On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 11:22 AM, Miguel Mitrofanov wrote:

1) You'll need a terminal application first, and I'm not sure if there is one in AppStore. In fact, I AM sure there isn't.

There's SSH terminal programs like Putty based stuff that are in the AppStore. So that sort of thing has been done yes.

2) My iPod Touch is still running 1.1.4 firmware; I've heard it's not that easy on 2.0 and later.

that's unfortunate.

3) Personally, I'd love to see ghc on iPhone. It could even persuade me to upgrade.

On 23 Mar 2009, at 21:00, Kirk Martinez wrote:

I saw Miguel Mitrofanov (

...

http://www.nabble.com/Hugs-on-the-iphone-td19478992.html) successfully ported Hugs to the iPhone. I'm now wondering if anyone has tried to get Apple's blessing to put this in the App Store? It would be really great to be able to try out little Haskell ideas as the mood strikes. Of course, it's kind of essential to have an editor of some kind for more significant programs...

Thanks, Kirk _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe

_______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe

I think he means a program running on the iPhone which allows you to open a terminal over an SSH session to other devices. The instance (I think) you're thinking of is where the SSH *server* runs on the iPhone. On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 2:46 PM, Miguel Mitrofanov wrote:

On 23 Mar 2009, at 21:38, David Leimbach wrote:

...

On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 11:22 AM, Miguel Mitrofanov < miguelimo38@yandex.ru> wrote: 1) You'll need a terminal application first, and I'm not sure if there is one in AppStore. In fact, I AM sure there isn't.

There's SSH terminal programs like Putty based stuff that are in the AppStore. So that sort of thing has been done yes.

You sure it can SSH to iPhone itself? Installing Hugs (or GHC) on a desktop PC and connecting to it via ssh is anything but impressive.

_______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe

-- /jve

Doesn't Apple Store restrict applications (by policy) so they cannot generate or execute arbitrary code? (That's the reason there's no Flash for iPhone.) That restriction seems like it'd block any interpreter or compiler from being sold, no? -Michael From: haskell-cafe-bounces@haskell.org [mailto:haskell-cafe-bounces@haskell.org] On Behalf Of David Leimbach Sent: Monday, March 23, 2009 12:59 PM To: John Van Enk Cc: haskell-cafe@haskell.org; Miguel Mitrofanov Subject: Re: [Haskell-cafe] Hugs on iPhone On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 11:53 AM, John Van Enk mailto:vanenkj@gmail.com> wrote: I think he means a program running on the iPhone which allows you to open a terminal over an SSH session to other devices. The instance (I think) you're thinking of is where the SSH *server* runs on the iPhone. Yeah I was talking about a terminal capability that can deal with all the lovely control codes of serial terminals. I thought this could serve as a front-end for something running with curses bindings, not that you need to open up the whole darned iphone to do this stuff. Dave On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 2:46 PM, Miguel Mitrofanov mailto:miguelimo38@yandex.ru> wrote: On 23 Mar 2009, at 21:38, David Leimbach wrote: On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 11:22 AM, Miguel Mitrofanov mailto:miguelimo38@yandex.ru> wrote: 1) You'll need a terminal application first, and I'm not sure if there is one in AppStore. In fact, I AM sure there isn't. There's SSH terminal programs like Putty based stuff that are in the AppStore. So that sort of thing has been done yes. You sure it can SSH to iPhone itself? Installing Hugs (or GHC) on a desktop PC and connecting to it via ssh is anything but impressive. _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.orgmailto:Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe -- /jve

Guess they ended up making an exception for Flash, finally. Will be interesting to see how they prevent 3rd party stores from running arbitrary Flash games and whatnot. Maybe they'll blacklist any popular sites that are stealing marketshare from the AppStore?

-Michael

-----Original Message-----
From: Miguel Mitrofanov [mailto:miguelimo38@yandex.ru] 
Sent: Monday, March 23, 2009 2:52 PM
To: Michael Giagnocavo
Cc: David Leimbach; John Van Enk; haskell-cafe@haskell.org
Subject: Re: [Haskell-cafe] Hugs on iPhone

http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/confirmed_apple_and_adobe_coll.php

On 23 Mar 2009, at 23:29, Michael Giagnocavo wrote:

