LastCalc Is Open Sourced

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Posted by timothy on Saturday March 10, 2012 @06:31AM from the ultimate-mathematicator dept.

Sanity writes "LastCalc is a cross between Google Calculator, a spreadsheet, and a powerful functional programming language, all with a robust and flexible heuristic parser. It even lets you write functions that pull in data from elsewhere on the web. It's all wrapped up in a JQuery-based user interface that does as-you-type syntax highlighting. Today, LastCalc's creator, Ian Clarke (Freenet, Revver), has announced that LastCalc will be open sourced under the GNU Affero General Public License 'to accelerate development, spread the workload, and hopefully foster a vibrant volunteer community around the project.'"

30 of 103 comments (clear)

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Too bad it's Affero by Anonymous Coward · 2012-03-10 06:37 · Score: 2, Insightful

This is compelling but the use of Affero for the license makes onerous demands of the user. The implicit threat of a code audit is there.
1. Re:Too bad it's Affero by Sanity · 2012-03-10 06:44 · Score: 4, Interesting
  
  This is compelling but the use of Affero for the license makes onerous demands of the user. The implicit threat of a code audit is there.
  Can you elaborate? Which clauses specifically make onerous demands?
2. Re:Too bad it's Affero by Anonymous Coward · 2012-03-10 06:56 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  The demands are only onerous to someone who is looking for code to run on a server as a service without having to make changes available. It's a good license that accomplishes what some authors want. Personally I prefer the BSD license for code I write, because I don't demand others share their changes unless they wish to. But not all authors wish to offer that choice, as they want changes to be shared. I really don't see the BSD vs. GPL vs. LGPL vs AGLP battles so many developers get involved in. Each offers freedoms and responsibilities, a different menu with each license. The author gets to choose. And the user of the code can choose to agree and use the code, meeting the obligations required, or choose not to use it. So simple, so easy.
  I won't be using LastCalc because I don't want to bother having to deal with the required responsibilities. If I wish to develop an application with that sort of functionality, I will likely write the code myself from scratch and share it BSD-style. Choices. I like having them. I'm grateful that others offer me open source choices. I'm glad that I have such a wide palette of choices to choose as a developer and as a code user.
3. Re:Too bad it's Affero by TheRaven64 · 2012-03-10 07:29 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  Being a user doesn't, but hosting it does. That's the difference between the GPL and AGPL.
  
  --
  I am TheRaven on Soylent News
4. Re:Too bad it's Affero by marcello_dl · 2012-03-10 08:20 · Score: 2
  
  If you contribute back changes, there is no need for code audit, as the functionality and bugs will be those you contributed. If somebody notices different functionality, and you don't want to contribute, that is VIOLATING the license, then shame on you. Problems? "write your own damn code", kthxbye.
  
  --
  ---- MISSING MISCELLANEOUS DATA SEGMENT --- [sigdash] trolololol
5. Re:Too bad it's Affero by hairyfeet · 2012-03-10 08:38 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  Since you seem to know, can you give a brief description of the difference between AGPL, GPL, and MPL for us common folk please? there seem to be a shitzillion licenses out there but those 3 along with BSD (which is easy to follow, its pretty much a "give credit where credit is due" kinda thing) look to be the biggies but knowing what makes one different (and thus incompatible) from the others is hard to keep up with. I know MPL allows copyrighted images, is that the only difference? Is AGPL mainly focused on hosted code? Someone really should make a handy chart for those of us that aren't programmers by trade so we can easily spot the differences.
  
  --
  ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
6. Re:Too bad it's Affero by Daniel+Phillips · 2012-03-10 09:27 · Score: 2
  
  If I wish to develop an application with that sort of functionality, I will likely write the code myself from scratch and share it BSD-style.
  Do you truly believe that will be easier than linking your Affero source? I am humbled by your software development prowess and look forward to enjoying your latest creation.
  
