I don't plan to do anything complicated with C++ just contribute bug fixes to blender and maybe add a few features here and there. Definetly not implementing a Smalltalk into it :D I am also interesting in improving my mathematical knowledge about 3d graphics. I am foremost a 3d artist, but I like the idea of customising my own tools. I would not design anything from scratch since there are already tons of open source projects. Designing my own Smalltalk is out of the question, I prefer small projects easy to do and realistic / practical.
Yeap I am aware of FP and Lazarus , I may play around them too but I will be facing the same problem I face with Pharo since they are not much popular either and has nothing that can compete with Blender for 3d graphics. I am not interested in commrecial Smalltalks from what I have seen Pharo looks better, maybe they have bigger libraries a bit more docs, but I dont think it would make much of a difference. If you are serious about coding 3d and 2d graphics , in the end knowning C/C++ is a big plus since most of development happens in those languages. I never said Smalltalk or Pharo is the wrong language for what I want to do , it was always a matter of tools and libraries. I may do something crazy like create a parser from Pharo to C++ , I think that would be interesting and would allow me to use Pharo for coding Blender source. Not a complete parser just something simple that can turn basic pharo syntax to C++ syntax. I would definitely being interested in something like this. I think Slang already does that so I may look at it and do maybe a few modifications here and there . I wonder if there are other parsers for Pharo to C++ , maybe a pettitparser template ? I would love to keep using Pharo syntax and the IDE and even keep contributing to it if it could generate C++ code. Actually thank you for reminding me about Slang :) On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 12:11 AM, vfclists . <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On 14 September 2014 18:54, kilon alios <[email protected]> wrote: > >> yes JAVA Swing comes with animation abilities , maybe you mean something >> more than that >> >> http://youtu.be/I3usNR8JrEE?t=7m41s >> >> before JAVA FX , Java had and still has Java2D. >> but I am no big fan of Java anyway. >> >> Dont know what it means by "ahead of its time" but back in 1998 I was >> coding in Delphi 1996 with a rock solid and very powerful GUI API. Delphi >> was an extremely powerful IDE , even more powerful than Pharo and stil is, >> with very mature and well documented libraries. >> >> Also if we talk about transparency animation this dates back to my days >> coding in DOS and C++. >> >> QT is awesome from what I see and people I ask generally have a very >> positive opinion about it, certainly something I may learn but my decision >> to swift focus from Pharo to C/C++ is not just because I having hard time >> coding the things I want in Pharo, its also because it makes more sense for >> me to contribute to Blender since my biggest interest is 3d art and blender >> is what I use. So re-learning C/C++ will give me full access to Blender >> internals which has a lot more potential for me. But yeah most likely I >> will learn QT and OpenGL. Its also cool that QT also supports mobile >> devices and even web apps. Also QML allows for live coding. >> >> I assume by 2-4 you mean full time developers. I don't know , personally >> I think you need more people because GUI APIs are a pain to maintain across >> platforms since OS define their own libraries and support. >> >> Yeap I definitely agree that Pharo needs more people using it, the >> problem however is that unpopularity is a vicious circle. You don't have >> much documentation and mature libraries because of small community and not >> much more new people come because you don't have much documentation and >> mature libraries. The problem also is fragmentation each one wants to try >> his own ideas and rightly so they may not be interesting in contributing to >> existing libraries, etc etc. These problems are common for languages. But >> Pharo can only get better since its in capable hands and passionate people. >> I have saw Pharo only improve the past year I have been using it regularly >> (in my free time , part time) and the community is helpful and kind if you >> exclude a couple of incidents here and there . >> >> About the web technology, personally I find he web is a big can of worms >> but a necessary evil, I always said that building pharo on top of amber >> would make more sense and would lift a great burden from the development of >> pharo. Sure pharo would inherit the problems of the web technologies and >> limitations but also its strengths and power and flexibility and pharo >> would not need to play this game of cat and mouse with other programming >> languages. It would at least solve the GUI API problem for Pharo and it >> would be a matter of mapping Spec on top of existing well documented and >> well tested and very powerful / flexible web technologies. >> >> But thats up to the Pharo community , my opinion is not fact and my >> personal choice is not the choice of other people. >> >> > > There is a saying that if you want something done, right you've got to do > it yourself, and this means working harder at it. Stuff like that get's > easier with the passage of time, but time is what you don't seem to have > and you may not have enough collaborators in your project. > > Seeing as you mentioned Delphi, you might consider the FreePascal/Lazarus > combination and consider building a Smalltalk on top if it as you need a > combination which gives the ease of an interpreter and live coding, > together with the facility to get down to the metal when you need it. It > also has the benefit of being crossplatform. C++ is really an insane > language to attempt to do something like that in. The newer languages like > Nimrod and Julia may be better, but they don't have the rich library set > you need. > > I've always felt that the design of Smalltalk/X offers a better foundation > for the type of stuff you want to accomplish so long as you are willing to > meet the conditions for using it for defense related and biotech purposes. > You will find the going tough as even Jan Vrany is not working on it much. > > All in all I would say Smalltalk is the right language for what you want > to do, it is just that the free versions available don't match your exact > needs, both in terms of libraries and level of mass adoption. > > -- > Frank Church > > ======================= > http://devblog.brahmancreations.com >
