Holt Software closer to releasing source?

[BigBear]

http://www.holtsoft.com/

Holtsoft.com is back I was just testing Sys.Exec and what do you know.

Nothing on the website is new they posted the free downloads and edited the wiki page that the source will be posted publically but shortly after the website went down and compsci started hosting the different versions.

[DtY]

I hope there's a working Linux version before the end of the school year

[Dan]

My understand from talking with Dr. holt threw e-mail was the source would not be reaslied as the code is in bad shape and as they are out of business they have no one to clean it up.

I have also asked about a linux version in the past. There is one but is very out of date and never ment for public use. It also dose not have an IDE.

You can run turing on linux threw wine or use an emulator/virutal mashen of some kind.

[DtY]

Dan @ Fri May 01, 2009 7:31 pm wrote:

My understand from talking with Dr. holt threw e-mail was the source would not be reaslied as the code is in bad shape and as they are out of business they have no one to clean it up.

I have also asked about a linux version in the past. There is one but is very out of date and never ment for public use. It also dose not have an IDE.

You can run turing on linux threw wine or use an emulator/virutal mashen of some kind.

People keep saying it runs fine on wine, so I don't know if they have lower standards than me, or there's just something different about my computer because there are so many little problems that add up into it being rather unusable. First of all the speed (which others have reported), letters in text get cut off, programs take five minutes to compile, then runs the old version of it, etc.

[BigBear]

Well unless the code is all over the place (different files/folders) why would they need someone to clean it up even then are they worried about reputation they have abandoned Turing so how much do they really care to post it?

[tjmoore1993]

Turing isn't worth the time and effort it would take to fix up the source. Turing is an easy language and it would be pointless to fix it up.

Turing is not as important anymore as we come across languages like C++, Python, Ruby, Java, and much more which provide more!

[Insectoid]

Quote:

Turing is an easy language

That is the worst reason to not like a language. At least give a decent argument. it's the funcionality that needs work

[DtY]

I think it's a wonderful language except for speed and compatibility. Being easy is wonderful, it does everything I usually need in the programs I write.

[saltpro15]

Quote:

People keep saying it runs fine on wine, so I don't know if they have lower standards than me, or there's just something different about my computer because there are so many little problems that add up into it being rather unusable. First of all the speed (which others have reported), letters in text get cut off, programs take five minutes to compile, then runs the old version of it, etc.

to fix the text glitch you need to install the ttf core font's

[Insectoid]

I have no issues running on crossover, so I can't help

[Dusk Eagle]

I had the text glitch. Go to File -> Preferences -> Run Window and click Change Font. The font I use is Lucida Sans, which runs fine, but you can choose whatever you want. This solved my text glitch. As for compiling, I find Turing is very slow with that on Windows and Wine.

[btiffin]

insectoid @ Fri May 01, 2009 8:42 pm wrote:

Quote:

Turing is an easy language

That is the worst reason to not like a language. At least give a decent argument. it's the funcionality that needs work

old guy ramble
I've never had any reason to use Turing. I fear that Ontario is decreasing overall, "as a group", compsci expertise. When teaching a language that some people like, build some pretty cool projects with and then ... management at the first job could care less, we are not getting the best bang per educational hour. 10,000 hours is a lot of hours to build expertise. Why not give the odd course using a system that has some legs in the commercial arenas while still providing foundational computer science?

10,000 hours of "programming" doesn't mean you'll be as good at debugging Perl as a developer with 10,000 hours of Perl programming. Google may hire the best and the brightest, and it's important to get a good foundation in the concepts, but Turing isn't going to help you keep up with the Python gurus at Google HQ.

Turing the language might be good, but the thousands of hours spent by students writing Turing, not so good.
In my, learn assembler first, crusty, old fart opinion.
Cheers

[tjmoore1993]

Correct me if I am wrong. Turing was made simple but behind that is a complexed core. If you think it would be easy to manage it I would assume you'd be wrong. None of us actually seen the source or even has an idea on how it was made.

To be honest I don't mind if they are out of business they had a good run and it is still being tought to students in Ontario. Right now though I just say leave it.

Also if Turing was continued there would be some problems. I am assuming that people in this forum are here to learn programming. If that is the case why do you want to fix up Turing. It will throw off peoples habits and by the time they upgrade to C++, Java, and others they will be lost because they learned how to do things Turing style.

That is my statement.


@ Anyone?

I do like the language, I like how it was written and it runs great. I just don't like the idea of it being continued because it would be pointless.

[Dan]

tjmoore1993 @ 2nd May 2009, 9:38 am wrote:

Correct me if I am wrong. Turing was made simple but behind that is a complexed core. If you think it would be easy to manage it I would assume you'd be wrong. None of us actually seen the source or even has an idea on how it was made.

Well tom west does have a user account here and i have had some luck decoming parts of turing thanks to dome debuging info that was left in turing for VC++. Also serveral users here are at the university level and have some expericen with compliers and interperters.

So if the code was realsed i think it might be posible to work on it but i would rather make a new lang that is backwords comtable with turing.

[BigBear]

Hey Dan were you apart of OpenT?