Since the language is fully standardized, that would be a quite useful resource.
Update
22 Oktober 2011
As of lately, planning of a package "system" of some kind is emerging. The smackage Wiki at the standardml github repository contains the initial thoughts.
Not that I'm aware of.
However the MLton guys have a quite nice svn repository with cool stuff in it, called MLtonLibraryProject (svn webview). Though it has been a while since someone posted any code there
You might wan't to look at myLib or sml-ext
Besides that you can find various stuff spread out all over the internet. However almost all of what you will find depends on the implementer's personal extensions of the basis library(that also goes for most of the MLtonLibraryProject.
Related
I'm definitely a beginner with Conan, and I've only used it with very small projects where pretty much everything is under my control. Loved it! However, this simplicity also makes me kind of unable to appreciate the use and interest of conan profiles. Why can't CMake and Conan talk kindly to each other to pass things like compiler versions and C++ standards versions?
I imagine that the (really cool) project cmake-conan wrapper is dedicated to actually formalize the "talk kindly to each other" part I so boldly abstracted away: but even if I entirely trust it's utterly complex, I still feel there is something I'm really missing here?
As I'm trying to migrate to Conan 2.0, the need to precise host and build profiles confuses me even more (I was doing fine without them for my baby libraries, why is it vital I precise them now and what do they do?). I feel actually a bit scared of Conan 2.0 and a part of me wants to stay away from it so I can stick with cmake-conan wrapper.
Is it possible to explain with (very) simple words why what seems to complexify my (very small) project management is worth the effort? Thank you!
As a python user, if I require a module pip install whatever, it magically handles dependencies and such. Python spoiled me! I'm NOT prepared for the world of C++!
It has taken me some considerable effort just to simplify this question, so bear with me:
Essentially if I create an open source package (and it involves QT, but I suppose it could involve anything) I would like to know of an OS-independent standard of some sort that at least simplifies the dependencies issue, so if another developer gets involved he can quickly get up and running with the source.
Using pip as an example, if there are cascading dependencies, all will be added, and the developer quickly assembles his rocketship with auto-delivered parts and goes to the moon.
I haven't found a similar solution with c++, that honors platforms, but then again I am very new to this language. This question itself might suggest great misunderstanding of the subject.
Can someone set me straight on this?
Being a fan of STL, I've been looking for a modern way of GUI development.
It seems that the latest theoretical ideas were in ASL. At least, that is what theoretical papers on gui look at. For example, Algorithms for user interfaces (2009)
However, the latest change in asl was in 2010. The forums are also seem empty. It seems that ASL is not maintained and not used a lot.
I still couldn't find anything as advanced and generic. What do people use now that fills the gap?
It's been a few years, so I'm sure the original questioner has moved on by now. However, for anybody with the same question, it appears that development has moved to GitHub. As of January 2014, this is not stated on the old ASL website.
I'm reading "Design Patterns: Elements of Reusable OOSW". In chapter two, the authors provide a case study of an editor they refer to as Lexi, which seems to be written in C++. I've looked around everywhere, but the only useful link I could find said this:
The Gof tell us in a note that Lexi is
based on "Doc, a text editing
application developed by Calder". But
this paper only outlines an editor,
without any source. And I even believe
today that Lexi never truly existed as
a program.
The link provides Delphi source. I'm after C++, cause that's what I'm comfortable with, and that's what's used in the book.
Does anybody know where I can find C++ source for Lexi? If the original never existed, it would be good to find something that I can use as a base. I really don't feel like writing my own text editor from scratch just so I can work through the case study in this book.
Doc was developed using the InterViews UI toolkit. I believe that doc source is part of the InterViews distribution. Doc was used to typeset Paul's thesis. (Paul Calder was my lecturer at Flinders University)
If you look at the InterViews code you might be surprised. It was developed before modern C++ existed. For example, there are no templates. And there are no comments in the code.
To my understanding, Lexi never existed. It was created as an example for the book by GoF.
Maybe a Java implementation can help, being it more similar to c++. Here it is:
jexieditor - A WYSIWYG editor based on JavaSE. I have not had a look at the code yet, anyway
I may be showing my age here but are you sure about C++? I have a funny feeling that when that book came out originally it may have been oriented toward Smalltalk. Its just something nagging at the back of my mind, I can't substantiate it I'm afraid
I'm currently implementing Lexi analog, pls take a look https://github.com/romaonishuk/LexI. Implementation is still in progress, but most of the described in GoF patterns and concepts are implemented using C++.
This is the code source of LEXI, written in Delphi unfortunately for you: LEXI sources.
It appears that the source code might be on the CD-ROM version of Design Patterns that came out in 1998. According to the Amazon listing, the CD contains (among other things):
Sample code demonstrating pattern implementation
Furthermore,
All patterns are compiled from real-world examples and include code that demonstrates how they may be implemented in object-oriented programming languages such as C++ and Smalltalk. Readers who already own the book will want the CD to take advantage of its dynamic search mechanism and ready-to-install patterns.
Whether these code samples include the full Lexi source is impossible to tell from the listing, and the current price of the CD (£86.87) is rather high. But it might be worth checking if any local libraries have the CD in stock.
I was just trying to find out if a real working Lexi version exists, to have a concrete reference, but I didn't find it.
I found this Java version on GitHub: https://github.com/AmitDutta/lexi
I don't know, maybe it could be useful for someone's purpose here.
I have been looking at using CLIPS as an expert system for a simulator i am working on, and so i had a look at clipsmm. The only problem is that their sourceforge page has broken links and private forums.
I was just curious if anyone has had experience with clipsmm (i have learnt how to use CLIPS as a stand alone already), and i just need a little help getting the c++ wrapper working.
Any help that someone could give me would be great.
Thanks
-Craig
(sorry can't make custom tags for this so had to use generic ones)
mm is "minus minus", the standard trope for a C++ "founding" pkg (as in eg c-- itself). This is on the one hand in cognitive dissonance with its failure to be just standard C++ with no external dependencies and on the other hand consonant with its use of glibmm. It's vacuous and these dependencies are a major hassle, but I don't know of anything better for C++ encapsulation of CLIPS.
Well, I don't have direct experience, but I happen to have been the original author of a very similar set of wrappers for Ada.
I developed what I needed for a school project, and released it to the Public Domain in hopes that somebody else could build on it or find it useful. Some folks have used it, but not enough to support a full-fledged project. It looks like the userbase in the C++ realm isn't a lot better.
My suggestion to you would be to accquaint yourself with how your C++ compiler handles C bindings, download what code you can find, and dive right into it. You aren't likely to find a lot of very experienced help in a small niche like this.
If I'm wrong, I'm happy for you.