Hi Alexander. Thank *you* for your attention. Best regards, Rosivaldo. Em 19/01/2021 15:21, 'Alexander Kogtenkov' via Eiffel Users escreveu: > Hi Rosivaldo, > Some further investigation may be needed, but after a quick look it > seems to be a bug. Thank you for the report. > Best

Hi Rosivaldo, Some further investigation may be needed, but after a quick look it seems to be a bug. Thank you for the report. Best regards, Alexander Kogtenkov Rosivaldo Fernandes Alves : Hi all. Please consider the classes below. SPEC1 specifies (and "implements")

Hi all. My view on the matter: loops need to be guarded by variants and invariants in order to establish their good behavior. Across loops (and their symbolic counterparts) may relieve the programmer from the need of rising those guards: the loop is encapsulated inside the iterator, it will

Hi all. Please consider the classes below. SPEC1 specifies (and "implements") the feature foo. SPEC2 inherits SPEC1 and redefines foo in order to strengthen its contract (it keeps the implementation, but don't mind: the contract is what counts). Then IMPL1 inherits SPEC1 and redefines foo's

Consumer readability is absolutely a matter to treat with care. For example: I find that a rigidly dogmatic dependence on "The Self Documenting Principle" is hurtful and ignores some serious realities of writing code to be read and understood. You use the word "intent" and I would use the

Hi Larry et al As I've nearly bitten through my tongue at this point, I have to say something. Larry is spot-on w/r/t loop assertions They are incredibly powerful mechanisms and they are no always necessary. That said, I have to raise my long-felt objections to the across constructs and now, even

Of course, another source of stack-overflow is either infinite nesting or circular logic. Again--the solution is well-crafted design-by-contract assertions to help "trap" a poorly-thought or bad design and logic. Therefore, whenever I get a stack-overflow, I generally assess where my call-stack

Out-of-control or unstable loops need to have both loop variants and invariants added as needed to bring them under control. As an engineer, you ought to be able to surmise an estimated maximum count for how many times you think your loop will iterate. If it goes over that amount, then you have

Version 20.11 When a stack overflow is detected a dialog appear whit two buttons: Ok and ignore. When pressing on ok the process restart and, of course, the call stack disappear ! This is not very comfortable find loop . jacques

But the company also needs to buy pizza and coke as well. A company that sells a OS and other products can allow people to play with their development environment. A company that sells the development does not have that option. Understanding this and the low price, I was more than happy to

Exactly! That is what I mean by having security to pursue culture. Those who decide on having fun, must at least know where their next pizza and coke is coming from (yuk!), so they don’t starve. Seems I have done most of my software development for fun! Steve Jobs famously ended up on an annual

“Personally I think the success of UNIX and C and maybe Perl and others was due to the fact that the original authors (I'm not talking about the companies that employed them) did not have making money at the primary goal” To understand the success of Unix and C, needs some understanding of the

OK. Simple solution for the license problem: buy a single license for my main system. Install GPL on the two that I use less frequently. No panic. Em 23/08/2020 08:22, Richard escreveu: > Brute force: if you are comfortable using the Windows Registry Editor > (assuming you are using Windows of

Hi all, I was about to tell something similar. I know Eiffel since now about 22 years and work daily with a licensed version since about 3 professionally. Back 20 years ago I remember some small eiffel compiler and vim for a collegue wanting a free version. I'm a fan and the first to use and

Hi Larry. With all due respect, you were rather aggressive. I have *no* right at all. I claim *no* right at all. Repeating: I am advocate of free software. And of *paid* software. It is up to developer to decide: their product, their rights. If I have any additional opinion, here it is: when

Hi Larry, I agree that people should be rewarded for their work. But a direct relationship between work and reward does not happen in the digital economy. A lot of people have put a lot of free work into Eiffel, but are not getting rewards because it is not widespread. Maybe it is not widesprea

With all due respect, care, and no ill-will intended ... I noted that Eiffel Software has (in fact) updated the latest GPL version to v19.11 (?). So, this is a good thing. I forget if the "bug-fixes" of v19.11 -> v20.11 would be applied back to v19.11 or not. So, I won't make assumptions based

And additional word about using an outdated GPL version of EiffelStudio. When I just installed ES 20.11, I immediately was forced to change hundreds (maybe above some few thousands?) lines of code in order to keep my code compilable. Tons of operators had got invalid due to the new syntax rules

I am an advocate of free software. And of *paid* software too. It is up to developer to decide. My point is that I use EiffelStudio for no profit at all. Not even personal (except for learning and training design/programming skills). For the time being, I just want to contribute with some code

For EiffelStudio: The GPL-licensed source code, now updated to version 19.12 , is available in the following two locations: - Subversion repository at https://svn.eiffel.com/eiffelstudio-public - Github mirror at https://github.com/eiffelsoftware/eiffelstudio

There was a comment put on Quora (from one of the better more helpful writers) the other day about how languages that have become widespread have free licensing and those that became niche languages had restrictive licensing. Unfortunately, I can’t find the comment again. The same has happened

There was a comment put on Quora (from one of the better more helpful writers) the other day about how languages that have become widespread have free licensing and those that became niche languages had restrictive licensing. Unfortunately, I can’t find the comment again. The same has happened

Well, I'm not quite happy with the licensing either, but: The programs you compile contain a lot of free/GPL code, so as per GPL your code has to be GPL as well. At least when you start to distribute your code. It seems when you pay for a license, your code does not have to be GPL. I'd like