GNOME.org
 

Re: [gnome-love] gnome-love Digest, Vol 92, Issue 1

Hello, we are very sorry, but NOBODY can understand here, your short cuts (SDK  OOP)  and perhaps on the 
other side of these line, my last WRITTEN SUPPORT REQUEST question via E-mail to your SUPPORT GROUP?) 

Can me please help somebody of these COMMUNITY there, to become personal contact with some UBUNTU user?!? I 
am from Bad Reichenhall and I want wo learn about these, I hope trustable COMMUNITY (UNIX .,...)

Thanks a lot for your UNDERSTANDING that a NORMAL user cant understand these INFORMATIONS in these written 
foren!

WE NEED MORE LEARNING by getting TEACHED through long term UBUNTU user and them have to get, it is in OUR 
BIBLE written: they have to get them FEE too and so our FOUNDATION make it possible to become a chance to be 
selfimployed at many different school projectes and these on many corner of the world...

Praise GOD for all these different opinion about the WORD BIBLE. IT IS THE TRUTH about the darkness and so 
very HELPFULL to know that there are very INTERESTED social RULES inside too. TO HELP one another through the 
true LOVE OF GOD to all WHO need HELP to FIND THEM OWN RIGHT professions...

Greetings

Ing. Sabine Ilse Elise Richter
-------- Original-Nachricht --------

Datum: Thu, 01 Mar 2012 19:47:07 +0000
Von: gnome-love-request gnome org
An: gnome-love gnome org
Betreff: gnome-love Digest, Vol 92, Issue 1



Send gnome-love mailing list submissions to
      gnome-love gnome org

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
      http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-love
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
      gnome-love-request gnome org

You can reach the person managing the list at
      gnome-love-owner gnome org

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of gnome-love digest..."


Today's Topics:

   1. Re: GNOME needs some good SDK (Michele De Pascalis)
   2. Re: GNOME needs some good SDK (Brian Duffy)


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2012 20:21:58 +0100
From: Michele De Pascalis <glaedr il drago gmail com>
To: Arief M Utama <arief utama gmail com>
Cc: gnome-love gnome org
Subject: Re: [gnome-love] GNOME needs some good SDK
Message-ID:
      <CABpcnvcysMAO5Ux15hTn=UbnEmZwwr7375sOjrvP8kcdP5WEyQ mail gmail com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="koi8-r"

Vala compiles in C/GLib, that actually provides an object sistem written
in
C, using C structs to provide it, with reflection and all. Using structs
to
provide OOP is less performant than using native OOP classes: GLib is
compiled in structs that are compiled in assembly, while native OOP
classes
are compiled in assembly without any implementation between. Briefly, GLib
results in a system of structs to represent a system of structs, while
native OOP implementations are just systems of structs. There is the
difference of an implementation layer, that is overhead. It's quite
similar
to every runtime object system, like those in Objective C, Java, Python,
ecc.
Plus, compiling from C means low-level exceptions, while compiling from a
native OOP language means high-level exceptions.
However, I'm not so good at explaining such complicated concepts in
English...hope you get it anyway.

2012/2/29 Arief M Utama <arief utama gmail com>



On 2/29/2012 8:05 PM, Michele De Pascalis wrote:

Vala is translated in C/GLib before it's built, that means so many data
structures in assembly, that means overhead. And, Vala was quite

unstable

the latest time I tried it, throwing meaningless low level exceptions (a

*

good* inheritance from C).


Err... I don't really understands this.

What are you saying actually? There should be no overhead in running

time.

Maybe slight overhead only at compilation time. Which don't mean much if

it

means increase in productivity and less programmer time used.

Or, I misunderstood your point? Care to elaborate?

All the best.
-arief



 2012/2/27 Brian Duffy <brduffy gmail com>


Personally, after quite a while deciding what language to use for my
project, I went with Vala. I just did not want to deal with writing my
application in C. If Vala could gain an excellent IDE with a proper

visual

debugger that isolated you from the underlying C code then I think that
would make for a nice development environment. Problem is, I don't see

the

community getting this done with Vala. I'm just happy that they have

done

what they have! It's amazing really. However, you can't escape the fact
that many of these contributions are made by people with other, more
pressing responsibilities. The most successful ones are often sponsored

by

a larger company, but there contributions are sometimes limited to that
company's needs.

