Page 18 of 19 FirstFirst ... 816171819 LastLast
Results 171 to 180 of 182

Thread: Mono Developers Go Bye-Bye From Attachmate

  1. #171

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ciplogic View Post
    You were talking about compatibility? So why your phrase can be interpreted in that many ways?
    I just have it on my mind and thought it's obvious mono isn't 100% compatible with .Net.

    Is Qt better than MFC? Qt is not a MFC replacement, a Gtk one, a Windows.Forms one or a Swing one... Qt is crap...
    Is that similar with your comment.
    Mono strides to not be compatible with .Net but with ECMA specs. Mono is as .Net (ECMA compatible) as Linux is Unix, yet both are POSIX compatible.
    Last time some mono fanboys were saying mono is a .Net for Linux, so this is what I was basing on. If it's not that way it doesn't matter overall. It puts it into probably even worse situation, because it won't be so 'attractive' for Windows .Net programmers.

    About Webkit was a more realistic down to earth thing as people that use it like Chrome cannot get back to use KHtms over the night, as Qt, to not say a line about KdeLibs are not working with Android, are just a custom port for Windows which will blow download budget of Google Chrome out of the water, Gnome's help is based on WebKit too, so they cannot replace it with KHtml. I'm puzzled how you did not find this as being more dangerous for your future.
    Qt is working on Android. Maybe you're right Android and Chrome cannot get back to use khtml over night, but something like this is much easier to do than migration from mono to something else - you have to rewrite entire application. There's also a significant difference between mono and webkit. Webkit serves to display html content and not to build your entire applications in some webkit language.

    I am curious how you can backup your statement that Mono intends to be a .Net compatible clone, when in fact have its own development.
    http://www.mono-project.com/Main_Page

    Run .Net applications on Linux etc. It was obvious to me it has to be compatible with .Net.

    In the rest, which is your application you contributed on, in the last 10 years? May you give just a bug report, or a translation from English to Spanish or some icons that you contribute to any OSS project? I never contributed to Mono but I did contribute to FreePascal/Lazarus, I put bug reports in MonoDevelop, Ubuntu, and I work as full time developer in an F/OSS project in real life.
    I mainly report and try to fix bugs. I was doing this mainly for Kubuntu, Ubuntu, Arch, KDE and one time to Linux kernel. I thought about helping Kubuntu in translations, but it seems it's incredibly messed up, so I'll rather wait for Mageia.

    https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/11467

  2. #172

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BlackStar View Post
    Where did I say you prefer flash?

    You said flash did not compete with free software. I showed that it does.
    Yes, but flash competing with FLOSS doesn't make me a hippo. It will be different if I'd prefer flash, gnash over html5 etc. I have an idea - mono = gnash. Now you should know why both are bad.

  3. #173
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    2,264

    Default

    Wasn't Adobe working on a Flash to HTML5 converter? Case closed.

  4. #174
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Madrid, Spain
    Posts
    398

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kraftman View Post
    Last time some mono fanboys were saying mono is a .Net for Linux, so this is what I was basing on. If it's not that way it doesn't matter overall. It puts it into probably even worse situation, because it won't be so 'attractive' for Windows .Net programmers.

    https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/11467
    Congratulations for your points and for your contributions! I'm glad you do it more than everything!
    As for me, Mono needs to be compatible to one degree. Like using another non-mainstream compiler, you expect the same results. As is GCJ with Java JRE, or FreePascal compared with Delphi, CLang and LLVM against GCC, as HTML 5 and it's JavaScript to work similarly accross browser. It does not need to be bug-to-bug compatible, but expected behavior. As o today I think the mainstream view of users of Mono. As for wanting to port the desktop application I work on from .Net to Mono, even if Mono supposedly will offer a solution to really run all the fluff needed, I will not do it a straight forward. Not cause of Namespace Patents attack, if this may be the issue for you. But because will look alien like: it uses Ribbon which looks alien on Linux, and it is not fun to look to unfinished Google SoC solutions, it uses WPF animations that depends on video card mature drivers (WPF uses pixel shaders, and Silverlight subset in it have a harder setup to start with). I will likely start with a Gtk# or Qt application and I would embed Mono to expose same functionality. Look&feel is an important matter for an user and I don't want to find all bugs and inconsistencies of every platform, but to use the best frameworks that a specific solution require.
    I've told you in other thread cases I use Mono, in general for small tool development and to deploy tools that are well made to run platform independent (in my case to remove Java dependency to move a rendering component. Luckily SunFlow renderer works with IKVM, so will work as packaged by default in Ubuntu and Windows with no extra setup, OS X will need it some settings though).