  --
  Have you got your LWN subscription yet?
7. Re:Too bad it's Affero by bhtooefr · 2012-03-10 10:23 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  AGPL is like GPL, but with the additional restriction that you must share source code to users when hosting it on a public-facing server, IIRC.
8. Re:Too bad it's Affero by Ly4 · 2012-03-10 13:52 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  That's basically it, but note that 'source code' could be interpreted as every last line of code for your web site.
  It's part of the murkiness in trying to describe 'modification'. Does that mean code that you've added to the original? When does that stop?
  Limiting the definition of modification is the main point of the LGPL. But there isn't an LGPL-like variation of the Affero license. And without that, there are a number of situations where AGPL code is simply unusable, regardless of whether you make any changes.
9. Re:Too bad it's Affero by kestasjk · 2012-03-10 14:13 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  Before the AGPL came out a BSD-licensed project of mine, webdiplomacy, was used to build a fork site.
  They apparently forgot to credit us, are closed source, and didn't even include the BSD license until they were discovered. Instead of sharing code back they're quite bitter rivals, holding their site hostage for donations and having premium accounts.
  
  Since the AGPL came out there are several other fork sites that have sprung up, but we all pool code changes, and they all market themselves to different niches (e.g. variants or different languages). Many of them are for-profit and host large communities, but we all share code and benefit from it.
  
  --
  // MD_Update(&m,buf,j);
10. Re:Too bad it's Affero by Ly4 · 2012-03-10 20:13 · Score: 2
  An example of the downside of the AGPL:
  You're running a website that's a discussion forum. You find a tiff-to-jpeg library that you want to use to convert member's avatar photos, so you call the library's 'convert' method.
  Congratulations, you've just created a modification. Since the library was licensed under the AGPL, you now need to:
  
  - release the code that calls the API.
  
  - release the code that calls the code that calls the API.
  
  - release any other code called by the code that calls the code that calls the API.
  
  - release your build scripts
  
  - release source for any other libraries you've invoked. That includes anything you purchased from a vendor.
  
  - etc. You pretty much have to release your entire web site.
  
  Now, you may not have any philosophical objections to releasing everything listed above, but just the logistics of determining the licenses of the existing source code could be enough to kill the idea.
  Note that this example is not completely theoretical. </dontaskmehowiknowthis>
For those who are curious by Anonymous Coward · 2012-03-10 06:43 · Score: 5, Interesting

For those who are curious what Freenet is: It's a distributed data store, which is censorship-resistant and allows to publish information anonymously.
1. Re:For those who are curious by biodata · 2012-03-10 07:17 · Score: 2
  
  How can it resist censorship when it is a .org? I thought the US government owned these.
  
  --
  Korma: Good
Re:Must be Lisp under the hood by Sanity · 2012-03-10 07:01 · Score: 4, Informative

Yeah, you're confusing it with a recursive function definition, I've been meaning to fix that. I guess I'll fire up Eclipse (it's Java, not Lisp)
Re:Must be Lisp under the hood by Sanity · 2012-03-10 07:20 · Score: 4, Funny

Ok, just for you I risked borking the site during a slashdotting and I implemented a quick fix. You're welcome :-)
Similar software by Twinbee · 2012-03-10 07:31 · Score: 4, Interesting

Calculators should be multi-line like this - it's so much easier to keep track of calculations. Similar to LastCalc is InstaCalc on the web and something on the Mac called Soulver which is also very impressive.

Shameless plug: I've been working tirelessly on something like this too for almost a year, and apart from lists and a couple of other minor features, is a bit like LastCalc on steroids:

OpalCalc (for Windows currently).

The screenshots should give an idea of what it can do, but to name a few things: it's even more like notepad, faster, can handle times/dates, and allow words in the sum (like saying "5 oranges * £10 = £50" ).

--
Why OpalCalc is the best Windows calc
1. Re:Similar software by Sanity · 2012-03-10 07:49 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  Soulver was actually what inspired LastCalc, but I wanted to bring it to the web, and make it programmable.
  OpalCalc looks neat, unlike Soulver it supports functions, and I'm sure it has a few features that LastCalc currently lacks.
  However LastCalc has a few features that OpalCalc lacks too, such as support for higher-level datastructures like lists and maps, pattern matching (like Haskell), and the ability to pull data from the web to use in calculations.
  So I'm not sure that I would describe OpalCalc as "LastCalc on steroids" by any stretch.
2. Re:Similar software by PieterGen · 2012-03-10 08:00 · Score: 2
  
  Interesting, but I can't use it because I don't use Windows. Do you have plans to make it cross-platform (Linux/osx/win)?
3. Re:Similar software by JustinOpinion · 2012-03-10 08:44 · Score: 2
  
  LastCalc looks absolutely amazing! I love Google's ability to do on-the-fly math with unit conversion, and it seems that LastCalc is giving us this and more! It's great.
  
