Let me chime in for Xojo again.

Behind the scenes Xojo is using Javascript frameworks. In effect they've chosen the best of breed Javascript frameworks for my benefit. The difference is that they're using this framework to communicate back to the web server where Xojo code is running. This has some benefits and some expenses as well:

Benefit: The Xojo based web application is amazingly compatible across platforms and browsers. Basically it's establishing a connected session back to the web server. It's also easy to use their framework to detect whether you're on a full browser or whether you're on a phone/tablet that needs a simpler page sent down. For us application developers, it makes it easy for us to look good for being mobile friendly.

The expense: Given the above, it does make Xojo web applications more "chatty". They communicate back to the server more than an optimized Javascript web application might.

All said, it is an amazing product that can turn desktop developers into web and mobile developers within a days time. Worth taking a look at.

Side note: for my open sourced VFP to Xojo converter, check out this link: https://bitbucket.org/kcully/vfptoxojo

-Kevin


On 07/31/2016 12:43 PM, Fernando D. Bozzo wrote:
There will be a lot of movement on top languages, depending on the
application type and environment, but particulary in web languages.
Some big companies are using various of them, because of this movement, and
because of the rise of new ones based on old known ones.
In example, Java is used a lot and keeps evolving too fast: Java 6 was the
kings for various years, then came Java 7, 3 years later Java 8 (2014),
this year Java 9 and Java 10 is in development.
HTML 5 + Javascript 5 (now 6) + CSS 3 (and 4 any time soon) is a must: They
are avolving fast too, and Nodejs is growing at light speed. I think that
Nodejs is a very interesting and power language (based on JS), because
allows you Javascript on client and server side, it's very scalable and
will be fantastic on many environments, including IoT.

All this came with a lot of complexities, because now yo don't have "one"
language for programming, testing and debugging, but 2 or more, so
development is more tedious, tricky and difficult, and there are many more
variables for web development. Rick Strhal surely can talk a lot about it :)

On the desktop side the movement is not that high, may be because almost
everybody wants "web" apps, that at this time can interact like desktop
apps with the bonus of conectivity and ease of deployment.

I'm missing the VFP calm winds. Too many languages out there and new ones
every time make some caos for my taste.



2016-07-31 7:32 GMT+02:00 Edward Leafe <[email protected]>:

On Jul 29, 2016, at 5:54 PM, Mike Copeland <[email protected]> wrote:

In the past a lot of discussion has focused on Python, and there's
always Ruby, etc., and I'm impressed with XOJO...what I've seen so far. Of
course Microsoft is still a player, but other than Visual Foxpro, what is
the current "most likely to succeed" development platform/language in this
group's opinion?

It hasn't changed much over the last few years. Python is clearly the
leading language, while Java still trudges along. The only new thing would
be Go, which is getting a lot of traction thanks to Google.


-- Ed Leafe







--- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
multipart/signed
   text/plain (text body -- kept)
   application/pgp-signature
---

[excessive quoting removed by server]

_______________________________________________
Post Messages to: [email protected]
Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: 
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/[email protected]
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

Reply via email to