|
|
|
| Does anyone know if the source code for gawk has been 'translated' into
Java? Voila! No more hunting around for distributions for individual
platforms.
TIA,
Sashi
| |
| Kenny McCormack 2005-08-05, 4:59 pm |
| In article <1123266947.365596.44710@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
Sashi <smalladi@gmail.com> wrote:
>Does anyone know if the source code for gawk has been 'translated' into
>Java? Voila! No more hunting around for distributions for individual
>platforms.
>TIA,
>Sashi
>
Does anyone know if the source code for Windows XP has been 'translated'
into Java? Voila! No more hunting around for distributions for individual
platforms.
| |
| Janis Papanagnou 2005-08-05, 4:59 pm |
| Sashi wrote:
> Does anyone know if the source code for gawk has been 'translated' into
> Java? Voila! No more hunting around for distributions for individual
> platforms.
> TIA,
> Sashi
>
I think the implications of the two words "translated" and "Voila!" don't
match.
Janis
| |
|
| Well, what I meant was that I wanted to use gawk for Solaris 8 and I
couldn't find it anywhere and that made me wonder if the source code
was available in Java rather than C/C++ so that I could compile it and
use the executable.
Hope this makes more sense.
Sashi
| |
| Kenny McCormack 2005-08-05, 4:59 pm |
| In article <1123272051.419402.19030@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>,
Sashi <smalladi@gmail.com> wrote:
>Well, what I meant was that I wanted to use gawk for Solaris 8 and I
>couldn't find it anywhere and that made me wonder if the source code
>was available in Java rather than C/C++ so that I could compile it and
>use the executable.
>Hope this makes more sense.
>Sashi
>
No, it makes even less sense. There is no more portable language than C.
Why can't you just get the C source and "compile it and use the
executable." ?
| |
| William Park 2005-08-05, 4:59 pm |
| Sashi <smalladi@gmail.com> wrote:
> Well, what I meant was that I wanted to use gawk for Solaris 8 and I
> couldn't find it anywhere and that made me wonder if the source code
> was available in Java rather than C/C++ so that I could compile it and
> use the executable.
> Hope this makes more sense.
> Sashi
Are you saying you can compile Java, but not C? Gawk is written in C.
Bash is written in C. Perl is written in C. Python is written in C.
--
William Park <opengeometry@yahoo.ca>, Toronto, Canada
ThinFlash: Linux thin-client on USB key (flash) drive
http://home.eol.ca/~parkw/thinflash.html
BashDiff: Super Bash shell
http://freshmeat.net/projects/bashdiff/
| |
| Chris F.A. Johnson 2005-08-05, 4:59 pm |
| On 2005-08-05, William Park wrote:
> Sashi <smalladi@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Are you saying you can compile Java, but not C? Gawk is written in C.
> Bash is written in C. Perl is written in C. Python is written in C.
IIRC, Solaris does not have a C compiler installed by default.
--
Chris F.A. Johnson <http://cfaj.freeshell.org>
========================================
==========================
Shell Scripting Recipes: A Problem-Solution Approach, 2005, Apress
<http://www.torfree.net/~chris/books/cfaj/ssr.html>
| |
| Kenny McCormack 2005-08-05, 4:59 pm |
| In article <3rvcs2-2et.ln1@rogers.com>,
Chris F.A. Johnson <cfajohnson@gmail.com> wrote:
....
> IIRC, Solaris does not have a C compiler installed by default.
And yet, interestingly enough, every Solaris box I've ever used has had
a C compiler, and almost none of them have had this "Java" thing.
| |
| Bill Marcum 2005-08-05, 9:59 pm |
| On 5 Aug 2005 13:00:51 -0700, Sashi
<smalladi@gmail.com> wrote:
> Well, what I meant was that I wanted to use gawk for Solaris 8 and I
> couldn't find it anywhere
Not even in sunfreeware.com?
--
Tonight you will pay the wages of sin; Don't forget to leave a tip.
| |
| gerryt@vcn.bc.ca 2005-08-06, 3:59 am |
|
Sashi wrote:
> Well, what I meant was that I wanted to use gawk for Solaris 8 and I
> couldn't find it anywhere
How hard did you try? Answer: not very if at all.
Sure you are new at this but you must have heard of Google : <
> and that made me wonder if the source code
> was available in Java rather than C/C++ so that I could compile it and
> use the executable.
> Hope this makes more sense.
No - I doubt there is any c++ in gawk source.. : >
And you dont "compile" with Java IMO - source ends up as byte code.
I dont know what Java's strengths are really but I dont think
parsing is one of them compared to C..
Anyway goto www.blastwave.org for gawk - forget sunfreeware
unless you are s ing Solaris 7 or less stuff..
| |
| Hannes Liesen 2005-08-06, 8:59 am |
| Sashi wrote:
> Java? Voila! No more hunting around for distributions for individual
Do not incorporate Frenach into your language.
Incorporating French into the own language
is totally passé.
There is a project on AWE in Java on sourceforge:
http://sourceforge.net/projects/libjawk/
As usual for Java projects this Jave project
has no bugs at all. Unfortunately it has no releases
either.
| |
| Loki Harfagr 2005-08-06, 8:59 am |
| Le Fri, 05 Aug 2005 13:00:51 -0700, Sashi a écrit_:
> Well, what I meant was that I wanted to use gawk for Solaris 8 and I
> couldn't find it anywhere and that made me wonder if the source code
Mmm, now this is strange!
I remember you were looking for it.
I also remember I gave you the proper address.
