Gambas-it
Gambas3 => Domande tecniche => Topic aperto da: vuott - 01 Novembre 2013, 17:22:34
-
Vi riporto questa discussione apparsa nella M.L. ufficiale:
" After long talk with many gambas developpers, after years of joy on the use
of this language, I want to talk about its future... its persistance.
Benoit for me is a little bit like our Linus. He have done something for
itself and it's today one of the better tool ever see. (Umm ... ;-))
Now, for me one thing lock down Gambas... why can't it be more known ?
Because it is close to Linux world. Theire is no possibility to use it
natively on other system ... this problem what explicitely exposed by RMS
in the past in a mail sended to us. Yes in his request he wanted us to make
the interpreter generate a cil code for interpreter like java/.net or
parrot. Well today we know java isn't a sure way, and we can do things too
without.
I have a request to Benoit, and i know it's time is precious and like mine
rare. I want him to concentrate on make it's code portable... separate
specific linux part to allow all our friend that want to help to port
gambas to stars to make theire job.
By doing this, most people can participate on compiler/interpreter code, by
having Gambas on other system we can have more component maker/maintainer.
At the end Benoit can take hollidays and come take a Cognac at home . :-)
I know this is a huge job as he/we need to take the time to mark all part
of the code that is hard linked on Linux system, and then choose a way to
separate it to symplify the maintainment
Same thing for the toolkits but it's at a first time not the subject of
today.
Now we have hands that can help... but it can't be done if the code is not
structured for.
So for the Undred time ... Benoit ... Please, let us helping you.
To all, the gambas user/dev, this exchange is for you so even if it take
thouthen of mail, please give us your impress and your ideas, your support.
Please, don't look at the spelling fault, it will take to many time to you
;-)
--
Fabien Bodard "
" Fabien's right!
i worked on gambas' portability (OS X and *BSD) and i can say
we need a new structure of code to make a good portability
but mainly a proper maintenance.
Gambas is too linked to Linux. I can understand Benoit isn't
interesting to spend time in the developing to port Gambas,
but Benoit MUST review its code.
At the moment, Gambas is not coded to port properly on
others OS.
a lot of routines is too linked to Linux (i say it again).
Add new components and features is great, but it is
preferable to focus time to make it better.
i hope a work will be done in the gambas code to have
a "modular code". Separate X11 in a single code is
better for us, developers who wants to work on
portability of Gambas!
in this manner, each developer can works on a code
for OS X, for Windows and so on ...
X11 for OS X is ugly.
X11 for Windows is ugly.
Use translated X11 routines are ugly.
Benoit, we don't ask you to port Gambas to OS X & Windows,
just to re-structure code of Gambas so that we can works
efficiently!
While this change will not be applied,
i would not be motivated to work on any Gambas port again...
François Gallo "
-
...continua...
" well, theres some point that end in a double-edged sword
there's sense to ported to BSD, maebo, firefox-os,but if we make
software for non-free
systems, i see that most free projects in net the binaries for OSX or
Guindows are more
downloaded rather than the binaries for FOSS like linux, maebo, BSD,
etc etc, so then this its
a double-edged sword
those that makes free software for non-free systems are hipocrit due
made more relatiable these non-free systems
think about it: oh i have gambas for guindows, so why installing
complete os linux? nahhh
then install "w2008R2 super dupper edition ultimate corporate with all stuff"
and that's all .. no funny mens
>> rare. I want him to concentrate on make it's code portable... separate
>> specific linux part to allow all our friend that want to help to port
>> gambas to stars to make theire job.
I have no problem if code are ported to ONLY FREE OS's i can help ONLY
IN THAT SCENARY
>> separate it to symplify the maintainment
YEs in this part u have rigth
> i worked on gambas' portability (OS X and *BSD) and i can say
OSX are a non-free OS
> we need a new structure of code to make a good portability
> but mainly a proper maintenance.
Well yes have right
> Gambas is too linked to Linux. I can understand Benoit isn't
> interesting to spend time in the developing to port Gambas,
oh god exits! ;-)
> but Benoit MUST review its code.
well u have right u_u
> for OS X, for Windows and so on ...
> X11 for OS X is ugly.
> X11 for Windows is ugly.
