On Thursday 05 June 2003 08:13 pm, John Baima wrote: > Right. That is one of the reasons that Mono has become one of the most > successful open source projects. Once you have the .NET Framework (which > does not need anything Microsoft), besides the free Microsoft C# compiler, > and the Microsoft Visual C++, Visual Basic, Jscript languages, you have > several third-party languages ported or being ported to .NET including > Delphi, Eiffel, Cobol, APL, Perl, Python, Smalltalk, as well as research > languages such as Haskell, ML, Oberon, Scheme and Mercury. You can create > objects in any language and use them in any other. That's freedom!
Right, but my point was that people (at least myself probably others) don't want to be forced into using .NET. > Think about how much development effort is spent on UI issues for Sword. In > .NET, any visual component in any language can be used in any other. With > .NET the UI effort would be pooled and reused, not reinvented several times > over. What can take you into the future and give the best software for the > most people? Anyway, I would encourage people to do some reading about .NET > and make up their own mind. I will now get off my soapbox :-) All of the UI issues for sword are on the windows side of things not on the API side which is what this thread started out asking for. Port the windows program to .NET all you like that's fine with me. I quite frankly don't even read the threads about the issue as I use BibleTime rather than the BibleCS (the windows front end). My point is that I don't want to have to install mono, or any other major environment to be able to use/develop BibleTime or GnomeSword or any other linux based project that comes out that uses sword. All I should need is what comes with my distro. -- --David's Mailing List and Spam Receiver Keeping me relatively spam free since 2002 _______________________________________________ sword-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/sword-devel
