Re: Switch from GTK to QT (was: ASU software - pre-pre-release impressions)
Subject: Re: Switch from GTK to QT (was: ASU software - pre-pre-release impressions) Date: mer 21 mag 08 09:22:38 -0400 Quoting Nkoli ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): On Tue, May 20, 2008 at 1:32 PM, Carlo E. Prelz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: My complaint is that it would be difficult for me to put my hands into the default apps. They are C++, QT, and expectedly using enough of those creepy C++-isms (possibly, even those yecchy templates or whereabouts). I would be comfortable with tinkering with CGTK main apps. On the other hand, I would find C++QT main apps closed boxes (I perfectly know that I could very well write C/Ruby new code on the OM). From this statement, one would think that you don't use _any_ applications written in C++ or Qt for the simple reason that you can't tinker with the code. I am sure this is not the case. You use the applications written in C++/Qt and play with those written in the languages you're comfortable with or you write your own from scratch. I do not use any Qt app (Qt not installed on any of my PC's). My XFCE setup is satisfactory as it is. I do use C++-written apps (starting with dear old Groff). No need to modify them, though. But you do not see the point. The cutting point of OM is that I can (rather, could) finely adapt the core phone applications to my many quirks. If I cannot do this, well, no reason to substitute my old palm, which goes on giving me the phone/pim services I need (all this, with a QWERTY keyboard and long battery time). Refusing to get the phone because you dislike the languages the shipped apps are written in, not because it prevents anyone from coding in the languages they prefer or that any of the applications are proprietary is beyond ridiculous. You appear to have a very low ridiculousness threshold. Carlo -- * Se la Strada e la sua Virtu' non fossero state messe da parte, * K * Carlo E. Prelz - [EMAIL PROTECTED] che bisogno ci sarebbe * di parlare tanto di amore e di rettitudine? (Chuang-Tzu) ___ Openmoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Switch from GTK to QT (was: ASU software - pre-pre-release impressions)
On Tue, May 20, 2008 at 1:32 PM, Carlo E. Prelz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: My complaint is that it would be difficult for me to put my hands into the default apps. They are C++, QT, and expectedly using enough of those creepy C++-isms (possibly, even those yecchy templates or whereabouts). I would be comfortable with tinkering with CGTK main apps. On the other hand, I would find C++QT main apps closed boxes (I perfectly know that I could very well write C/Ruby new code on the OM). From this statement, one would think that you don't use _any_ applications written in C++ or Qt for the simple reason that you can't tinker with the code. I am sure this is not the case. You use the applications written in C++/Qt and play with those written in the languages you're comfortable with or you write your own from scratch. Right now OM needs more new apps than it needs shipped apps taken apart (which will probably be done by a number of people anyway). Refusing to get the phone because you dislike the languages the shipped apps are written in, not because it prevents anyone from coding in the languages they prefer or that any of the applications are proprietary is beyond ridiculous. To each their own though. Good luck getting that perfect phone that ships with C and GTK apps and also lets you code in any language you want. ___ Openmoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Switch from GTK to QT (was: ASU software - pre-pre-release impressions)
2008/5/21 Nkoli [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On Tue, May 20, 2008 at 1:32 PM, Carlo E. Prelz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: My complaint is that it would be difficult for me to put my hands into the default apps. They are C++, QT, and expectedly using enough of those creepy C++-isms (possibly, even those yecchy templates or whereabouts). I would be comfortable with tinkering with CGTK main apps. On the other hand, I would find C++QT main apps closed boxes (I perfectly know that I could very well write C/Ruby new code on the OM). From this statement, one would think that you don't use _any_ applications written in C++ or Qt for the simple reason that you can't tinker with the code. I am sure this is not the case. You use the applications written in C++/Qt and play with those written in the languages you're comfortable with or you write your own from scratch. Right now OM needs more new apps than it needs shipped apps taken apart (which will probably be done by a number of people anyway). In this case, openmoko is still being marketed to developers and is still alpha software. As such, I have a reasonable expectation that I will want to hack a fair number of the applications it ships with. So that is a valid complaint. Of course, you could simply rewrite each application in your preferred language, but that's a waste of effort. Or you could not mess with the applications written in a language you do not prefer. Or you could wait until there's a more severe need and then learn the language in question and start working on the application. With desktop Linux, most things are sufficiently mature that I expect not to have to hack them. So the language they are written in is far less important. Of course, one person's opinion doesn't matter much, as long as there are plenty of people familiar with the languages that are commonly used in openmoko. I think there are far more people who can effectively write C collaboratively than who can effectively write C++ collaboratively. The larger issue is extending a C++ codebase in another language. ___ Openmoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Switch from GTK to QT (was: ASU software - pre-pre-release impressions)