> Use translated X11 routines are ugly.
u must use free software
> While this change will not be applied,
> i would not be motivated to work on any Gambas port again...
well with this i already very motivated
--
Lenz McKAY Gerardo "
" Just to throw in my two cents... I personally despise Windows, OSX and
iOS. Microsoft and Apple can both die in a fire as far as I'm concerned.
That being said, from a practical standpoint I think the lack of
portability speaks of two weaknesses (or strengths not taken advantage
of) of GAMBAS:
1) Developers have a significantly more limited target audience. The
best program in the world, if developed in GAMBAS, won't be used by the
vast majority of those potentially interested in using it. That hurts
potential end users and the developers.
2) The more people using an open source application, the more people
contribute to maintaining, improving, documenting, and evangelizing it,
as well as testing and reporting bugs. Hypothetically, if one million
people use GAMBAS and it runs on 1% of computers due to OS limitation,
porting it to the other 99% will result in the user base increasing to
100 million. That is profound and could accelerate the development and
stability of GAMBAS to unseen levels.
So, despite wanting to stab Microsoft and Apple in both eyes with
daggers, in the end I think it would benefit GAMBAS and us as developers.
If it's a matter of getting all the component dependencies working in
other OS's, couldn't build scripts be generated for all of them? You'd
think a lot of them already have build scripts for Windows and OSX and
it would be a matter of identifying the outliers and creating scripts
for them. How many components actually can't currently be compiled on
Windows/OSX? Maybe the start could just be the IDE and "default"
components, then the other components could be tackled individually. Not
my area of expertise. :/
> then install "w2008R2 super dupper edition ultimate corporate with all stuff"
> and that's all .. no funny mens
>
While that's true, it depends on your perspective, or, your intentions
as a GAMBAS developer. Most developers, especially in the open source
world, just want their application to be the best possible and to be
accessible to and used by the most people possible. People like RMS on
the other hand allow philosophy and politics to affect the landscape,
sometimes to their own detriment. If you get too "religious" about a
project you can end up shooting yourself in the face by accident.
Most users aren't technically savvy enough to migrate their OS to Linux
or set up a dual-boot scenario. They don't understand or care about the
open source philosophy, and while it's important to me, I don't think it
NEEDS to be important to other people. Everyone uses computers now;
kids, grandmas, police, firemen, lumberjacks, whatever. I don't think
they all need to be worried about changing OS's because a handful of
programs they want to use only work on Linux.
Linux will have its day on the desktop; it will have it's appropriate
market share (33% to be fair at this point), but I don't think it will
be from application platform exclusivity.
Kevin Fishburne "
-
...continua...
" Why, at least if it would be possible to implement multi-threading...
M. Cs. "
" To port Gambas on non-X11 systems, the problems are the following:
1) The interpreter relies on some kernel features that are not exactly
implemented in the Windows kernel, especially the fork() system call.
The Cygwin emulation layer is too slow.
2) I don't care about Windows. Doing the port is a big job. I started to
did it on Windows XP + Cygwin years ago. It worked, but there was the
fork() system call emulation that was slow.
3) There is X11 code in gb.gtk, gb.qt4 and gb.desktop.
4) For gb.gtk: as GTK+ 2 is deprecated, gb.gtk should be ported to GTK+
3. This implies removing all the X11 specific code.
5) For gb.qt4: the X11 specific code is there to workaround some
problems, but should not exist theoritically.
6) For gb.desktop: the desktop routines relies on the X11 window manager
protocols and freedesktop.org standards. A lot of things cannot be
ported, but some things can.
7) Many components are interfaces to libraries that do not necessarily
exist on other systems. It could be a problem.
I think there is not a lot of thing to do to port the interpreter, the
compiler and the other tools, as I already did that on Windows.
As for the X11 stuff, of course you're right. It must be encapsulated
somewhere so that it can be easily replaced. I already planned to do
that, but never had the time.
At the moment, I'm busy with fixing Gambas packager as soon as possible,
so that a Gambas 3.5.1 could be released.
--
Benoît Minisini "
" But you will support the native MIR and Wayland, right? And you will
create a 'gb.qt5' component? I waiting the GTK+ 3. :-)
Kende Krisztián "
" I'm sure that we all acknowledge that Gambas plays much the same role on Linux that VB plays on Windows. I used to be a VB developer, but I'd far sooner work with Gambas any day, even if it could be run on Windows. That said, the fact is that VB does exist and, whatever we like to think, it is a good tool with a huge and enthusiastic user base. At best, fully migrating Gambas to Windows would put it in a similar position to GIMP on Windows. At a functional level GIMP stands up well against Photoshop for most users. Despite that people still pay good money for Photoshop because it is the "go to" image editor in most people's minds. In the same way, no matter how good Gambas is most people looking for a RAD tool on Windows would automatically opt for VB.