  A question for you (or a feature request, I suppose): how do we add more information to the behind-the-scenes taxonomy? For instance, if I go "2*pi*1 nanometers in angstroms" it correctly converts from "nanometers" to "angstroms". However if I use "nm" instead, it doesn't know what I mean. Of course I can add a definition "1 nm = 10 angstroms" and from then on it works correctly... but I don't want to have to add that every time I use LastCalc!
  
  Presumably you have a database behind-the-scenes with taxonomies for various units. Is there any way for end-users to edit that taxonomy (wiki-style), or perhaps submit new relations/data for inclusion? Now that you're open-sourcing this project, it seems like you could take advantage of community involvement to expand and refine the taxonomy, making the system ever-more-powerful. (I see you have a Google Group... so, is the intention that people just discuss this in the that forum? Seems like it would be more efficient to have a wiki or open database where people (even non-programmers) could contribute suggestions for units/relations/etc.)
  
  Anyways, thanks for your efforts on what looks like a great project. I hope you keep it up!
4. Re:Similar software by Sanity · 2012-03-10 09:36 · Score: 2
  
  You can just type:
  X nm = (X*10) angstroms
  The plan is that people will be able to define lots of functions like this, along with much more complicated ones, and then share them. The best of them will become part of the default vocabulary.
  Please sign up for the mailing list if you'd like to keep up with developments (or, if you can code Java, perhaps you could help?!)
AGPL is a fine choice. by jbn-o · 2012-03-10 07:44 · Score: 2

In other words, any FLOSS license is objectionable to those who wish to violate that license and make unauthorized derivatives. The AGPL and GPL, in particular, require equal treatment and reciprocity for all distributors. This is not onerous on the user or developer.
As to not seeing a "battle", that language overstates the case but you do probably see the differences among the licenses and you have apparently made your choice. Your choice is no more or less political than someone who chooses a strongly copylefted free software license such as the AGPL. Freedom of choice doesn't really explain anything. Choices are present in proprietary licenses too, thus highlighting how freedom of choice is a scam: The user's software freedoms are not respected nor is the open source development methodology present.

--
Digital Citizen
1. Re:AGPL is a fine choice. by steveha · 2012-03-10 10:07 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  In other words, any FLOSS license is objectionable to those who wish to violate that license and make unauthorized derivatives.
  Wow, way to set up a straw man there.
  Okay, any FLOSS license is objectionable to those who want to violate the license. Tautology, so I'm hardly going to argue with it. But "in other words" implies that this is a reasonable paraphrase of the GP post, which this is not.
  Some FLOSS licenses are a pain even for people who don't want to violate licenses. Suppose I want to include a library in a proprietary closed-source project. With some licenses, I can just do it. With BSD + "advertising clause", I now have an obligation to put text in my program, to put text in my manual, and possibly to put text on my web site and on a product package; I also have to keep track of whether I did the text or not, and make sure it isn't accidentally removed or altered. And I'll tell you right now: non-hypothetically, I avoid any license with an "advertising clause" for the above reason. With LGPL, I explicitly have to allow my customers to reverse-engineer my code, which would be a problem with a commercial product using licensed code (some licensed code requires one to take steps to prevent reverse-engineering).
  So, a higher post in this thread claimed that the requirements of Affero GPL include an "auditing" clause, which potentially places an annoying burden on anyone who hosts the Affero GPL code. I haven't reviewed the Affero GPL so I don't know if this is correct, but I assume it is because you engaged in a straw-man attack rather than just pointing out an error.
  So with a few examples I have shown that some licenses are more burdensome than others. In fact it is only people who do care about obeying licenses who are burdened; people who are just planning to violate the licenses can violate Affero GPL as easily as any other.
  As to not seeing a "battle", that language overstates the case but you do probably see the differences among the licenses and you have apparently made your choice. Your choice is no more or less political than someone who chooses a strongly copylefted free software license such as the AGPL. Freedom of choice doesn't really explain anything. Choices are present in proprietary licenses too, thus highlighting how freedom of choice is a scam: The user's software freedoms are not respected nor is the open source development methodology present.
  I have read this paragraph three times and I am not sure what you were trying to say here. If it is important, please restate.
  "Freedom of choice doesn't explain anything"? What?
  steveha
  
  --
  lf(1): it's like ls(1) but sorts filenames by extension, tersely
2. Re:AGPL is a fine choice. by butalearner · 2012-03-10 13:26 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  I used to prefer the various *GPL licenses until I read the OGRE development team's post about switching from LGPL (plus a commercial license option) to MIT for version 1.7. The key paragraph for me was this:
  
  While not requiring modified source to be released might initially seem like giving up an important motivator to contribute code back to the community, we’ve noticed something in recent years: 99% of useful code contributions come from people who are motivated to participate in the project regardless of what the license tells them they have to do. It’s our experience that a certain percentage of the user community will always participate and contribute back, and therefore encouraging adoption via simpler licensing is likely to result in more contributions overall than coersion via complex and restrictive licensing does. In addition, people who are internally motivated to participate tend to provide much higher quality and more usable contributions than those who only do it because they are forced to.
3. Re:AGPL is a fine choice. by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · 2012-03-10 16:56 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  It would take a very comprehensive piece of surveying work to say whether this in fact holds across the board; but my anecdotal impression is that the utility of legally enforced compliance may vary depending on what sort of software you are dealing with.
  
  The area that comes to mind is embedded systems: a substantial number of assorted plastic SoC boxes running linux are user-modifiable today because their sellers were forced to provide sources under the GPL. Their firmware was often of rather low quality; but contained vital architectural details about the hardware that would otherwise have had to be inferred by comparatively arduous reverse engineering. In those situations, motivation is still better(one presumes that the manufacturers who are shipping *WRT firmwares are probably more helpful than the ones who stash a passive_agressive_GPL_compliance_blob.rar file somewhere in the dark corner of their support site); but bad code that provided enough information to port the better mainline-based 3rd party firmware was still useful.
  
  In something like the OGRE case, there doesn't seem to be the analogous vital information, bad code would just be bad code, making enforced contribution considerably less useful.
  
  I'd be interested to see if this pattern in fact holds, or if I am simply mistaken, and if there are any other categories that push strongly in one direction or the other; but I don't really have enough information to say...
Re:Must be Lisp under the hood by Sanity · 2012-03-10 07:50 · Score: 4, Funny

Nah, just wanton irresponsibility :-)
Seriously? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-03-10 07:52 · Score: 2, Insightful

When you have R, you hardly need any lousy calculators like this.
Mac Graphing Calculator by Anonymous Coward · 2012-03-10 08:36 · Score: 2, Informative

Still looking for an open source equivalent of one of the greatest calculators ever written. It was bundled with OS8. This one "shows you the math". Every kid should have it.
It's got a really great geek story behind it too. If you don't already know this one, take a minute and enjoy.
http://www.pacifict.com/Story/
Quantrix? by Burz · 2012-03-10 09:29 · Score: 2

http://www.quantrix.com/
If its similar to this then its very interesting, indeed.
SAGE by steveha · 2012-03-10 10:10 · Score: 2

Anyone interested in LastCalc is probably also interested in SAGE:
http://sagemath.org/
Basically this is every free math tool out there, glued together using Python, with a nice web "workbook" interface. It can make plots, do symbolic math, and all sorts of stuff.
Fun fact: someone ported TeX font rendering to JavaScript, and that is what SAGE uses to draw math equations in your browser.
steveha

--
lf(1): it's like ls(1) but sorts filenames by extension, tersely
Typical slashdot thread by oheso · 2012-03-10 13:05 · Score: 2

Huge mud-slinging war about the license chosen and no one pointing out the thing is borked.