 My biggest hope is for a company like Canonical to spend a good deal

of

time and money and develop a kick ass Vala IDE/Debugger and API even if
they have to charge for it.



 2012/2/27 Konstantin Evdokimenko <qewerty gmail com>


Cocoa is not a single framework it has a lot of them, I think even

more

than gtk+ and gnome have together. MS also has many technologies,
frameworks and solutions. So I'm thinking nothing is that bad with

gnome,

but
maybe a good ide is needed
27.02.2012 23 <27.02.2012%2023>:31 ???????????? "Darton Williams" <
dartonw gmail com> ???????:



On Thu, Feb 23, 2012 at 4:38 PM, Michele Alex D. De Pascalis <

glaedr il drago gmail com> wrote:


Just look around: Apple and Microsofts have their own SDKs, APIs

and

IDEs perfectly working with them. Compared to these, developing for

GNOME

is way too hard and complicated. Maybe we have the fastest software,

but we

have to write with Gtk, which is just a toolkit, without anything else
really integrating it. And C is over, so autogenerating a wrapper

isn't a

good solution (talking about gtkmm). If a newbie gets in touch with

Cocoa

and Xcode, he gets templates, he gets wide documentation, he connects
events with handlers by a drag'n'drop, cutting on the IDE's editor.

But it's not just about the IDE itself, it's also about paradigms:

Apple chose Model View Controller and Delegation, and everything is

written

around these, and it takes seconds to add a View to your application.

I'm saying this because I've been learning Cocoa for eight months,

and I had learnt C++ before. Even now I know C++ is better in many

ways,

but trying back Gtk made me understand it's not about the language,

now.

Those who write iOS or Mac apps know what I mean with all this.

_______________________________________________
gnome-love mailing list
gnome-love gnome org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-love



I fully agree with this statement - that GNOME desperately needs a

unified API/SDK. It would accelerate adoption of GNOME simply because
application development would become less of an arcane art. As a

developer,

I feel that I could contribute to that effort.


So how do we get started? :)

_______________________________________________
gnome-love mailing list
gnome-love gnome org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-love



_______________________________________________
gnome-love mailing list
gnome-love gnome org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-love





  --
Duff

_______________________________________________
gnome-love mailing list
gnome-love gnome org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-love





_______________________________________________
gnome-love mailing

listgnome-love gnome orghttp://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-love




_______________________________________________
gnome-love mailing list
gnome-love gnome org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-love



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://mail.gnome.org/archives/gnome-love/attachments/20120301/720a2bcb/attachment.html>

------------------------------

Message: 2
Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2012 14:46:48 -0500
From: Brian Duffy <brduffy gmail com>
To: Michele De Pascalis <glaedr il drago gmail com>
Cc: gnome-love gnome org
Subject: Re: [gnome-love] GNOME needs some good SDK
Message-ID:
      <CAHrDPkp5yGffxiztbMcNpH0Qz6QPLnfohGSPeWDeD-q-TbQnig mail gmail com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="koi8-r"

Hmm. When was the last time you tried it? I have not been using it for a
long time but I have managed to do quite a lot with Vala/Clutter and so
far
it has been pretty stable. I just wish it had better debug integration.
Still, I am far from a complete application so things may crop up. For
now,
I am liking the ease and flexibility of it. What language would you
recommend for a *standard* programming environment with GNOME, other than
C?

2012/3/1 Michele De Pascalis <glaedr il drago gmail com>


Vala compiles in C/GLib, that actually provides an object sistem written
in C, using C structs to provide it, with reflection and all. Using

structs

to provide OOP is less performant than using native OOP classes: GLib is
compiled in structs that are compiled in assembly, while native OOP

classes

are compiled in assembly without any implementation between. Briefly,

GLib

results in a system of structs to represent a system of structs, while
native OOP implementations are just systems of structs. There is the
difference of an implementation layer, that is overhead. It's quite

similar

to every runtime object system, like those in Objective C, Java, Python,
ecc.
Plus, compiling from C means low-level exceptions, while compiling from

a

native OOP language means high-level exceptions.
However, I'm not so good at explaining such complicated concepts in
English...hope you get it anyway.