  5. #175

    Thumbs up

    Quote Originally Posted by ciplogic View Post
    Congratulations for your points and for your contributions! I'm glad you do it more than everything!
    As for me, Mono needs to be compatible to one degree. Like using another non-mainstream compiler, you expect the same results. As is GCJ with Java JRE, or FreePascal compared with Delphi, CLang and LLVM against GCC, as HTML 5 and it's JavaScript to work similarly accross browser. It does not need to be bug-to-bug compatible, but expected behavior. As o today I think the mainstream view of users of Mono. As for wanting to port the desktop application I work on from .Net to Mono, even if Mono supposedly will offer a solution to really run all the fluff needed, I will not do it a straight forward. Not cause of Namespace Patents attack, if this may be the issue for you. But because will look alien like: it uses Ribbon which looks alien on Linux, and it is not fun to look to unfinished Google SoC solutions, it uses WPF animations that depends on video card mature drivers (WPF uses pixel shaders, and Silverlight subset in it have a harder setup to start with). I will likely start with a Gtk# or Qt application and I would embed Mono to expose same functionality. Look&feel is an important matter for an user and I don't want to find all bugs and inconsistencies of every platform, but to use the best frameworks that a specific solution require.
    I've told you in other thread cases I use Mono, in general for small tool development and to deploy tools that are well made to run platform independent (in my case to remove Java dependency to move a rendering component. Luckily SunFlow renderer works with IKVM, so will work as packaged by default in Ubuntu and Windows with no extra setup, OS X will need it some settings though).
    I want to thank you for comprehensive responses and for being sane and fair. It's a pleasure to talk to such person and I can educate myself more on the topic. Thanks to you I can look at this from a different perspective. I also apologize for being harsh. If persons who are fair with others will drive mono development it has much brighter future. Icaza has failed at this, because his responses weren't straight, but there were too much PR thus he cannot be trusted.

  6. #176
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    3

    Default

    Ok. Trolling aside. What languages/platforms do you recommend one pursue if one is (currently) a C# programmer wanting to write programs for Linux?

    I've got 22 years of experience writing software professionally. I've tried and ruled out C, C++ and Java a long time (10+) years ago. IIRC, with C, I miss too many modern language features. Out of necessity (work) I used to be pretty good at C++, but I never *really* got into it, partly I think because I hated the way some things seemed to be bolted on. At the time, I liked Eiffel better, but that obviously never took off. Java seems to go too far in its ideology to be competitive, and could probably use a compatibility break in order to advance. But that's just my guess.

    I checked out Vala because of a comment in this thread, and it looked pretty nice, until I saw its generics.

    A new language/platform for me doesn't even have to be C-like, but it has to:
    Have generics. (Can't decide if I like C++ or C# better in this regard, but I find Java generics horrible.)
    Have garbage collection/automatic memory management.
    Have a good base class library. (Implementing your own List<T> is fun. For a while.)
    Have an IDE with a good UI designer.
    Have an IDE (the same IDE as above, mind you) with refactoring support.

    It's nice if it
    Allows operator overloading. (It is more than syntactic sugar. It helps keep the interface clean)
    Allows one to control the memory management in the few cases one needs to.

    Oh, and the IDE must be cheap or free.

    C#/Monodevelop seemed like a god fit, and I'll miss it if it disappears.

  7. #177
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    62

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JoachimJ View Post
    Ok. Trolling aside. What languages/platforms do you recommend one pursue if one is (currently) a C# programmer wanting to write programs for Linux?
    C++/Qt

    A new language/platform for me doesn't even have to be C-like, but it has to:
    Have generics. (Can't decide if I like C++ or C# better in this regard, but I find Java generics horrible.)
    Check
    Have garbage collection/automatic memory management.
    Qt has several smart pointer classes, like QSharedPointer that can delete the referenced object automatically when it goes out of scope and no other QSharedPointer objects are referencing it.
    Have a good base class library. (Implementing your own List<T> is fun. For a while.)
    Check, I always use Qt even if I don't write GUI apps just because of the great base class library.
    Have an IDE with a good UI designer.
    Check, Qt Creator.
    Have an IDE (the same IDE as above, mind you) with refactoring support.
    Check, Qt Creator, although it is not as good as Visual Studio in this regard.

    It's nice if it
    Allows operator overloading. (It is more than syntactic sugar. It helps keep the interface clean)
    Check
    Allows one to control the memory management in the few cases one needs to.
    Check

    Oh, and the IDE must be cheap or free.
    Check
    Replies in bold.

  8. #178
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Under the bridge
    Posts
    2,142

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JoachimJ View Post
    Ok. Trolling aside. What languages/platforms do you recommend one pursue if one is (currently) a C# programmer wanting to write programs for Linux?

    Oh, and the IDE must be cheap or free.

    C#/Monodevelop seemed like a god fit, and I'll miss it if it disappears.
    Boo is another great choice. It's inspired by python and is extremely flexible (you can even create domain-specific languages if you need!) It runs on the Mono runtime and has access to its huge base class library.

    C# generics are closer to Java generics than C++ templates, but with a much more logical implementation. They are very useful but they have limitations (you can't create a generic "Number<T>" like you could in C++, for instance). This is actually a runtime limitation, not a C# one - and Boo works around it by using dynamic code generation.

  9. #179
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    3

    Default

    @Znurre: I already ruled out C++.

    @Blackstar: I was assuming Mono/Monodevelop would stagnate from now on. If Mono/Monodevleop stays a viable alternative, I won't be needing to switch from C#, will I?

    Thanks anyway. (I think)

  10. #180
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    845

    Default

    Well since your prerequisites were mapped 1:1 with what C# offers I'd say it's extremely unlikely that you'd find another language that suits you. For my own needs (as a C,C++,Python developer) I'm becoming more and more interested in Go. It has some of the things you mentioned but lacks generics which seemed like a deal-breaker for you (although there's been alot of talk concerning future implementation of generics in Go). As always, you as the developer is always the best judge of what language works best for you.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •