headers
Joris van der Hoeven | 1 May 2005 11:53

Re: [TeXmacs] compiling 1.0.5 with gcc 3.4.3

Kostas,

Please continue this discussion at texmacs-dev;
maybe someone there has an idea, in particular Ralf Treinen.

On Sat, Apr 30, 2005 at 06:53:12PM -0400, Kostas Oikonomou wrote:
> Yes, Solaris.  It may be a g++ problem, or a source code problem.
> GNU C++ keeps changing, hopefully it will converge.   In the meantime
> it's very frustrating.  Constructs that work with one version of g++ don't
> work with another version.  I don't know enough C++ to be able to tell what
> kind of problem this is.
> 
> However, I compiled 1.0.5 with no trouble using gcc 3.3.3 (which I keep 
> around as a "backup").  Does this give you a hint?

No, I personally don't use the gcc 3.* series. Compilation is way slower
than with the good old 2.95.3. Only the compilation of template librairies
benefits a bit from the new versions, because of better error reporting.

> (By the way, the experimental graphics mode is very impressive!)
> 
> 				Kostas
> 
> >Hi Kostas,
> >
> >On Wed, Apr 27, 2005 at 05:16:28PM -0400, Kostas Oikonomou wrote:
> >>When trying to build TeXmacs 1.0.5 with gcc 3.4.3, I get the following
> >>error:
> >>
> >[Joris: on Solaris, if I'm right]
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Ralf Treinen | 1 May 2005 12:51
Picon
Favicon

Re: [TeXmacs] compiling 1.0.5 with gcc 3.4.3

On Sat, Apr 30, 2005 at 07:07:13PM +0200, Joris van der Hoeven wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 27, 2005 at 05:16:28PM -0400, Kostas Oikonomou wrote:
> > When trying to build TeXmacs 1.0.5 with gcc 3.4.3, I get the following 
> > error:
> >
> [Joris: on Solaris, if I'm right]
> >
> > g++ -I./System -I./System/Boot -I./System/Classes -I./System/Files 
> > -I./System/Link -I./System/Misc -I./Classes/Abstract -I./Classes/Atomic 
> > -I./Classes/Compound -I./Data/Drd -I./Data/String -I./Data/Tree 
> > -I./Data/Convert -I./Guile -I./Resource -I./Window -I./Typeset 
> > -I./Typeset/Bridge -I./Typeset/Concat -I./Typeset/Page -I./Edit -I./Plugins 
> > -I./Texmacs -I./Edit/Editor -I./Edit/Interface -I./Edit/Modify 
> > -I/opt/csw/include/freetype2 -I/opt/csw/include -I/opt/csw/include -Wall 
> > -Wno-return-type -O2 -fno-rtti -fno-exceptions -c 
> > ./Edit/Interface/edit_complete.cpp -o Objects/edit_complete.o
> > In file included from ./Edit/Interface/edit_interface.hpp:16,
> >                  from ./Edit/Interface/edit_complete.cpp:13:
> > ./System/Classes/timer.hpp:28: error: `ftime' does not name a type
> > make[1]: *** [Objects/edit_complete.o] Error 1
> > make[1]: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs....
> > make[1]: Leaving directory `/home/build/TeXmacs-1.0.5-src/src'
> > make: *** [TEXMACS] Error 2
> > $
> 
> Any proposal for solving this issue?

Not really. I usually compile with gcc-3.4 since this is now the 
standard compiler for debian. I just tried to compile with gcc 3.4.3 
(on i686/linux) and it compiled without any problems.
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Felix Breuer | 2 May 2005 21:05
Picon
Gravatar

Re: XML

On Fri, 29 Apr 2005 19:27:47 +0200
Joris van der Hoeven <vdhoeven <at> texmacs.org> wrote:

> Recall that we still should replace entities &char; by markup
> <tmsym>char</tmsym> or <tmsym name="char"> in the TMML format too.