2012/2/29 Arief M Utama <arief utama gmail com>



On 2/29/2012 8:05 PM, Michele De Pascalis wrote:

Vala is translated in C/GLib before it's built, that means so many data
structures in assembly, that means overhead. And, Vala was quite

unstable

the latest time I tried it, throwing meaningless low level exceptions

(a

*good* inheritance from C).


Err... I don't really understands this.

What are you saying actually? There should be no overhead in running
time. Maybe slight overhead only at compilation time. Which don't mean

much

if it means increase in productivity and less programmer time used.

Or, I misunderstood your point? Care to elaborate?

All the best.
-arief



 2012/2/27 Brian Duffy <brduffy gmail com>


Personally, after quite a while deciding what language to use for my
project, I went with Vala. I just did not want to deal with writing my
application in C. If Vala could gain an excellent IDE with a proper

visual

debugger that isolated you from the underlying C code then I think

that

would make for a nice development environment. Problem is, I don't see

the

community getting this done with Vala. I'm just happy that they have

done

what they have! It's amazing really. However, you can't escape the

fact

that many of these contributions are made by people with other, more
pressing responsibilities. The most successful ones are often

sponsored by

a larger company, but there contributions are sometimes limited to

that

company's needs.

 My biggest hope is for a company like Canonical to spend a good deal
of time and money and develop a kick ass Vala IDE/Debugger and API

even if

they have to charge for it.



 2012/2/27 Konstantin Evdokimenko <qewerty gmail com>


Cocoa is not a single framework it has a lot of them, I think even

more

than gtk+ and gnome have together. MS also has many technologies,
frameworks and solutions. So I'm thinking nothing is that bad with

gnome,

but
maybe a good ide is needed
27.02.2012 23 <27.02.2012%2023>:31 ???????????? "Darton Williams" <
dartonw gmail com> ???????:



On Thu, Feb 23, 2012 at 4:38 PM, Michele Alex D. De Pascalis <

glaedr il drago gmail com> wrote:


Just look around: Apple and Microsofts have their own SDKs, APIs

and

IDEs perfectly working with them. Compared to these, developing for

GNOME

is way too hard and complicated. Maybe we have the fastest software,

but we

have to write with Gtk, which is just a toolkit, without anything

else

really integrating it. And C is over, so autogenerating a wrapper

isn't a

good solution (talking about gtkmm). If a newbie gets in touch with

Cocoa

and Xcode, he gets templates, he gets wide documentation, he connects
events with handlers by a drag'n'drop, cutting on the IDE's editor.

But it's not just about the IDE itself, it's also about paradigms:

Apple chose Model View Controller and Delegation, and everything is

written

around these, and it takes seconds to add a View to your application.

I'm saying this because I've been learning Cocoa for eight months,

and I had learnt C++ before. Even now I know C++ is better in many

ways,

but trying back Gtk made me understand it's not about the language,

now.

Those who write iOS or Mac apps know what I mean with all this.

_______________________________________________
gnome-love mailing list
gnome-love gnome org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-love



I fully agree with this statement - that GNOME desperately needs a

unified API/SDK. It would accelerate adoption of GNOME simply because
application development would become less of an arcane art. As a

developer,

I feel that I could contribute to that effort.


So how do we get started? :)

_______________________________________________
gnome-love mailing list
gnome-love gnome org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-love



_______________________________________________
gnome-love mailing list
gnome-love gnome org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-love





  --
Duff

_______________________________________________
gnome-love mailing list
gnome-love gnome org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-love





_______________________________________________
gnome-love mailing

listgnome-love gnome orghttp://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-love




_______________________________________________
gnome-love mailing list
gnome-love gnome org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-love




_______________________________________________
gnome-love mailing list
gnome-love gnome org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-love





-- 
Duff
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://mail.gnome.org/archives/gnome-love/attachments/20120301/5fcc4564/attachment.html>

------------------------------

_______________________________________________
gnome-love mailing list
gnome-love gnome org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-love


End of gnome-love Digest, Vol 92, Issue 1
*****************************************


-- 
NEU: FreePhone 3-fach-Flat mit kostenlosem Smartphone!                                  
Jetzt informieren: http://mobile.1und1.de/?ac=OM.PW.PW003K20328T7073a


-- 
Empfehlen Sie GMX DSL Ihren Freunden und Bekannten und wir
belohnen Sie mit bis zu 50,- Euro! https://freundschaftswerbung.gmx.de
[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]