> Doesn't Apple Store restrict applications (by policy) so they cannot  
> generate or execute arbitrary code? (That's the reason there's no  
> Flash for iPhone.) That restriction seems like it'd block any  
> interpreter or compiler from being sold, no?
>
> -Michael
>
> From: haskell-cafe-bounces@haskell.org [mailto:haskell-cafe-bounces@haskell.org 
> ] On Behalf Of David Leimbach
> Sent: Monday, March 23, 2009 12:59 PM
> To: John Van Enk
> Cc: haskell-cafe@haskell.org; Miguel Mitrofanov
> Subject: Re: [Haskell-cafe] Hugs on iPhone
>
>
> On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 11:53 AM, John Van Enk   
> wrote:
> I think he means a program running on the iPhone which allows you to  
> open a terminal over an SSH session to other devices. The instance  
> (I think) you're thinking of is where the SSH *server* runs on the  
> iPhone.
>
> Yeah I was talking about a terminal capability that can deal with  
> all the lovely control codes of serial terminals.
>
> I thought this could serve as a front-end for something running with  
> curses bindings, not that you need to open up the whole darned  
> iphone to do this stuff.
>
> Dave
>
>
> On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 2:46 PM, Miguel Mitrofanov  > wrote:
>
> On 23 Mar 2009, at 21:38, David Leimbach wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 11:22 AM, Miguel Mitrofanov  > wrote:
> 1) You'll need a terminal application first, and I'm not sure if  
> there is one in AppStore. In fact, I AM sure there isn't.
>
> There's SSH terminal programs like Putty based stuff that are in the  
> AppStore.  So that sort of thing has been done yes.
>
> You sure it can SSH to iPhone itself? Installing Hugs (or GHC) on a  
> desktop PC and connecting to it via ssh is anything but impressive.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Haskell-Cafe mailing list
> Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
> http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
>
>
>
> -- 
> /jve
>
> _______________________________________________
> Haskell-Cafe mailing list
> Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
> http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe

Miguel Mitrofanov wrote:

3) Personally, I'd love to see ghc on iPhone. It could even persuade me to upgrade.

See the GHC-on-ARM page[1] for my work on it last summer, among others'. GHC is tough to port because bootstrapping to new architectures has been broken for a long time, since soon after 6.6.2. My attempts to cross-compile 6.6.1 using the development environment for my Nokia N810 failed, as can be seen in [1]. I attempted several times to build Hugs for it: it would build successfully and then fail to run either on the device, in scratchbox, or natively compiled on x86 because it failed to find the Prelude. I suspect I was doing something wrong in building Hugs, something unrelated to the ARM platform. The good news is that jhc's portable C code works perfectly well -- but of course that is simply running precompiled Haskell apps and not a compiler or interpreter running on the device. Since jhc is not self-hosting (yet?) but instead is built with GHC, that's the best we can do with that approach for now. Braden Shepherdson shepheb [1] http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/ghc/wiki/ArmLinuxGhc

This is solely the reason for my interest in JHC. The agreement doesn't specifically prohibit the use of interpreters (just those than run external code). It also doesn't say anything about machine generated code. The only thing one would have to ensure is that the dependencies of JHC are all compiled in, or statically linked. Shared libs are disallowed in any app. If it has a runtime dependency on gcc (is there such a thing?) Then you would have to statically link it and therefore couldn't sell your application. (gotta love GPL) JHC also helps with another issue: There is some concern about garbage collection schemes, Apple removed their own garbage collector in the iPhone SDK and the docs mention that GC isn't allowed. But there is nothing about that in the Developer Agreement. JHC's region based memory management very closely reflects Apples own convention for using memory pools for all allocation. I speculate that this would less likely to be rejected. . There is also some discussion on both the GHC and JHC mailing list WRT this a month or two ago. I will attempt exactly this scheme later next month, will let you know how it goes. :) On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 5:45 PM, John Meacham wrote:

On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 04:41:04PM -0400, Braden Shepherdson wrote:

...

The good news is that jhc's portable C code works perfectly well -- but of course that is simply running precompiled Haskell apps and not a compiler or interpreter running on the device. Since jhc is not self-hosting (yet?) but instead is built with GHC, that's the best we can do with that approach for now.

I wondered what would happen if I submitted some jhc generated C for approval, it _almost_ looks like it could have been hand written by someone with an unusual penchant for gotos and their own inscrutable hungarian notation.

John

-- John Meacham - ⑆repetae.net⑆john⑈ _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe

-- We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them. - A. Einstein

Go ahead sell your GPL application. I'll get your code, build the application, and sell it for less than half of what you're selling it for. How exactly will you make your money, then? When people say, "You can't make commercial software with GPL code," they don't mean it's not legally possible to sell GPL code, only that it's not commercially viable. Regards, John A. De Goes N-BRAIN, Inc. The Evolution of Collaboration http://www.n-brain.net | 877-376-2724 x 101 On Mar 24, 2009, at 1:27 AM, Jules Bean wrote:

Rick R wrote:

...

The agreement doesn't specifically prohibit the use of interpreters (just those than run external code). It also doesn't say anything about machine generated code. The only thing one would have to ensure is that the dependencies of JHC are all compiled in, or statically linked. Shared libs are disallowed in any app. If it has a runtime dependency on gcc (is there such a thing?) Then you would have to statically link it and therefore couldn't sell your application. (gotta love GPL)

Not true. GPL doesn't forbid selling and never has. RMS used to make money selling emacs tapes.