I have played around with Lazarus, which is a visual development environment based on FreePascal and generates native executables. It's harder to use than Gambas, but still a lot easier than Visual C++. It already has the advantage that there are versions for Linux, Windows and OSX, so you can develop a project on one OS and just recompile it to run on the others. On that basis it beats every other development tool hands down for portability and should dominate the market. For all that, most developers regardless of their OS, have probably never heard of it.
To my mind Gambas has been developed to satisfy a requirement on Linux and it does that brilliantly well. There's nothing that comes close in terms of functionality vs ease-of-use. My view is that just because something CAN be done doesn't mean that it MUST be done. The notion that Gambas, or any other FLOSS project, must strive for maximum market share is more than a nod towards the stance of commercial proprietary software which many of us strive to avoid.
The one thing I would like to see for Gambas is not so much functionality as improved awareness of one of its many capabilities. By combining Gambas with SQLite you have more or less a complete analog for MS Access. When I first came to Linux I struggled to find anything close to an Access equivalent. LibreOffice Base is far too complicated and slow. I'm sure there are many Linux users who would dearly love to have a powerful desktop database tool but don't realise that a solution is so readily available.
Regards
Nige "
-
Argomento interessante
faccio una domanda
Visula Basic Express è già disponibile gratuitamente, naturalmente solo per uso locale.
Che vantaggi avrei ad avere Gambas in alternativa?
Prescindiamo da argomenti di tipo etico (software open e libero)
Un vantaggio è la portabilità su più piattaforme
Che dite?
-
...continua...
" Dear Nige and all,
I'm working on something like MS Access in Gambas 3, but it's far from
complete. For now it works with PostgreSQL, XSB, eXist, Flora-2 and
ZODB, but SQLite and others like CouchDB are planned and should be
done soon. You can take a look at it at:
http://code.google.com/p/the-baze/
or for a binary at:
http://tinyurl.com/skini-baze
I hope that I get a working version soon.
All the best,
Markus Schatten, PhD
Assistant professor and head of Artificial Intelligence Lab
University of Zagreb "
-
Buon giorno Akrobaticone, buon giorno vuott.
Ho fatto una veloce ricerca in proposito:
Visual Basic Professional costa circa: 300$.
vedi: http://www.microsoft.com/visualstudio/eng/visual-studio-2013#story-2013
mentre Visual Basic Express forse è ancora gratuita...
Eventuali profitti commerciali sono ammessi anche per
gli sviluppatori sulla versione Express...
vedi anche: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/3969484/can-i-produce-a-commercial-application-using-visual-studio-express-2010
...salvo per il fatto che non è ammessa divulgazione su S.O. non Microsoft
come ad esempio Linux (paragrafo 2, comma iii, punto 3). :nono:
Per le applicazioni commerciali che comprendono Microsoft SQL SERVER
vi é una licenza a parte che ancora non ho letto (paragrafo 5).
Il riferimento a un numero di copie non eccedente quello esplicitamente
indicato dal presente contratto (paragrafo 6, punto 3), a una lettura più attenta,
credo che si intenda un "numero qualitativo" e non quantitativo del
Software-Distribuibile (run-time e .dll varie) di proprietà Microsoft. Per
questo non é precisato: (10, 100, 1000?).
In allegato a questo inserto c'è il testo completo in lingua italiana in formato
.pdf della licenza ma non riesco a visualizzarne il link!!! :-\
Ciao.
-
Prescindiamo da argomenti di tipo etico (software open e libero)
Non credo sia un argomento secondario.
-
Prescindiamo da argomenti di tipo etico (software open e libero)
Non credo sia un argomento secondario.
Non intendevo dire che sia un argomento secondario, tutt'altro, ma volevo incentrare la discussione su considerazioni meramente economiche e pratiche.
Se ho già un software che si adatta perfettamente al sistema operativo che sto usando, che vantaggi avei nell'usarne un altro ancora in sviluppo e che avrebbe prestazioni inferiori (all'inizio .....)?
-
Le licenze Microsoft SQL Server per un eventuale prodotto commerciale
elaborato con Visual Basic si acquistano separatamente.