The drawback of <tmsym name="char"/> is that this cannot be easily
transformed via XSL. Nonetheless we need to get rid of the &char; entity
names, because the XML standard only defines &lt; &gt; &quot; and &amp;
There are standartized names for many unicode characters, but these have
to be declared inside an XML document for it to be well-formed.

One possibility would be to produce correct character codes (e.g. &#ABCD;)
This would yield TMML documents that are well-formed XML, and could this
be easily transformed into other formats via XSL. True, this is not as
readable.

An alternative would be to write a proper TMML DTD where all needed
entity names are declared. Then we could write &char; and the doc would
be well-formed. Another advantage would be, that we could treat TeXmacs
symbols that _are_ in unicode and those that _are not_ identically: In
the DTD we could declare (pseudo-syntax):

  &somecharinunicode;    -> &#AB34;
  &somecharnotinunicode; -> <tmsym name="somechar"/>

>From within TeXmacs we would always generate entity names.

I could try to implement such a DTD, but it will take quite some time
till I get to it. No, I have not forgotten about the literate programming
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 3 comments |
headers
Joris van der Hoeven | 3 May 2005 13:03

Re: XML

On Mon, May 02, 2005 at 07:05:33PM +0000, Felix Breuer wrote:
> > Recall that we still should replace entities &char; by markup
> > <tmsym>char</tmsym> or <tmsym name="char"> in the TMML format too.
> 
> The drawback of <tmsym name="char"/> is that this cannot be easily
> transformed via XSL.

And what about <tmsym>name</tmsym> ?

> Nonetheless we need to get rid of the &char; entity names,
> because the XML standard only defines &lt; &gt; &quot; and &amp;
> There are standartized names for many unicode characters, but these have
> to be declared inside an XML document for it to be well-formed.

Yes, we definitely should produce completely standard XML.

> One possibility would be to produce correct character codes (e.g. &#ABCD;)
> This would yield TMML documents that are well-formed XML, and could this
> be easily transformed into other formats via XSL. True, this is not as
> readable.

There are two points here: now and then I add new characters,
and I may forget to update all tables. We still need a mechanism
which produces correct XML even in such situations, or automatically
update the necessary tables (in a backward-compatible way!).

Secondly, Unicode indeed supports a range of characters which
may be application-dependent. This is what we may use if someone
feels for completing David's unicode tables.
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 2 comments |
headers
Joris van der Hoeven | 3 May 2005 19:53

Reorganization of Scheme code

Hi all,

I started reorganizing the Scheme code since a few days. Most things
should remain upward compatible. However, I drastically changed
the directory layout, so you may have to do some renaming of
imported modules in your scheme code. The necessary renamings have
been made in all existing plug-ins which are known to me (i.e. those
plug-ins which are in the plugins directory of our cvs).

I hope that this will be the final reorganization of the scheme code,
at least of the most fundamental part. The main novelty is
contextual overloading and I hope to improve the lazy-loading,
the preference system, and interaction with TeXmacs. At the end,
I intend to document the basics of writing Scheme extensions,
and release a clean API for tree manipulations.

Best wishes, Joris
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Felix Breuer | 4 May 2005 22:02
Picon
Gravatar

Re: XML

On Tue, 3 May 2005 13:03:33 +0200
Joris van der Hoeven <vdhoeven <at> texmacs.org> wrote:

> On Mon, May 02, 2005 at 07:05:33PM +0000, Felix Breuer wrote:
> > > Recall that we still should replace entities &char; by markup
> > > <tmsym>char</tmsym> or <tmsym name="char"> in the TMML format too.
> > 
> > The drawback of <tmsym name="char"/> is that this cannot be easily
> > transformed via XSL.
> 
> And what about <tmsym>name</tmsym> ?

Same problem: with XSL you cannot easily match strings (whether they
come in text nodes or attribute values makes no difference) only tag
names. And in any case, you would have to write a mapping from TeXmacs
names to Unicode (or whatever) entities _in a XSL stylesheet_ which is
far too cumbersome to bother with. So, if you want to make use of any
kind of symbol on an XML level, they have to be unicode in TMML as far
as possible.