And more funny was the fact that I gave an example of link
that happened to correspond to your platform and version :
==>>
You can start here and pick a mirror
http://www.sunfreeware.com/ftp.html
As you didn't mention your contry and OS version/cpu I can't
make it closer ;-)
For instance, if you don't mind a french mirror and
by chance you run OS8 on a SPARC :
ftp://ftp.club-internet.fr/pub/mirr...-sparc-local.gz
<<==
Or was it that you didn't read the answers or you suddenly changed your
mind on what version you'd use ?
Anyway, starting at the page I linked you'll find any other version
you'll need ;-)
| |
| E. Rosten 2005-08-06, 8:59 am |
| On Fri, 05 Aug 2005 11:35:47 -0700, Sashi wrote:
> Does anyone know if the source code for gawk has been 'translated' into
> Java? Voila! No more hunting around for distributions for individual
> platforms.
> TIA,
> Sashi
http://www.axiomsol.com/ have a C compiler which targets the JVM. I have
never used the software neither am I in any way related to the company: I
saw it throught the random freshmeat links which slashdot has every day.
Anyway, buy the compiler and compile gawk.
-Ed
--
(You can't go wrong with psycho-rats.) (er258)(@)(eng.cam)(.ac.uk)
/d{def}def/f{/Times findfont s scalefont setfont}d/s{10}d/r{roll}d f 5/m
{moveto}d -1 r 230 350 m 0 1 179{1 index show 88 rotate 4 mul 0 rmoveto}
for /s 15 d f pop 240 420 m 0 1 3 { 4 2 1 r sub -1 r show } for showpage
| |
| John L 2005-08-06, 8:59 am |
|
"Sashi" <smalladi@gmail.com> wrote in message news:1123272051.419402.19030@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
> Well, what I meant was that I wanted to use gawk for Solaris 8 and I
> couldn't find it anywhere
Gawk is on the Solaris 8 companion software cd, and
can be downloaded from http://www.sunfreeware.com
and from http://www.blastwave.org
If your sys admin has loaded the companion cd then
gawk (and the other software) will be /opt/sfw/bin
which might not be in your default path.
--
John.
| |
| Kenny McCormack 2005-08-06, 4:59 pm |
| In article <dd2f38$khu$1@news8.svr.pol.co.uk>,
John L <jl@lammtarra.fslife.co.uk> wrote:
>
>"Sashi" <smalladi@gmail.com> wrote in message news:1123272051.419402.19030@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
What you meant is that you didn't try very hard, if at all.
[color=darkred]
>Gawk is on the Solaris 8 companion software cd, and
>can be downloaded from http://www.sunfreeware.com
>and from http://www.blastwave.org
>
>If your sys admin has loaded the companion cd then
>gawk (and the other software) will be /opt/sfw/bin
>which might not be in your default path.
That is, in fact, a valid point. I found that out almost by accident --
that current Solaris installs put a bunch of stuff in /opt/sfw and then
don't put that dir on your path. Weird (but not necessarily bad).
| |
| Jürgen Kahrs 2005-08-06, 4:59 pm |
| Hannes Liesen wrote:
> There is a project on AWE in Java on sourceforge:
> http://sourceforge.net/projects/libjawk/
This looks like hot air.
No release, no doc, status=planning.
> As usual for Java projects this Jave project
> has no bugs at all. Unfortunately it has no releases
> either.
The source code seems to contains 0 bugs in 0 lines.
| |
| Hannes Liesen 2005-08-06, 4:59 pm |
| Jürgen Kahrs wrote:
> Hannes Liesen wrote:
>
>
>
>
> This looks like hot air.
> No release, no doc, status=planning.
>
>
>
>
> The source code seems to contains 0 bugs in 0 lines.
I agree. French has too much grammar to incorporate
it into English, and Java is too typesafe that awk
could be incorpated into Java. So we have 0 lines
and 0 bugs with this project.
| |
| Hannes Liesen 2005-08-06, 4:59 pm |
| Kenny McCormack wrote:
> In article <1123272051.419402.19030@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>,
> Sashi <smalladi@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> No, it makes even less sense. There is no more portable language than C.
> Why can't you just get the C source and "compile it and use the
> executable." ?
>
There is a more portabale language than C.
AWK!
| |
| Bill Marcum 2005-08-06, 4:59 pm |
| On Sat, 06 Aug 2005 22:21:04 +0200, Hannes Liesen
<sabbelkopp@world.at> wrote:
> There is a more portabale language than C.
> AWK!
>
Indeed, Solaris comes with three versions of awk, but the original
poster was looking for gawk, and having difficulty finding it. I think
sunfreeware.com is the answer; you should find a compiled gawk package
there, or you can get gcc and compile your own.
--
Tonight you will pay the wages of sin; Don't forget to leave a tip.
| |
|
| Things get a bit tricky here if you try to compute the number of bugs
per line (or the number of lines per bug) in this project as 0/0 is
hard to do (well, actually, undefined.)
Hannes Liesen wrote:
> J=FCrgen Kahrs wrote:
>
>
> I agree. French has too much grammar to incorporate
> it into English, and Java is too typesafe that awk
> could be incorpated into Java. So we have 0 lines
> and 0 bugs with this project.
| |
|
| Would it make any sense to say that the number of lines per bug is
infinitely none?
:-)
| |
| J??rgen Kahrs 2005-08-25, 7:57 am |
| Galen wrote:
> Things get a bit tricky here if you try to compute the number of bugs
> per line (or the number of lines per bug) in this project as 0/0 is
> hard to do (well, actually, undefined.)
Yes, being a humble CompSci graduate, I actually avoided the division operation.
Even verbally:
[color=darkred]
But seriously, division by zero is more than just
a theoretical problem. In the early 1990s it was
still quite common that statistical software and
also software for analysis of 'chaos data' crashed
if I supplied all 0s (no differences between samples).
|
|
|
|