Esse sono chiamate "licenze CAL" in cui Microsoft ipotizza
scenari di assistenza CED ha piccole, medie industrie
(poche copie e attività stabile del programmatore):
vedi: http://www.microsoft.com/italy/business/sam/lic_cal.mspx
la più semplice di queste licenze costa circa 250$+VAT (Standard Edition Single)
vedi: http://www.kelkoo.it/ss-microsoft-sql-server-pricing.html
Nei pacchetti Visual Basic Express (gratuito) è incluso (=embedded) il
pacchetto SQL Compact Edition (gratuito per un uso personale), mentre,
per la vendita di un programma commerciale ivi realizzato,
nasce qualche dubbio
vedi: http://www.codeproject.com/Questions/566839/OpeningplusaplusSoftwareplusCompanyplusinplusIndia
Se la versione SQL Compact ha le stesse funzionalità della
SQL Standard Edition, chi comprerebbe più quest'ultima?
Tuttavia per creazioni commerciali di largo consumo
(molte copie, basso prezzo) tipo l'italiana Finson
o giochi commerciali tipo Patrician III, 250$ a pezzo, sono assolutamente
poco concorrenziali.
Un programma senza un valido programma di archiviazione, ad ogni
accensione, parte sempre da zero: non si va più in là di una semplice
utility. E Microsoft,(come già detto) proibisce esplicitamente l'uso congiunto di
librerie non-Microsoft. Quindi proibisce anche Oracle MySQL etc...
Resta da vedere cosa, invece, offre Gambas... ???
Ciao.
-
Cosa offre Gambas?
La più stabile libreria di archiviazione è MySQL.
Per realizzazioni in ambito gratuito (licenza GPL), Oracle
concede MySQL con le stesse libertà!
vedi: http://www.mysql.com/about/legal/licensing/index.html
vedi: http://searchitchannel.techtarget.com/feature/Using-MySQL-licensing-Open-source-license-vs-commercial-license
Per realizzazioni di servers di internet concede una licenza in
affitto che parte da 600$ (per month) e si attesta in media a
2000$ (per month).
vedi anche: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/11/03/oracle_mysql_price_hike/
(Giochi di largo consumo o Finson)
Non sono riuscito a trovare una licenza (e il relativo prezzo) adeguata
a una grande distribuzione. :'(
Ma con Gambas é possibile rivolgersi anche a SqlLite o PostGreSQL
o a un primitivo ISAM...
Alla prossima puntata...
-
Buone notizie:
SQLlite è "di pubblico dominio" e non richiede alcuna licenza in nessun caso!!
vedi: http://www.sqlite.org/copyright.html
molte sono le realizzazioni di largo consumo specie i
browsers di Internet (tra cui anche FireFox);
vedi: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SQLite
e anche PostgreSQL si ritiene nell'area delle licenze GPL, (con un
testo liberatorio differente);
vedi: http://www.postgresql.org/about/licence/
se può essere di qualche importanza, però, noto, nei vari Forums che,
prima o poi, i programmatori in queste piattaforme (SQL) valutano sempre
i loro progetti anche con MySQL per vedere se ci sono bug nei
loro programmi o se malfunzionamenti dipendano
da bugs delle piattaforme (SQL).
Tra i "primitivi" ISAM ci sono:
1 - il BDB-Berckley-Data-Base. Che però mi sembra che nelle ultime
licenze sia completamente votato al software libero.
E' esplicitamente vietato qualsiasi sfruttamento commerciale.
2 - Il VB-ISAM di Trevor Van Bremen di cui è reperibile il
codice sorgente in licenza LGPL
vedi: http://sourceforge.net/projects/vbisam/files/vbisam/
-
...continua...
" I will be one of the first to use the possibility to let users run some gambas
app on OSX (not to work on it myself).
But if I really have to, I can run in a VM, so I wouldn't ask someone/B. to
spent time on it at the cost of the own advances of Gambas on Linux.
We have a nice platform: Linux.
We have the best desktop, and we even have choice.
And for some years, we have a great Development Environment: Gambas.
Every minute has 60 seconds, so I prefer Benoit and all the rest of us to
spent this time on improving these nice things that we have.*
The License is clear. People that want to do so can do whatever they want if
they follow the license.
The 'lock down' is rather a 'lock open'.
So just keep on doing the nice job as long as you can.