Do not get me wrong: both of the variants you suggested are perfectly
fine as a fallback scheme. But to be able to actually _use_ the symbols
in a TMML file, we have to use unicode dictionaries. 

How we use unicode dictionaries is debatable, though. Options are

  1) Encode TMML documents using e.g. UTF-8, and output symbols as "binary"
     UTF-8 words.

     Drawback: Most text editors won't even be able to _open_ the document
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |
headers
Joris van der Hoeven | 5 May 2005 12:54

Re: XML

On Wed, May 04, 2005 at 08:02:32PM +0000, Felix Breuer wrote:
> How we use unicode dictionaries is debatable, though. Options are
> 
>   1) Encode TMML documents using e.g. UTF-8, and output symbols as "binary"
>      UTF-8 words.
> 
>      Drawback: Most text editors won't even be able to _open_ the document
>      properly.
> 
>   2) Use escape strings containing the character code, e.g. &#1F7E;
> 
>      Drawback: You won't be able to make sense of the document, when using
>      a text editor. But you will be able to open it.
> 
>   3) Use entity names but have an associated DTD (whereever that comes from)
> 
>      Drawback: TMML docs no longer stand-alone.
> 
>   4) Use entity names and put only the required DTD declarations into the 
>      TMML doc itself.
> 
>      Drawback: Ugly header in each TMML doc.
> 
> Thinking about it, 4) might be the best option (you wanted to autogenerate
> DTD code, didn't you :) After that, my next choice would be 2).

I would opt for 2. Remind that the litiguous characters are necessarily
very special, so we should not make our lives too difficult. If we really
want to make things better for the future, then we should submit all
our TeXmacs-specific mathematical characters for inclusion into Unicode.
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Juan Pablo Romero | 6 May 2005 04:33
Picon
Gravatar

Re: New stable release 1.0.5

Hi

There is serious bug with TeXmacs for windows, (including v 1.0.5, :( ).

The problem is that the moment you type an accented character (á, é,
...,),  texmacs stops processing some keys, (like Enter, Esc, etc.).
Some times it is even necessary to kill texmacs.

Regards

   Juan Pablo

On 4/27/05, Joris van der Hoeven <vdhoeven <at> texmacs.org> wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> Here follow the diffed and full release notes for the stable
> version 1.0.5, which is available now. If you notice any major bugs,
> then please let me know quickly, so that I can correct them before
> the official release tomorrow morning.
> 
> Best wishes, Joris
> 
> =================================================================
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> I am happy to announce the new stable release 1.0.5 of TeXmacs.
> The main improvements with respect to TeXmacs-1.0.4 are:
> 
>   * A native Windows port of TeXmacs is available now.
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Dan Martens | 9 May 2005 20:57

[TeXmacs] Wintexmacs Problems

Hello all,

Some users have brought to my attention some issues regarding strange 
document appearances and Maxima issues under Wintexmacs.
After some investigation, this was due to an outdated installer script 
which was being used to compile Wintexmacs.
This issue has been fixed and a new build posted.  Please re-download 
and install this package.

Thanks,

--

-- 
Dan Martens
Permalink | Reply | 12 comments |
headers
Vadim V. Zhytnikov | 9 May 2005 23:31
Picon

Re: [TeXmacs] Wintexmacs Problems

Dan Martens writes:
> Hello all,
> 
> Some users have brought to my attention some issues regarding strange 
> document appearances and Maxima issues under Wintexmacs.
> After some investigation, this was due to an outdated installer script 
> which was being used to compile Wintexmacs.
> This issue has been fixed and a new build posted.  Please re-download 
> and install this package.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
Thanks for quick fix!  Now Maxima works to me with
TeXmacs out of the box.

--

-- 
      Vadim V. Zhytnikov

       <vvzhy <at> mail.ru>
      <vvzhy <at> netorn.ru>
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |

Gmane