(Link to AcmlmWiki) Offline: thank ||bass
Register | Login
Views: 13,040,846
Main | Memberlist | Active users | Calendar | Chat | Online users
Ranks | FAQ | ACS | Stats | Color Chart | Search | Photo album
05-22-24 01:36 AM
0 users currently in Programming.
Acmlm's Board - I3 Archive - Programming - Krugle, The Programmers' Search Engine. New poll | |
Pages: 1 2Add to favorites | Next newer thread | Next older thread
User Post
HyperHacker

Star Mario
Finally being paid to code in VB! If only I still enjoyed that. <_<
Wii #7182 6487 4198 1828


 





Since: 11-18-05
From: Canada, w00t!
My computer's specs, if anyone gives a damn.
STOP TRUNCATING THIS >8^(

Last post: 6302 days
Last view: 6302 days
Posted on 02-19-06 07:56 PM Link | Quote
Due to launch next month, Krugle is a search engine designed for progammers. Apparently it searches web pages for pieces of open-source code and indexes them along with a description of what they do. Various forms of pattern recognition are used to determine what language the code is in. Sounds useful!
Deleted User
Banned


 





Since: 05-08-06

Last post: None
Last view: 6302 days
Posted on 02-19-06 08:13 PM Link | Quote
That actually sounds really useful. Now I don't have to use Google as much when I'm searching for applications and what not. Maybe... don't know if I'll use it, but that seems a lot more helpful than Google which is just a general search engine and will find anything with the key words in it. Yay for not so general search engine.
HyperHacker

Star Mario
Finally being paid to code in VB! If only I still enjoyed that. <_<
Wii #7182 6487 4198 1828


 





Since: 11-18-05
From: Canada, w00t!
My computer's specs, if anyone gives a damn.
STOP TRUNCATING THIS >8^(

Last post: 6302 days
Last view: 6302 days
Posted on 02-19-06 09:11 PM Link | Quote
Using Google to search for code is a huge pain. Especially when it ignores symbols like # no matter what you do.
Parasyte +

Red Paragoomba


 





Since: 01-05-06

Last post: 6623 days
Last view: 6623 days
Posted on 02-19-06 11:13 PM Link | Quote
Sounds like a pointless attempt to bypass free software licenses.
Gavin

Cheep-cheep
Vandalism is not tolerated


 





Since: 11-17-05
From: IL, USA

Last post: 6379 days
Last view: 6322 days
Posted on 02-19-06 11:38 PM Link | Quote
I've tested a few of these before.. Krulge certainly isn't the first. Koders comes to mind, and I know there are a few others that I just can't think of. Intrestesting I guess? I have only actually used one of these once, and it did help. I was having trouble locating a real working example of Mozilla's internal binary input and output services, nsIBinaryInputStream / nsIBinaryOutputStream, which I found in some MPL licenensed code or another. Can't remember which moz project it belonged to or if it was just some generic scriptage. In any event, it helped.
Guy Perfect









Since: 11-18-05

Last post: 6304 days
Last view: 6302 days
Posted on 02-20-06 12:14 AM Link | Quote
Something like this will only be particularly helpful if the code being indexed is truly public domain. I like what GNU stands for, but I absolutely despise their Public Licence, which basically says "You're vulnerable to lawsuit if you use code protected under this license and don't release your code and do it under this license."

Retaining ownership is the exact opposite of what open-source is about, so GNU should really release a new revision to their license stating any code protected under the license is free game. Why have the license at all if that's the case? Good question.

In the United States, copyrights are applied automatically to any original works, so there is legal protection under any circumstances when code is released. That way, if it really matters (which it probably doesn't), someone won't be able to say "Look at this awesome code I made" and get away with it if the code is borrowed.

In regards to Krugle, which will likely return unlimited quanities of code protected under worthless licenses, it's a good way to find a large selection of stuff that you can look at but not have.
FreeDOS +

Giant Red Koopa
Legion: freedos = fritos








Since: 11-17-05
From: Seattle

Last post: 6302 days
Last view: 6302 days
Posted on 02-20-06 12:24 AM Link | Quote
Originally posted by BGNG
Something like this will only be particularly helpful if the code being indexed is truly public domain. I like what GNU stands for, but I absolutely despise their Public Licence, which basically says "You're vulnerable to lawsuit if you use code protected under this license and don't release your code and do it under this license."

