Re: kylix: rad!

2002-01-14 Thread Perrin Harkins
> > GUI builders usually don't work for anything but the > > most trivial websites that could be written in anything > > and do fine. > > consider struts, a popular java mvc framework. it defines > simple interfaces for things like actions and forms. does > struts (and mvc in general) work for non

Re: kylix: rad!

2002-01-14 Thread brian moseley
On Sun, 13 Jan 2002, Daniel Aldham wrote: > Slashdot and Freshmeat ran a story on the weekend about > the Borland/Kylix license. Pretty draconian stuff. that's where i heard of it.

Re: kylix: rad!

2002-01-14 Thread Christian Couder
Hi all, brian moseley wrote: > > have you folks seen kylix? > http://www.borland.com/kylix/ And have you seen KDevelop ? http://www.kdevelop.org and also http://dot.kde.org/992083107/ http://dot.kde.org/986594487/ So there is already a basic Perl support in KDevelop 3 (codename Gideon)...

Re: kylix: rad!

2002-01-13 Thread Daniel Aldham
> > On Sun, 13 Jan 2002, brian moseley wrote: > > Kylix is, as I understand it, something much closer to original Delphi aim > of programming without coding. I'm not saying it wouldn't be neat if you > could do Kylix for Perl. I'm just saying I don't think it would be a > fantastic success. S

Re: kylix: rad!

2002-01-13 Thread brian moseley
On Mon, 14 Jan 2002, Gunther Birznieks wrote: > OK, I learned mod_perl, now where are my hot chicks! :) no, no, you have to pledge the frat! > I think a UI tool would help a bit, but it wouldn't > necessarily solve the hard part of mod_perl which is the > lack of Interpreter cleanup between inv

Re: kylix: rad!

2002-01-13 Thread Gunther Birznieks
At 06:16 AM 1/14/2002, brian moseley wrote: >On Sun, 13 Jan 2002, Sam Tregar wrote: > > > On Sat, 12 Jan 2002, Perrin Harkins wrote: > > > > > Well, does this product actually have any users to compete for? GUI > > > builders usually don't work for anything but the most trivial websites > > > tha

Re: kylix: rad!

2002-01-13 Thread Sam Tregar
On Sun, 13 Jan 2002, brian moseley wrote: > altho kylix was discussed in the first post of the thread, > my actual reply to you stood on its own as a condemnation of > a general cliquish attitude. Oh, consider me properly chastened then. BTW - kylix is actually the subject of this thread, suppo

Re: kylix: rad!

2002-01-13 Thread brian moseley
On Sun, 13 Jan 2002, Sam Tregar wrote: > Ah, gimme a break. You want to convince me that > non-programmers can find their way to the party with a > fancy GUI? Go right ahead! I'll let you wear the > moose-hat for a whole week if you succeed. However, > that doesn't mean I'm going to stay quie

Re: kylix: rad!

2002-01-13 Thread Sam Tregar
On Sun, 13 Jan 2002, brian moseley wrote: > On Sun, 13 Jan 2002, Sam Tregar wrote: > > > > Agree. > > you know, i think it's this attitude, or a more insidious > version of it, that keeps mod_perl from being as ubiquitous > as php. it's like having to pledge the frat before you can > get the hot

Re: kylix: rad!

2002-01-13 Thread brian moseley
On Sun, 13 Jan 2002, Sam Tregar wrote: > On Sat, 12 Jan 2002, Perrin Harkins wrote: > > > Well, does this product actually have any users to compete for? GUI > > builders usually don't work for anything but the most trivial websites > > that could be written in anything and do fine. People seem

Re: kylix: rad!

2002-01-13 Thread Sam Tregar
On Sat, 12 Jan 2002, Perrin Harkins wrote: > Well, does this product actually have any users to compete for? GUI > builders usually don't work for anything but the most trivial websites > that could be written in anything and do fine. People seem to come to > mod_perl because they need more per

Re: kylix: rad!

2002-01-13 Thread Steven Lembark
-- brian moseley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > many of us on this list have well-developed preferences for > editing and debugging our code, configuring and testing our > applications that are based on executing shell commands in a > terminal. don't you think there are lots of well developed > advocacy

Re: kylix: rad!

2002-01-13 Thread brian moseley
On Sat, 12 Jan 2002, Perrin Harkins wrote: > Well, does this product actually have any users to > compete for? unknown. i figure a large established software company isn't going to spend time developing a product for a market that doesn't exist, but you never know. > GUI builders usually don't

Re: kylix: rad!

2002-01-13 Thread Perrin Harkins
> competition with this product (which has some really > freaking license clauses which you can read about on > freshmeat) seems pretty easy: [...] > anybody interested? Well, does this product actually have any users to compete for? GUI builders usually don't work for anything but the most triv

kylix: rad!

2002-01-12 Thread brian moseley
have you folks seen kylix? http://www.borland.com/kylix/ check out this white paper that describes how to create cgis and modules for apache: http://www.borland.com/kylix/papers/apache_development.pdf kylix looks pretty much like ye olde application framework, just like what many of us have