All it requires is that you accompany your sale either with a copy of the source code, or a promise to make source available. Posting the source on a public web site would meet this requirement.

Does anything in the iPhone SDK forbid you from posting your source? _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe

Like I said, go ahead and try that with an iPhone application. If the iPhone app is so buggy or complicated so as to require support, no one will buy it. If it's not, I'll make all the money by selling it for half the price you sell it for. In any case, the examples you mention involve companies selling the labors of others. Joe Schmoe who contributed patch #2345235 to fix a critical bug never sees a cent from RedHat. So your examples don't support your case as much as you seem to think. Regards, John A. De Goes N-BRAIN, Inc. The Evolution of Collaboration http://www.n-brain.net | 877-376-2724 x 101 On Mar 24, 2009, at 6:58 AM, Karel Gardas wrote:

John A. De Goes wrote:

...

Go ahead sell your GPL application. I'll get your code, build the application, and sell it for less than half of what you're selling it for.

How exactly will you make your money, then?

Ask RedHat how they make money from RHEL while Oracle and CentOS are exact copies of it. Ask RedHat/JBoss how they make money from JBoss AS when all the source code is available in their repository.

Probably, it's not only about the software anymore, but also about the service you get with the software subscription... Although I agree that this applies only to software which crossed some kind of complexity already (hence service is needed) and that majority of phone apps might not fall into this category yet especially if they are not tied to some kind of server based services.

Karel

"John A. De Goes" wrote:

Go ahead sell your GPL application. I'll get your code, build the application, and sell it for less than half of what you're selling it for.

I don't think you can go below 0.79 in the Apple store, and I guess you'll have a hard time convincing Apple to list your identical program alongside with the original version.

How exactly will you make your money, then?

Selling tapes, not software. Unless you invent something like the internet that gets rid of time needed write tapes and package&shipment costs, you're going to have a very, very hard time being cheaper than anybody else unless you live on a different continent, and an incredibly hard time financing the advertisement you need to place your product more prominently than RMS can do simply by being himself.

When people say, "You can't make commercial software with GPL code," they don't mean it's not legally possible to sell GPL code, only that it's not commercially viable.

Oh, it is. Id is still selling Quake I data files, and you'll be surprised how much you're allowed to do since the GPL isn't the Affero GPL. -- (c) this sig last receiving data processing entity. Inspect headers for copyright history. All rights reserved. Copying, hiring, renting, performance and/or quoting of this signature prohibited.

"John A. De Goes" wrote:

You simply can't make a living selling GPL software. If the software's complicated enough and you know your way around it, then you can sell support & maintenance. However, those conditions doesn't apply to consumer software, because consumers don't want complicated software.

Sure, times have changed. Still, go to a campus, figure out who doesn't have internet access (personally, back then I bought a 100mb zip drive to get my software). You might not be able to earn a living burning Debian CD's, but you're going able to finance your beer consumption. Not only because you're bound to get some free beer while helping people to install it. OTOH, magazines still come with CDs or DVDs, which means that there's a demand for "hard-copies" of software. People _will_ buy your "1000 best open source games" collection. The costs of setting up distribution and manufacturing will prevent others from doing the same: They'd rather distribute other OSS software, avoiding competition that's only going to lessen their own profits. Additionally to the physical medium, you're providing the service of compiling the compilation, in the first place: I can tell you it's a bugger to rummage through OSS games to find out what's cool. Surely, it's not a big market and won't make you a millionaire, but no source of income can be used by everyone without breaking down. Just to make things clear: I wouldn't hand out venture capital to such an endeavour, either. -- (c) this sig last receiving data processing entity. Inspect headers for copyright history. All rights reserved. Copying, hiring, renting, performance and/or quoting of this signature prohibited.

Correct. My point was only in the case that it would need to statically link to a GPL'd lib (which I'm not sure if such a case exists) If the gcc license suddenly decided to claim compiled items as derivative works, the IT world as we know it would end. On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 11:06 AM, John Meacham wrote:

...

The agreement doesn't specifically prohibit the use of interpreters (just those than run external code). It also doesn't say anything about machine generated code. The only thing one would have to ensure is that the dependencies of JHC are all compiled in, or statically linked. Shared

...

are disallowed in any app. If it has a runtime dependency on gcc (is

On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 07:00:26PM -0400, Rick R wrote: libs there

...

such a thing?) Then you would have to statically link it and therefore couldn't sell your application. (gotta love GPL)

No problem here, the gcc licence explicity states things compiled with it are not considered derivative works. And after all, Mac OS X is compiled with gcc, apple X-Code uses gcc as its compiler and I think gcc may even be the only objective C compiler out there.

John

-- John Meacham - ⑆repetae.net⑆john⑈ _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe

-- We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them. - A. Einstein