The link https://quanta.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/QUANTA-HELPLINE-07.pdf gets me to a security page telling me that quanta.org.uk is unsafe. It seems that the security certificate - SSL? - expired some 129 days ago. Is there ome one at Quanta who needs to know? Cheers, Norm. -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. ___ QL-Users Mailing List
Re: [Ql-Users] Software Preservation Project - Tasks
I think, but I'm not 100% certain, that the source code for Turbo, The Editor etc, by the author who's name escapes me right now, are or were online many years ago. I may even have downloaded them at some point. I remember definitely looking through the source for The Editor so I did get it somewhere legal. Turbo was originally by Simon Goodwin and Chas Dillon. At various stages, parts were updated by David Gilham, Mark Knight and George Gwilt. George maintains it now and both the compiler, toolkit, manuals and sources are available to download free of charge nowadays from George's site at http://gwiltprogs.info/page2.htm The Editor was originally from Chas Dillon and was updated by Mark Knight as "Editor 2000". This updated version plus sources is available to download as freeware from my site at http://www.dilwyn.me.uk/editview/index.html The sources for many of Chas Dillon's programs are at http://www.dilwyn.me.uk/cdillon/index.html (sadly not including CPort). These are Freeware and not public domain. At the time, Chas only supplied me with the sources - you will need Turbo to recompile them and some of them include only limited documentation. Unfortunately, I don't still have a copy of Chas's original message (lost during computer failure a few years ago) concerning the release of his QL software and without that email I can't be 100% sure that all of his programs were covered. I do remember that his copies were held on the hard disk of a failed Thor XVI and what appears on my site was what he had been able to recover at the time. Perhaps if Rich or anyone else I was in contact with at the time has copies of that email, I could do with a copy to verify exactly what was said. Reverse engineering a compiled SuperBasic task might be more trouble than simply rewriting from scratch? If necessary there's a program I wrote yes ago, which Dilwyn updated, that decodes a QSAVE'd program. I'm certain that could be used as the basis for a new Cport lexer perhaps. It is called something like decode_qsave or similar. It formed the basis of a Quanta Helpline article, available from the Quanta website at https://quanta.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/QUANTA-HELPLINE-07.pdf - I think it's the same article as the one below. The updating Norman referred to was to get it to decode some additional tokens in SBASIC. There's a doc file here, I think it's Word format: http://www.sitelevel.com/click?url=http%3a%2f%2fwww.dilwyn.me.uk%2fdocs%2fformats%2fsavfiles.doc&sid=YCsXx5g7rfbNG11e - which contains a listing of the program. Also at http://www.dilwyn.me.uk/docs/formats/savfiles.pdf Dilwyn Jones - No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2016.0.7640 / Virus Database: 4627/12591 - Release Date: 07/10/16 ___ QL-Users Mailing List
Re: [Ql-Users] Software Preservation Project - Tasks
Yes - Simon Goodwin was the author of Turbo and Supercharge and released the source code for Turbo when Digital Precision ceased business and all rights reverted to the authors. Chas Dillon also released his code as freeware (possibly even public domain). No idea what happened with the other authors however... Rich > On July 10, 2016 at 2:14 PM Wolf wrote: > > > Hi all, > > isn't Turbo maintained by Grorge Gwilt? > > Wolfgang > > On 07/10/2016 02:22 PM, Norman Dunbar wrote: > > Afternoon all. > > > > I think, but I'm not 100% certain, that the source code for Turbo, The > > Editor etc, by the author who's name escapes me right now, are or were > > online many years ago. I may even have downloaded them at some point. I > > remember definitely looking through the source for The Editor so I did get > > it somewhere legal. > > > > Having said that, I don't remember if Cport was included. > > > > Reverse engineering a compiled SuperBasic task might be more trouble than > > simply rewriting from scratch? If necessary there's a program I wrote yes > > ago, which Dilwyn updated, that decodes a QSAVE'd program. I'm certain that > > could be used as the basis for a new Cport lexer perhaps. It is called > > something like decode_qsave or similar. > > > > There's a doc file here, I think it's Word format: > > http://www.sitelevel.com/click?url=http%3a%2f%2fwww.dilwyn.me.uk%2fdocs%2fformats%2fsavfiles.doc&sid=YCsXx5g7rfbNG11e > > - which contains a listing of the program. > > > > Doing it as new should allow the cfix stuff to be included without needing a > > separate task to do it. Plus, it could be made easier to translate to C - > > how hard could it be? ;-) > > > > To be honest, I paid for Cport all those years ago, but have used it > > infrequently. It's a great idea, it fell down in practice. There always > > seemed to be far too much work post conversion just to get a clean C68 > > compile,never mind getting the code to work! > > > > > > Cheers, > > Norm. > > > > On 9 July 2016 22:17:45 BST, Michael Bulford > > wrote: > >> On Thursday 7 July 2016, 21:29:04, Rich Mellor (RWAP) wrote : > >> > >> > >>> Shirley Butler (C-Fix program for use with SuperBASIC C-Port) - not > >> sure if she > >>> had any more involvement in C-Port. I also emailed Dave Walker, but > >> no response > >>> from either > >> > >> Hi Rich, > >> I also wrote to Shirley, but had no response. This morning, > >> I tried ringing her on the number she gave in the C-Fix user manual > >>from 1992, but this was unobtainable. Are you still in contact with > >> Freddy Vaccha? Perhaps he might know something. > >> What I would like to do is to get a copy of the source SuperBASIC code > >> for both C-Port and C-Fix. The idea being to update them so that they > >> can work fully with modern day emulators, and also to cure some bugs > >> and generally improve them. I have actually managed to use C-Port > >> with some success. Recently I have C-Ported a 58k SBASIC program into > >> Cee without any problems. I did of course have to keep on changing the > >> code until it finally Cported. The resulting Cee code certainly needed > >> some tinkering with before it would C68 compile. The program was a > >> version of the Travelling Salesman program, which I have been working > >> on with Steve Poole. In my opinion, C-Port is far better than its > >> reputation, but is certainly in need of some improvement. The C-Fix > >> addition is very useful, however it is not complete. The numeric array > >> bases have not been treated. > >> If however the source is unavailable, then how about reverse > >> engineering?Derek, have you thought any more about your idea of reverse > >> engineering Turbo? I would be willing to work with you jointly on > >> this. I am well acquainted with the Turbo parser and understand how it > >> works. If you can regenerate the pseudo-code for C-Port, I am sure I > >> could regenerate the SuperBASIC code from there. What we could end up > >> with is a SuperBASIC program that perhaps works, but would be totally > >> unreadable, since we would not know the original variable names used. > >> We would just have to guess at how it works. But this would be a > >> start. This may take some while to complete, but the more time spent > >> on it, the better it would become. > >> About the legal aspect, I would agree this may be illegal - if we go by > >> the letter of the law. But if we go by the spirit of the law, this may > >> be another matter. We would be producing something that would be of > >> benefit to the whole QL community. I am certain the authors of Turbo / > >> Cport / C-Fix would welcome our contributions. > >> We may not have to go down this road. Who knows - perhaps Freddy > >> Vaccha can come up with the goods - and supply the SuperBASIC sources. > >> If anybody knows him, can you please contact him and ask. > >> Michael > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> ___ > >> QL-Users Mailing List
Re: [Ql-Users] Software Preservation Project - Tasks
Hi all, isn't Turbo maintained by Grorge Gwilt? Wolfgang On 07/10/2016 02:22 PM, Norman Dunbar wrote: Afternoon all. I think, but I'm not 100% certain, that the source code for Turbo, The Editor etc, by the author who's name escapes me right now, are or were online many years ago. I may even have downloaded them at some point. I remember definitely looking through the source for The Editor so I did get it somewhere legal. Having said that, I don't remember if Cport was included. Reverse engineering a compiled SuperBasic task might be more trouble than simply rewriting from scratch? If necessary there's a program I wrote yes ago, which Dilwyn updated, that decodes a QSAVE'd program. I'm certain that could be used as the basis for a new Cport lexer perhaps. It is called something like decode_qsave or similar. There's a doc file here, I think it's Word format: http://www.sitelevel.com/click?url=http%3a%2f%2fwww.dilwyn.me.uk%2fdocs%2fformats%2fsavfiles.doc&sid=YCsXx5g7rfbNG11e - which contains a listing of the program. Doing it as new should allow the cfix stuff to be included without needing a separate task to do it. Plus, it could be made easier to translate to C - how hard could it be? ;-) To be honest, I paid for Cport all those years ago, but have used it infrequently. It's a great idea, it fell down in practice. There always seemed to be far too much work post conversion just to get a clean C68 compile,never mind getting the code to work! Cheers, Norm. On 9 July 2016 22:17:45 BST, Michael Bulford wrote: On Thursday 7 July 2016, 21:29:04, Rich Mellor (RWAP) wrote : Shirley Butler (C-Fix program for use with SuperBASIC C-Port) - not sure if she had any more involvement in C-Port. I also emailed Dave Walker, but no response from either Hi Rich, I also wrote to Shirley, but had no response. This morning, I tried ringing her on the number she gave in the C-Fix user manual from 1992, but this was unobtainable. Are you still in contact with Freddy Vaccha? Perhaps he might know something. What I would like to do is to get a copy of the source SuperBASIC code for both C-Port and C-Fix. The idea being to update them so that they can work fully with modern day emulators, and also to cure some bugs and generally improve them. I have actually managed to use C-Port with some success. Recently I have C-Ported a 58k SBASIC program into Cee without any problems. I did of course have to keep on changing the code until it finally Cported. The resulting Cee code certainly needed some tinkering with before it would C68 compile. The program was a version of the Travelling Salesman program, which I have been working on with Steve Poole. In my opinion, C-Port is far better than its reputation, but is certainly in need of some improvement. The C-Fix addition is very useful, however it is not complete. The numeric array bases