Subject: Re: ASU software - pre-pre-release impressions Date: mar 20 mag 08 08:21:06 -0600 Quoting Travis Tabbal ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): On Tue, May 20, 2008 at 12:39 AM, Carlo E. Prelz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The switch to QT *requires* the abandoning of C in favour of C++, a language that I personally find unsuitable for use. QT is C++, but you can write your code in C and just use the various classes to get GUI widgets. Funny way to define the concept. I must disagree: if you use the various classes you write C++. I really don't see why someone that knows C would have a problem with C++. I find some aspects of C++ irritating compared to Java, C#, Python, etc.. But it's far from unsuitable for use. I can write both good and bad code in most any language. And there is nothing saying you have to write your apps in C++. Subjectively (for me), it is unsuitable for use. I write code as a job (have been doing that for longer than I wish to remember). C and Ruby are my current tools. I know from multiple personal attempts that C++ goes severely against my mental engrams. My ability to pay my bills depends on how smoothly and effectively these engrams operate. I cannot allow them to get disrupted. My complaint is that it would be difficult for me to put my hands into the default apps. They are C++, QT, and expectedly using enough of those creepy C++-isms (possibly, even those yecchy templates or whereabouts). I would be comfortable with tinkering with CGTK main apps. On the other hand, I would find C++QT main apps closed boxes (I perfectly know that I could very well write C/Ruby new code on the OM). I just find it an odd thing to be so irritated about. I do not know how you received the idea that I was irritated. I am only a bit disappointed (after waiting for this project to produce its fruit for all these years), and I wanted to let Openmoko know that they have lost at least one (early-adopting) client by operating the switch to QT. Later, if I find that the original OM core code works to satisfaction, I may decide to buy the phone just the same. Carlo -- * Se la Strada e la sua Virtu' non fossero state messe da parte, * K * Carlo E. Prelz - [EMAIL PROTECTED] che bisogno ci sarebbe * di parlare tanto di amore e di rettitudine? (Chuang-Tzu) ___ Openmoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Switch from GTK to QT (was: ASU software - pre-pre-release impressions)
Tuesday 20 May 2008 skrev Carlo E. Prelz: snipsnipsnip I write code as a job (have been doing that for longer than I wish to remember). C and Ruby are my current tools. Well... Why not use the Qt bindings for Ruby, then? http://rubyforge.org/projects/korundum/ (also, i might make the note, that while C++ itself might give you a headache, using Qt is really rather different from using pure C++, but as you're so very experienced, i suspect you already know this :) ) -- ..Dan // Leinir.. http://www.leinir.dk/ Co- existence or no existence - Piet Hein ___ Openmoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Switch from GTK to QT (was: ASU software - pre-pre-release impressions)
On Tue, May 20, 2008 at 1:45 PM, Dan Leinir Turthra Jensen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Well... Why not use the Qt bindings for Ruby, then? http://rubyforge.org/projects/korundum/ Very cool. I've been thinking I might need a Ruby project for a while now. I might have to give that library a try when I get some time to set up an OM dev environment. C++ is far from my favorite language as well. :) Personally, I'd like to see work continue on the old GTK apps, I like the look of them better than the QTopia apps from the screenshots I've seen so far. Not that either one is bad really, just preference. I'm sure there are plenty of people that like the new apps better as well. The joy of community. :) ___ Openmoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Switch from GTK to QT (was: ASU software - pre-pre-release impressions)
Funny way to define the concept. I must disagree: if you use the various classes you write C++. Fair enough. I have seen plenty of C code using C++ objects that I didn't think of as real C++ code. It felt more like Obj-C to me, but again, to each their own. Subjectively (for me), it is unsuitable for use. I write code as a job (have been doing that for longer than I wish to remember). C and Ruby are my current tools. I know from multiple personal attempts that C++ goes severely against my mental engrams. My ability to pay my bills depends on how smoothly and effectively these engrams operate. I cannot allow them to get disrupted. My complaint is that it would be difficult for me to put my hands into the default apps. They are C++, QT, and expectedly using enough of those creepy C++-isms (possibly, even those yecchy templates or whereabouts). I would be comfortable with tinkering with CGTK main apps. On the other hand, I would find C++QT main apps closed boxes (I perfectly know that I could very well write C/Ruby new code on the OM). Fair enough. We all think in different ways so I can see what you're getting at. I personally don't find C++ all that bad to grok once I get into it a little, but if we were all like me the world would be a boring place. :) I do not know how you received the idea that I was irritated. Emotion + Email = Misinterpretation My apologies if I misunderstood what you were getting at. Best wishes whatever your decision on the phone, I certainly don't make any money if you buy one. :) Just curious what you found so wrong about the change, and you kindly explained it to me. Thanks. :) ___ Openmoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