No. The license says that if you redistribute the product to anyone, they must have access to the source code just as easily. So if you sell an operating system for $50 to someone, they must be able to have the source code for no extra charge. There's nothing that says you _must_ release any modifications (you can keep it all to yourself), but if you do, you must not retain the source code or make it more difficult to get the source code.
Guy Perfect









Since: 11-18-05

Last post: 6304 days
Last view: 6302 days
Posted on 02-20-06 01:17 AM Link | Quote
If you don't release code, then Krugle won't document it. Here's an excerpt from the GPL. Pay particular attention to section 2, condition b:

  1. You may copy and distribute verbatim copies of the Program's
source code as you receive it, in any medium, provided that you
conspicuously and appropriately publish on each copy an appropriate
copyright notice and disclaimer of warranty; keep intact all the
notices that refer to this License and to the absence of any warranty;
and give any other recipients of the Program a copy of this License
along with the Program.

You may charge a fee for the physical act of transferring a copy, and
you may at your option offer warranty protection in exchange for a fee.

2. You may modify your copy or copies of the Program or any portion
of it, thus forming a work based on the Program, and copy and
distribute such modifications or work under the terms of Section 1
above, provided that you also meet all of these conditions:

a) You must cause the modified files to carry prominent notices
stating that you changed the files and the date of any change.

b) You must cause any work that you distribute or publish, that in
whole or in part contains or is derived from the Program or any
part thereof, to be licensed as a whole at no charge to all third
parties under the terms of this License.

c) If the modified program normally reads commands interactively
when run, you must cause it, when started running for such
interactive use in the most ordinary way, to print or display an
announcement including an appropriate copyright notice and a
notice that there is no warranty (or else, saying that you provide
a warranty) and that users may redistribute the program under
these conditions, and telling the user how to view a copy of this
License. (Exception: if the Program itself is interactive but
does not normally print such an announcement, your work based on
the Program is not required to print an announcement.)

These requirements apply to the modified work as a whole. If
identifiable sections of that work are not derived from the Program,
and can be reasonably considered independent and separate works in
themselves, then this License, and its terms, do not apply to those
sections when you distribute them as separate works. But when you
distribute the same sections as part of a whole which is a work based
on the Program, the distribution of the whole must be on the terms of
this License, whose permissions for other licensees extend to the
entire whole, and thus to each and every part regardless of who wrote it.

Thus, it is not the intent of this section to claim rights or contest
your rights to work written entirely by you; rather, the intent is to
exercise the right to control the distribution of derivative or
collective works based on the Program.

In addition, mere aggregation of another work not based on the Program
with the Program (or with a work based on the Program) on a volume of
a storage or distribution medium does not bring the other work under
the scope of this License.



(edited by BGNG on 02-20-06 12:25 AM)
(edited by BGNG on 02-20-06 12:29 AM)
Gavin

Cheep-cheep
Vandalism is not tolerated


 





Since: 11-17-05
From: IL, USA

Last post: 6379 days
Last view: 6322 days
Posted on 02-20-06 02:59 AM Link | Quote
And why, again, is releasing your source-code such a problem (especially if you say you like what GNU stands for??)?
Guy Perfect









Since: 11-18-05

Last post: 6304 days
Last view: 6302 days
Posted on 02-20-06 12:29 PM Link | Quote
That falls just short of flaming, Gavin. When hacking games, the point is to learn how it works. Source code is irrelevant in that regard, as I release documentation for my hacking projects in place of source code. GNU stands for free software specifically, and open-source is simply an added bonus (except with the GPL, as stated above, it's not really "open," per sé ). Anything that I create will still be released for free, which is exactly what GNU stands for.

Regardless, this is a thread about Krugle, not the approperiateness of open-source.
Dan

Purple Leever


 





Since: 11-18-05

Last post: 6311 days
Last view: 6302 days
Posted on 02-20-06 03:15 PM Link | Quote
Originally posted by BGNG
That falls just short of flaming, Gavin. When hacking games, the point is to learn how it works. Source code is irrelevant in that regard, as I release documentation for my hacking projects in place of source code. GNU stands for free software specifically, and open-source is simply an added bonus (except with the GPL, as stated above, it's not really "open," per sé ). Anything that I create will still be released for free, which is exactly what GNU stands for.