have not been treated. If however the source is unavailable, then how about reverse engineering?Derek, have you thought any more about your idea of reverse engineering Turbo? I would be willing to work with you jointly on this. I am well acquainted with the Turbo parser and understand how it works. If you can regenerate the pseudo-code for C-Port, I am sure I could regenerate the SuperBASIC code from there. What we could end up with is a SuperBASIC program that perhaps works, but would be totally unreadable, since we would not know the original variable names used. We would just have to guess at how it works. But this would be a start. This may take some while to complete, but the more time spent on it, the better it would become. About the legal aspect, I would agree this may be illegal - if we go by the letter of the law. But if we go by the spirit of the law, this may be another matter. We would be producing something that would be of benefit to the whole QL community. I am certain the authors of Turbo / Cport / C-Fix would welcome our contributions. We may not have to go down this road. Who knows - perhaps Freddy Vaccha can come up with the goods - and supply the SuperBASIC sources. If anybody knows him, can you please contact him and ask. Michael ___ QL-Users Mailing List ___ QL-Users Mailing List
Re: [Ql-Users] Software Preservation Project - Tasks
Afternoon all. I think, but I'm not 100% certain, that the source code for Turbo, The Editor etc, by the author who's name escapes me right now, are or were online many years ago. I may even have downloaded them at some point. I remember definitely looking through the source for The Editor so I did get it somewhere legal. Having said that, I don't remember if Cport was included. Reverse engineering a compiled SuperBasic task might be more trouble than simply rewriting from scratch? If necessary there's a program I wrote yes ago, which Dilwyn updated, that decodes a QSAVE'd program. I'm certain that could be used as the basis for a new Cport lexer perhaps. It is called something like decode_qsave or similar. There's a doc file here, I think it's Word format: http://www.sitelevel.com/click?url=http%3a%2f%2fwww.dilwyn.me.uk%2fdocs%2fformats%2fsavfiles.doc&sid=YCsXx5g7rfbNG11e - which contains a listing of the program. Doing it as new should allow the cfix stuff to be included without needing a separate task to do it. Plus, it could be made easier to translate to C - how hard could it be? ;-) To be honest, I paid for Cport all those years ago, but have used it infrequently. It's a great idea, it fell down in practice. There always seemed to be far too much work post conversion just to get a clean C68 compile,never mind getting the code to work! Cheers, Norm. On 9 July 2016 22:17:45 BST, Michael Bulford wrote: >On Thursday 7 July 2016, 21:29:04, Rich Mellor (RWAP) wrote : > > >> Shirley Butler (C-Fix program for use with SuperBASIC C-Port) - not >sure if she >> had any more involvement in C-Port. I also emailed Dave Walker, but >no response >> from either > >Hi Rich, >I also wrote to Shirley, but had no response. This morning, >I tried ringing her on the number she gave in the C-Fix user manual >from 1992, but this was unobtainable. Are you still in contact with >Freddy Vaccha? Perhaps he might know something. >What I would like to do is to get a copy of the source SuperBASIC code >for both C-Port and C-Fix. The idea being to update them so that they >can work fully with modern day emulators, and also to cure some bugs >and generally improve them. I have actually managed to use C-Port >with some success. Recently I have C-Ported a 58k SBASIC program into >Cee without any problems. I did of course have to keep on changing the >code until it finally Cported. The resulting Cee code certainly needed >some tinkering with before it would C68 compile. The program was a >version of the Travelling Salesman program, which I have been working >on with Steve Poole. In my opinion, C-Port is far better than its >reputation, but is certainly in need of some improvement. The C-Fix >addition is very useful, however it is not complete. The numeric array >bases have not been treated. >If however the source is unavailable, then how about reverse >engineering?Derek, have you thought any more about your idea of reverse >engineering Turbo? I would be willing to work with you jointly on >this. I am well acquainted with the Turbo parser and understand how it >works. If you can regenerate the pseudo-code for C-Port, I am sure I >could regenerate the SuperBASIC code from there. What we could end up >with is a SuperBASIC program that perhaps works, but would be totally >unreadable, since we would not know the original variable names used. >We would just have to guess at how it works. But this would be a >start. This may take some while to complete, but the more time spent >on it, the better it would become. >About the legal aspect, I would agree this may be illegal - if we go by >the letter of the law. But if we go by the spirit of the law, this may >be another matter. We would be producing something that would be of >benefit to the whole QL community. I am certain the authors of Turbo / >Cport / C-Fix would welcome our contributions. >We may not have to go down this road. Who knows - perhaps Freddy >Vaccha can come up with the goods - and supply the SuperBASIC sources. >If anybody knows him, can you please contact him and ask. >Michael > > > > > > >___ >QL-Users Mailing List -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. ___ QL-Users Mailing List