Re: Long-term design goals for ePiX

[Andrew Hwang <ahwang@radius.holycross.edu>]

Andrew Hwang wrote:
> 1. A few things about ePiX obviously need improvement:
>
>   b) The program is not a stand-alone binary, a limitation that restricts
>     potential users' access. For example, a Windows user asked about using
>     ePiX. While I think this is technically possible, it is not likely to
>     be easy. My suggestion was to install the deLorie port of the GNU C
>     compiler, then to compile Bash, and finally to try to install ePiX. I
>     have no easy way to determine if this will work or not.

Easiest is to download the Cygwin distribution from RedHat where all the
compilers, bash, etc. are precompiled. It looks 99% like Unix under Windows.

>     Making ePiX into a stand-alone binary is more effort than I am willing
>     to invest personally, though it might make a good student project.

One thing you might consider is exposing the ePiX internals via a
Python (or some such) interface so that it can be scripted rather than
written in C code. That solves the Windows problem, too (the Windows
user downloads the Python distribution and the ePiX pre-compiled DLL).

> 3. ePiX is at a stage where future design work should be based, to the
>   extent possible, on users' experiences and needs. Discussions of desired
>   features, as well as ways of implementing them simply and flexibly, are
>   likely to be important to the future development of ePiX.

I'm already starting to develop a small library of useful functions
(stem plots, square waves, etc.) and I'd like to link it in as a true
library using the 'epix' program but it currently expects everything
to be monolithic. I hacked the epix shell script to allow for a user-defined
include directory and library include directory, but I'd rather not do this
every release :-)

I'm thinking:

           epix -Imyinclude -Lmylibs thefile.c

> 5. Practical development matters: I am waiting to hear from our Dean's
>   Office about the College releasing claim on the copyright of ePiX so the
>   code can be put properly under the GNU GPL. If this does not happen,
>   ePiX may be dead, GPL-wise. If anyone has experience in the matter, I'd
>   like to hear about it.

I've previously released code under both GPL and College copyright. I
don't think the GPL's copyright is exclusive. Perhaps the College is
willing to retain joint copyright ownership rather than relinquishing it
altogether.

In my experience, the college or university is most interested in not
being exposed to liability, rather than profiting off copyright. You may
appease the Dean by including a notice to that effect (just get any code
from the Berkeley BSD days, the notices included at the top of each
file do the job).

-- 
Andrew Sterian                | <steriana@claymore.engineer.gvsu.edu>
Assistant Professor           | <http://claymore.engineer.gvsu.edu/~steriana>
Padnos School of Engineering  | (616) 771-6756
Grand Valley State University |