Hate to disagree with you there but your version of free and GNU's are not the same. You stated that you won't release the source code, which is a part of GNU's "free" definition. From the GNU website :

"Free software is a matter of the users' freedom to run, copy, distribute, study, change and improve the software."

How can a user improve your software, without the source code? Going by the GNU website, your software would only be "free" as in "beer", not as in "speech".
Gavin

Cheep-cheep
Vandalism is not tolerated


 





Since: 11-17-05
From: IL, USA

Last post: 6379 days
Last view: 6322 days
Posted on 02-20-06 03:23 PM Link | Quote
Originally posted by BGNG
That falls just short of flaming, Gavin. When hacking games, the point is to learn how it works. Source code is irrelevant in that regard, as I release documentation for my hacking projects in place of source code. GNU stands for free software specifically, and open-source is simply an added bonus (except with the GPL, as stated above, it's not really "open," per s� ). Anything that I create will still be released for free, which is exactly what GNU stands for.

Regardless, this is a thread about Krugle, not the approperiateness of open-source.


It was just a question, so you can stop your pedantic obsession with forum decorum.

Can I get a hearty, "WTF", for my comments that fall, "just short of flaming" ??
If this was a flame, I probably would have been talking about the multiple times a night that I engage in sexual intercorse with your mother and how you take it up the butt from your father, and probably something concerning "balls" and "your mouth," thrown in for good measure, just FYI.

I was simply curious considering most of the posts I've seen you make appear to be veiled attempts at selling some message or addressing a percieved impropriety or misconception with the world of software developement at large. And I was like, you know, wondering what that was all about.

(edit: Gavin retard alert. decore != decorum )


(edited by Gavin on 02-20-06 02:30 PM)
Dan

Purple Leever


 





Since: 11-18-05

Last post: 6311 days
Last view: 6302 days
Posted on 02-20-06 03:31 PM Link | Quote
Originally posted by Gavin
I was simply curious considering most of the posts I've seen you make appear to be veiled attempts at selling some message or addressing a percieved impropriety or misconception with the world of software developement at large. And I was like, you know, wondering what that was all about.


Releasing source code is bad. That's the general jist I get. Completely bizarre attitude when it comes to hobbyist programming, in my opinion.
Parasyte +

Red Paragoomba


 





Since: 01-05-06

Last post: 6623 days
Last view: 6623 days
Posted on 02-20-06 06:46 PM Link | Quote
Aside from BGNG's statement which sums up to "I like GNU except that I do not," I think it should be noted that what I was trying to say originally is that "source code search engines" could be used to exploit software licenses that are designed to keep the software's freedom available to everyone. Point in case is of course the GNU General Public License; the whole idea behind 'copyleft' is to prevent people from restricting the rights of other users. For example, if programmer X likes binutils and decides to add support for a new CPU, he's perfectly free to do so, and he is perfect free to keep it to himself. But if he ever releases the modified program in any form, the source code must also be available at no extra charge, as has been stated previously. The reason for this is that so all of the users out there who benefit from the modifications are free to expand on the project, fix bugs, or otherwise maintain the code. You are in defiance of the license when you choose to remove these rights from others.

And how this all works into the topic at hand: If these source code search engines do not properly handle the licenses for the source code they list, I imagine there could be some very negative results. You must keep in mind that just because source code is freely available without any known license does not make it public domain. Quite the contrary: the status of "public domain" must be clearly stated if it to be handled as such. That is all I am saying; the sources listed should be clearly labeled with how they may and may not be used.
Guy Perfect









Since: 11-18-05

Last post: 6304 days
Last view: 6302 days
Posted on 02-20-06 09:50 PM Link | Quote
Dan:

I regard "free" as the international convention has defined it: uncontrolled; without cost. I don't charge a dime for the software that I release. And I do release source code: Every project of mine that is specifically not the result of hacking something has released source code. Just look at some of my posts in this very forum (Link, Link, Link, Link) for snippets of relevant code that I authored.

