Which is the best (and free) APL interpreter? [closed] - interpreter

Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
We don’t allow questions seeking recommendations for books, tools, software libraries, and more. You can edit the question so it can be answered with facts and citations.
Closed 8 years ago.
Improve this question
I need an APL implementation to test some expressions, do your know which is the best interpreter for the language ?
It would be great if it is free and it runs on Linux.

You can test simple expressions with my APL interpreter, it runs on JavaScript in the browser: http://ngn.github.com/apl/web/index.html https://n9n.gitlab.io/apl/web/index.html

Try GNU APL. Version 1.0 was released September 27, 2013.

Also, if you want to try something, why not go to http://tryapl.org ? :)
And, finally, Dyalog Ltd. offers free version of their interpreter (the best you can get, IMHO) - which is free for personal, non-commercial use - which sounds like what you do..
And while TryAPL gives you a protected environment in which certain "potentially harmful" statements are not allowed, there is a new service available which gives you a complete sandboxed Dyalog APL environment that can execute scripted commands at https://tio.run/#apl-dyalog

Try APLX for Linux (Personal Edition) Version 1.1 from MicroAPL.

The best for PC are>
APL2 IBM but free only a trial period.
APLX is very good but some different to APL2.seems to be Eternal Life inside APL.

Related

Is there an online Elixir IDE? [closed]

Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
We don’t allow questions seeking recommendations for books, tools, software libraries, and more. You can edit the question so it can be answered with facts and citations.
Closed 7 years ago.
Improve this question
Please is there an online Elixir IDE?
I can only find tutorialspoint and ideone for Erlang.
It would make learning Elixir fun, as we could test scripts and code ideas on the go without a PC.
Like a PasteBin... but for Elixir.
I've just started learning Elixir and have been using Nitrous after stumbling across this: http://blog.nitrous.io/2014/06/03/intro-to-elixir.html. It's referencing the Nitrous.io VM and IDE. They have a free level, which I'm using for now.
The IDE is not Elixir specific but has worked reasonably well so far. I can start in terminal mode when I'm playing with examples in iex or go to a full IDE when I'm writing code that needs more than an interactive mode. It's a bit behind, supporting 1.0.2 as the current version and there's no "real" Elixir support like there is for first class languages, but I've been able to use it from within a browser with no problems for the stuff I've been playing with.
EDIT: As of Apr 23 2015, just a few days after this response, Nitrous has effectively killed off their free tier and bumped the prices on their other tiers. No longer viable for just learning Elixir (unless you've got excess cash, that is). Too bad.
Finally found a great online REPL for elixir: http://play.elixirbyexample.com/
Atom editor have a cool package called Language Elixir.

Are there alternatives to embsysregview? [closed]

Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
We don’t allow questions seeking recommendations for books, tools, software libraries, and more. You can edit the question so it can be answered with facts and citations.
Closed 3 years ago.
Improve this question
http://embsysregview.sourceforge.net/
I'd like to avoid using eclipse if I can. Tried googling - nothing came up.
The debuggers of most commercial vendors will provide that functionality, for example Kiel MDK-ARM, IAR EWB, Rowley Associates CrossWorks.
Keil and IAR both provide code-size limited evaluation versions that you can use for non-commercial and evaluation purposes (i.e. you can't sell or distribute a product built using it), Rowley have a 30 day evaluation licence (as does IAR in addition to teh code limited version). For a full licence Rowley is by far the least expensive - largely because they use GCC rather than a proprietary compiler, but the debugger is their own and not based on GDB (and all the better for it!).
If you need free tools, CooCox CoIDE appears to do exactly what you want (and probably more). It is Eclipse based, so may not meet your requirements, but all the integration is already done for you, so it is less of a kit-of-parts than assembling Eclipse with CDT and various other plug-ins. In particular the embedded target debugging is integrated, and that is probably the most difficult part to get information on for Eclipse in my experience.

Is there any free cross platform setup builder tool available? [closed]

Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
We don’t allow questions seeking recommendations for books, tools, software libraries, and more. You can edit the question so it can be answered with facts and citations.
Closed 7 years ago.
Improve this question
There are commercial cross-platform install tools out there and i think that they are really useful because you "compose" your setup once and the setup tool compiles it for the target platforms you want it to work for.
Unfortunately, such tools are expensive for a shareware author like me - they cost thousands of dollars. Are there similar open source projects out there?
Thanks in advance,
David
I'm having the same problem. Looked into IZPack, IZPack with Native Laucher, Lauch4J, ... All of them way too complex to use, at least for my taste. Searching for more info on IZPack, I've run accross that one a minute ago almost by accident: http://www.installjammer.com/
Looks promising, haven't tried it yet, though.
IZPack does very fine, i think. It's comprehensive, cross-platform and has a commercial-friendly license.

Alternative to OpenCF.FTP - stable [closed]

Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
We don’t allow questions seeking recommendations for books, tools, software libraries, and more. You can edit the question so it can be answered with facts and citations.
Closed 5 years ago.
Improve this question
I am looking for a STABLE FTP library for Compact Framework. I would prefer a library where I don't have to fix or step through any code, but just use as is.
While the free OpenCf.FTP is great, I think it is at this point creating more work for me than my actual coding and I am afraid I don't have time allotted for this.
Any libs you guys have had experience with? Good/bad?
Our Rebex FTP/SSL supports .NET CF since 2006. It shares the codebase with Rebex FTP which is maintained since 2004. I guess it is probable quite stable - for example Microsoft licensed this FTP/SSL component and is using it in Visual Studio 2010 for web deployment. Source code available.
Xceed also has a solid FTP library for .NET CF.
Check out IP*Works from \n Software. Solid and well supported.
What i find the most bizarre about CF is that it lacks FTP functionality. I mean it is a framework for MOBILE apps for God's sake. Perhaps someone from MS could enlighten me on why file transfer functionality is missing from mobile apps framework.
I am sure someone will come with some long and smart sounding explanation. Knock yourself out, it still makes no sense at all.

Lua's bytecode specification [closed]

Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
We don’t allow questions seeking recommendations for books, tools, software libraries, and more. You can edit the question so it can be answered with facts and citations.
Closed 5 years ago.
Improve this question
Can anyone tell me where to find Lua's bytecode specification? I've been searching for 15 minutes, and I can't find anything.
The official definition is in lopcodes.h.
Maybe A No-Frills Introduction to Lua 5.1 VM Instructions contains what you're looking for?
There is also a table of the Lua 5.0 instruction set (Figure 5) in:
Ierusalimschy, R.; Figueiredo, L. H.; Celes, W. (2005), "The implementation of Lua 5.0", J. of Universal Comp. Sci. 11 (7): 1159-1176
You can find the full text with a search on Google Scholar and I believe it's on lua.org as well. This reference is used by the Lua page on Wikipedia, which is always a good place to look for such things. :-)
The only specifications for Lua are the language, standard libraries, and the C API. The creators of Lua intentionally left the VM unspecified for a couple main reasons:
Lua can be fully implemented with any underlying architecture (VM, interpreter, compiler, etc.)
The official Lua distribution doesn't have to worry about maintaining VM compatibility between versions
This means, for example, that you generally shouldn't use the Lua VM as a target for a compiler. If you'd like to know how the official Lua distribution's VM works as an example for your own curiosity, see the other answers.
You can read The Implementation of Lua 5.0 online.