I don't think Linus made the wrong choice, and I don't think either that he
would try to be more ... (wathever else).
Wim Geraets "
" I agree with you but, if i want to see Gambas on others OS
is because i've friends who would be to run my software
without have to install any linux distributions.
I don't care to have a lot of users from Windows or OS X
who use Gambas :-) . This is not my goal.
My goal is just to be able to run Gambas applications
without imposing choices.
furthermore, on OS X like Windows,
there is no good BASIC programming language.
either BASIC's are not free, or don't have good tools
and a good logic into BASIC syntax as Gambas.
François Gallo "
" Hi Markus et al
One of the big attractions of MS Access is that all the data, forms and queries can be delivered to the user in a single file. This is very attractive when it comes to distributing standalone databases to be run on the desktop. LibreOffice Base, at its simplest level, seeks to do the same thing, but it is seriously hampered by having such a rudimentary form designer, and its implemention of the Basic programming language is more difficult to use than VBA. When you add to that the default HSQL database engine, which is both slow and inefficient, you have a tool which I cannot believe is widely used for anything other than local "quick and dirty" databases, where performance and appearance are of little importance.
Of course, both Access and Base can be used for far more sophisticated purposes. Through the use of ODBC Access can connect to a number of different types of database and, combined with the use of local tables, can extend the core dataset. Again, Base can do much the same, but it remains hampered by having such an unsophisticated form designer and the tedious programming language.
With Gambas it is not possible to achieve the "single file" approach to database application delivery that you can with Access or Base (well, I've not found a way), but it is still very simple to deliver a Gambas executable (assuming the runtime environment has already been installed on the target) and an associated SQLite database in just 2 files. This makes distribution by email, subject to size constraints, a practical proposition in way that is not possible if the data is hosted in a server-based architecture.
Developing a database front-end in Gambas is more like developing such an application in VB than Access, as you still need to create the links between the controls on the form and the database which, of course, is done for you automatically in Access. For all that, though, it is very easy whether you use the Gambas databound controls or prefer to write a few generic read/write procedures long-hand.
>From the description of your Baze project in Google Code, rather than duplicating an existing application I believe that you will end up with a high performance tool which achieves the flexibility aspirations of Base combined with the ability to create a sophisticated, professional-looking user interface. By including support for NoSQL you will be ahead of the game.
It's an ambitious goal, but I do think that as long as ease of use and implementation are always at the forefront of the design, then it will eventually find an enthusiastic user base.
I wish you every success.
Nige "
-
E se Gambas potesse diventare uno dei linguaggi di supporto a Libreoffice?
alla stregua di VBA.........
-
E se Gambas potesse diventare uno dei linguaggi di supporto a Libreoffice?
alla stregua di VBA.........
Eccolo! Questo potrebbe essere un gran matrimonio! :)
Purtroppo non verrà mai utilizzato, almeno finché Gambas non giri anche su altre piattaforme...
-
Quanto deve essere grande l'impegno per portare gambas anche su Win?
certo che con Libreoffice sarebbe un bel colpaccio....
-
...mi domando se effettuare una sorta di ritorno del pensiero in questo modo a Windows abbia un senso. :-\
-
...mi domando se effettuare una sorta di ritorno del pensiero in questo modo a Windows abbia un senso. :-\
è vero, ma a mio avviso non si può ignorare il fatto che Win è (purtroppo) il SO più usato e portare Gambas su di esso significherebbe aprire ad una platea più vasta la sua conoscenza
Anche a me non piace molto l'idea, ma bisogna valutare i vantaggi che una portabilità su altri SO significherebbe.
-
...mi domando se effettuare una sorta di ritorno del pensiero in questo modo a Windows abbia un senso. :-\
è vero, ma a mio avviso non si può ignorare il fatto che Win è (purtroppo) il SO più usato e portare Gambas su di esso significherebbe aprire ad una platea più vasta la sua conoscenza
Anche a me non piace molto l'idea, ma bisogna valutare i vantaggi che una portabilità su altri SO significherebbe.
Benoit non ha mai voluto portare Gambas su Windows. Prima lo diceva apertamente mentre ora lo vela dietro tecnicismi. Mi chiedo come mai lo sforzo di portare Gambas su OSX sia stato fatto (anche se i sistemi *nix effettivamente sono molto simili) mentre per Window non ne abbia voglia. Eppure l'utenza OsX non è vasta e sicuramente non è rinomata per essere un'utenza di sviluppo software.