Incidentally, Krugle may end up (depending on how they do things) finding those posts as it crawls the web (which it may or may not do) and in such a scenario document them in its index. I, for one, would be happy to see my source code being useful for someone else. But products of hacking something, as I mentioned before, I will release documentation instead of source code. That's my call; you don't have to agree with it.



Gavin:

Your intent was provocative (malicious intent is just as "flaming" as you can get) and with your most recent post, you are clearly unwilling to reasonably consider the things that I have to say. Your most recent post bears no significance to the subject at hand (Krugle) and therefore qualifies as spam.

If you have a bone to pick with me, do it in a PM. Don't clutter up the board with insults.



Parasyte:
I fully support GNU and the Free Software Foundation. What I do not like is the means by which GNU is ensuring its vision: the GPL. Change the means but keep the cause the same, and I'd like everything about it.

Because of the GPL, which, in my experience, is one of the more popular ways to distribute source code, and because of my distain for the license, something like Krugle wouldn't be as effective as it could be for someone like me. I understand "free source code" to be open for use, public or private, without any legal encumbrances or restrictions.

Since the GPL requires source code to be made available for any distributed work "based on the program" borrowed from, Krugle would end up as more of a display case than something I would feel comfortable using.
Dan

Purple Leever


 





Since: 11-18-05

Last post: 6311 days
Last view: 6302 days
Posted on 02-21-06 04:39 AM Link | Quote
Originally posted by BGNG
But products of hacking something, as I mentioned before, I will release documentation instead of source code. That's my call; you don't have to agree with it.


I don't agree, but as you said it's your call to do whatever you want with your source code. (I'm personally not sure I agree with forcing people to release their source code which is why I use the BSD license tor release my source code under)

Originally posted by BGNG
Your most recent post bears no significance to the subject at hand (Krugle) and therefore qualifies as spam.


Off topic posts are what make threads interesting. In real life, discussions can move on from one topic to another. This board seems to have a very off definition of what spam actually is. Off-topic posts != spam.
FreeDOS +

Giant Red Koopa
Legion: freedos = fritos








Since: 11-17-05
From: Seattle

Last post: 6302 days
Last view: 6302 days
Posted on 02-21-06 06:34 PM Link | Quote
Originally posted by Dan
Originally posted by BGNG
Your most recent post bears no significance to the subject at hand (Krugle) and therefore qualifies as spam.


Off topic posts are what make threads interesting. In real life, discussions can move on from one topic to another. This board seems to have a very off definition of what spam actually is. Off-topic posts != spam.

Forums are meant to keep discussions orgainized. If you want something that moves from topic to topic, go to IRC.
MathOnNapkins

1100

In SPC700 HELL


 





Since: 11-18-05

Last post: 6302 days
Last view: 6302 days
Posted on 02-21-06 10:07 PM Link | Quote
Apparently everyone wants to be a mod these days.

Personally, I think that stuff like Krugle would work best if all the code was user submitted as public domain. That way, if there is a theft issue, that user can be banned/sued and the offending code removed. It would probably work best as a Q/A format for small tasks. Something like, "how do I open a file in ____ operating system?" or "how do I work detect mouse clicks in _____ programming language?", with clear and conside commented code.

However, there are already sites like that, such as experts-exchange, (not expert sexchange . But that site makes you register to even view solutions, which is lame. You should only need to register to ask questions and give answers.
Coby

Keese


 





Since: 11-20-05
From: Belgium

Last post: 6307 days
Last view: 6303 days
Posted on 02-22-06 07:52 AM Link | Quote
So what if the code is copyrighted? Not like anyone's going to know once you compile the program anyway. If you don't want people to use your code, don't release it.
firemaker

Cheep-cheep


 





Since: 12-13-05
From: Somewhere in a place called Berkshire

Last post: 6380 days
Last view: 6380 days
Posted on 02-22-06 09:12 AM Link | Quote
Well this search engine should make me happier. However I usualy find what I want at Codegurus.com.
Pages: 1 2Add to favorites | Next newer thread | Next older thread
Acmlm's Board - I3 Archive - Programming - Krugle, The Programmers' Search Engine. |


ABII

Acmlmboard 1.92.999, 9/17/2006
©2000-2006 Acmlm, Emuz, Blades, Xkeeper

Page rendered in 0.020 seconds; used 461.88 kB (max 591.81 kB)