* Levi Bard wrote, On 29/06/09 15:35: >> The "on topic" results of the thread so far are: >> > ...pretty worthless. >
clearly not to the people who made them, and further down you even find one to have been worthwhile. >> automatic language conversion of C# >> The code won't compile but the syntax would be valid. >> Maybe Vala's parser could parse C# into a Vala AST which it could re-emit as >> vala code >> Maybe some perl/python tool to fix up or highlight the various constructs >> Maybe just conversion of the mono project files into an automake file >> > > FFS, this is A Bad Idea. > However you don't say what is bad about the idea, you just compare it to a worse, off-topic, idea. For some-one who is porting to Vala, a tool that did the mundane conversions would be a good tool. If many people will do a port, then such a tool is a good idea. > Maybe we could write a parser frontend for every known language in > existence, map that into Common Lisp, then re-emit it as Objective > CAML. > Then we could write another tool in [incr Tcl] to fixup or highlight > the various constructs. > ? This is off topic, except on CAML mailing list. > And then we could implement a tool to convert automake and autoconf > files into Makefiles. > automake and autoconf already do that. >> vapi/vala re-writes of some common mono dependencies >> (This would also improve the gnome eco-system) >> If these can be made available to mono again, it would support a seamless >> bottom up migration >> > > There really aren't any "common mono dependencies," except for Mono. > See, you're already adding value to the discussion, although from your attitude it's hard to tell if you are trying to be accurately helpful, or saying whatever you think will stop discussion. Maybe mod_mono (for apache) is an example of the sort of dependency I was thinking of: http://ibbie.xanga.com/686874553/item/ > If you rewrote Mono in Vala, then migrated Mono to Mono, you'd still have > Mono. > (Insert Xzibit meme here.) > I don't understand why you make this statement. No-one is suggesting this. You seem to be making nonsense suggestions in order to prove this to be the sort of thread you imagine it to be. >> Improve vala documentation (particularly to be useful for developers not >> familiar with gobject) >> > > This is actually worthwhile, although its inclusion in the list for > competitive reasons and not on its own merit is disheartening. > There is nothing competitive about it. It's not part of a "vala is better than mono" attempt or anything at all like it. > >> Port Tomboy as a show-case project port >> > There is already a project that showcases Vala in comparison to C, > C++, and C#: http://code.google.com/p/vala-benchmarks/ > Yes, but it talks about show-casing Vala. We were talking about show-casing a port to vala - i.e. show-casing the port process, not Vala or tomboy. It is of interest to see how easy it is to port something to Vala. > Can we please stop the ridiculousness now? Please? > As the ridiculousness seems to be all in your mind as you mis-interpret the entire thread and it's purpose, I don't see that we can do anything to help. I've done what I can with explanatory posts but you seem unable to grasp that the thread is merely for this: To have interested vala developers be aware to notice things that might be done in order to help mono projects move to Vala /in case a move from mono occurs/, and to consider if these things that might be done are worth doing. On-topic discussion moved faster than I thought and already 4 things which /might/ be done come to light so already. Sam
_______________________________________________ Vala-list mailing list Vala-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/vala-list
