Re: [vos-d] Swig
That it costs anything is a common misconception: The Microsoft C# compiler comes for free with Windows. You can download the Visual Studio 2005 Express Editions for free for a year. You can download other integrated development enviroments for free (such as SharpDevelop) You canbuild C# in Mono for free, which also runs on Linux which is a free OS. All the MSDN documentation is available for free online. So altogether, it is highly possible to spend no money and build C# apps. On 3/12/06, sconzey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The problem is that as far as I know, C# isn't anywhere near as portable as python, nor is it anywhere near as open. There are many free python development applications, whereas to write C# requires £300 worth of software. My vote's cast for python. On 3/12/06, Hugh Perkins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hmmm, After playing around a little with C#, I have to agree with Neil: C# rocks. Just to throw some salt in the wounds of the Python discussions, I cant help thinking that C# has all the advantages of both Python (run from source, easy to read) and C++ (strong typing, runs quickly). Btw, OSMP is now available in a C# version ;-) http://manageddreams.com/osmpbb/viewtopic.php?t=333 On 9/2/05, Neil Mosafi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yep, not had much practise with managed C++ as I'm lazy and C# is so much easier (!), but I guessmanaged C++ could be the way to go for integrating with VOS as it can fully utilise the C++ classes. Still there'd be work required to make the API more .net like ___vos-d mailing list vos-d@interreality.orghttp://www.interreality.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vos-d -- QOTD:Violence is the last resort of the incompetent-- Isaac Asimov GPG Public Key: http://www.jargonjunkie.com/rants/scones.ascWebsite: http://www.jargonjunkie.com/ ___vos-d mailing listvos-d@interreality.org http://www.interreality.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vos-d ___ vos-d mailing list vos-d@interreality.org http://www.interreality.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vos-d
Re: [vos-d] Swig
Yeah, Neil is 100% right. FWIW, I'm using Scite as my editor, and lescript as my build tool. Scite: http://www.scintilla.org/SciTE.html lescript: http://manageddreams.com/utils/lescriptmar9.zip Lescript lets you use C# as though it is a scripting language, ie you can do: C:\ lescript --nologohelloworld.cs Hello World! C:\ You need to have .Net Framework 1.1runtimeinstalled to use lescript ( http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyID=262d25e3-f589-4842-8157-034d1e7cf3a3DisplayLang=en ) Hugh http://manageddreams.com On 3/13/06, Neil Mosafi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: That it costs anything is a common misconception: The Microsoft C# compiler comes for free with Windows. You can download the Visual Studio 2005 Express Editions for free for a year. You can download other integrated development enviroments for free (such as SharpDevelop) You canbuild C# in Mono for free, which also runs on Linux which is a free OS. All the MSDN documentation is available for free online. So altogether, it is highly possible to spend no money and build C# apps. ___ vos-d mailing list vos-d@interreality.org http://www.interreality.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vos-d
Re: [vos-d] Re: Swig
Hi Lalo, Yes, you're right, for many applications weak typing is better, because it produces more compact, easier to read code.On 3/13/06, Lalo Martins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:And so says Hugh Perkins on 12/03/06 14:27... Just to throw some salt in the wounds of the Python discussions, I cant help thinking that C# has all the advantages of both Python (run from source, easy to read) and C++ (strong typing, runs quickly). agreeing to that would require me to agree that strong typing is anadvantage :-) I think it's a serious weakness.best, Lalo Martins-- ___ vos-d mailing list vos-d@interreality.org http://www.interreality.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vos-d
[vos-d] [OFF] typing
Basic, javascript and a few others have weak typing. Python, Lisp, Perl, Ruby, Smalltalk and a few others have dynamic typing. Which is very different. (Although Perl's case is, like everything else when Perl is in the sentence, arguable.) I can't fathom a case of high-level code where strong typing is better than dynamic... for low-level yes, but then you would probably be using C or assembler anyway. In fact, I think this was one of the (many) mistakes of C# design. But that's a prejudiced opinion; I just looked at tutorials and example code, and turned away in disgust. Maybe it's better if you actually use it a bit. (I know Python's indentation takes some getting used to... and smalltalk's/objC's keyword args. One funny thing is that it's not hard to beat C++ into dynamic typing. Your typical VOS application is at least partially dynamic typed. Although in my dream world, the dream language uses neither kind... it uses interface typing exclusively. But I don't know a language that works like that in the real world :-) And so says Hugh Perkins on 13/03/06 11:03... Yes, you're right, for many applications weak typing is better, because it produces more compact, easier to read code. best, Lalo Martins -- So many of our dreams at first seem impossible, then they seem improbable, and then, when we summon the will, they soon become inevitable. -- personal: http://www.laranja.org/ technical:http://lalo.revisioncontrol.net/ GNU: never give up freedom http://www.gnu.org/ ___ vos-d mailing list vos-d@interreality.org http://www.interreality.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vos-d