-
...non si può ignorare il fatto che Win è (purtroppo) il SO più usato ....
...ma.... allora che lo usiamo a fare Linux ???
...e portare Gambas su di esso significherebbe aprire ad una platea più vasta la sua conoscenza
Io credo che le strade per farlo conoscere siano ben altre.
Faccio un piccolo esempio proprio su di te: :)
http://www.gambas-it.org/smf/index.php?topic=2645.0
...bisogna valutare i vantaggi che una portabilità su altri SO significherebbe.
Io credo che la questione non sia ristretta nell'ambito di Gambas in quanto tale. Aver abbandonato Winzoz per Linux, o comunque aver scelto Linux anziché altri SO, ha un significato più ampio...... altrimenti a che pro ? Perché lo si è fatto quel passo da parte nostra ? :rolleyes:
-
Il problema non siamo noi
sono ben felice di essere migrato a Linux e non tornerei indietro
Sono ancora più felice di aver trovato Gambas che mi ha permesso di sfruttare le (poche ) conoscenze di VB accumulate quando ero ancora "di là" per realizzare applicazioni che mi servono.
Ho addirittura fatto una presentazione a Linux Day per far conoscere questo fantastico linguaggio.
La mia speranza, e penso anche la vostra, è quella di vederlo un giorno utilizzato come si fa ora con Python e Java. Questi linguaggi però sono multipiattaforma e la loro diffusione ha permesso la creazione di tantissime librerie che li hanno resi più potenti.
Allora se il compromesso è un po' sgradevole, ma permette di arrivare prima alla meta, può essere accettabile.
A quanto vedo però anche Midisini accetta comunque la discussione, segno che il problema viene avvertito dalla comunità.
insisto sulla idea di prima
Immaginiamo Gambas alla stregua di VBA in Libreoffice
Quante parolacce in meno...
-
Gambas, prima ancora di essere multipiattaforma, ha un grosso, grossissimo problema: la stabilità. Hai mai provato a scrivere un progetto "serio" in Gambas? Appena esci da qualche rango comune devi uscire pazzo per far funzionare le cose a dovere. Chiedi a chi ha scritto dei progetti grossi (tipo fsurfing o mdAEIOUY) cosa ha dovuto fare in alcuni punti per ottenere il risultato voluto. Il problema è sempre stato del padre padrone del progetto che è poco propenso all'ascolto (ricordo scambi di email poco carini tempo addietro). Se vuoi che il tuo lingauggio sia conosciuto ed usato devi fare in modo che sia affidabile. Ecco perchè gli altri decollano e noi no. Addirittura ci sono linguaggi nuovissimi che vantano più roba di gambas.
-
Vien da pensare che sia proprio il grande capo a non voler che Gambas si diffonda troppo......
-
Teniamo conto che stiamo parlando diun linguaggio e non un'applicazione qualsiasi, e questo sottintende una serie di problematiche che non vengono risolte solo con un'illuminazione o uno schiocco di dita.
Teniamo conto che Gambas è partito in sordina, ed è rimasto così per molto fino a che qualcuno non si è preso la briga di adottarlo o provare a lavorarci sopra.
Teniamo conto che questo è un linguaggio cui si è cercato di rendere il più semplice il creare un'applicazione, attirando più che altro chi si avvicinava alla programmazione, o chi aveva programmato in basic e desiderata non perdere troppo del proprio bagaglio informatico.
Teniamo conto che l'eccessiva semplicità porta anche molte cose negative, tra cui molte limitazioni nell'espandere funzionalità e approcci vari.
Teniamo conto che si basa essenzialmente su librerie esterne, in quanto di sue ne ha ben poche, e per cui dipende eccessivamente da eventi e aggiornamenti esterni. Un esempio sono stati i cambi di release di kde e gnome.
Dò pienamente ragione a ceskho, che dice che gambas non è predisposto, se non dietro faticacce immonde, alla creazione di applicazioni complesse, in quanto è proprio la sua eccessiva semplicità che lo rende poco idoneo.
E dò anche ragione al discorso della stabilità, in quanto è stato più volte evidenziato il problema di rendere ben funzionanti le poche proprietà disponibili, ed invece si cercava sempre di aggiungerne di nuove, con ovvie aggiunte di ulteriori problemi. Alla fine il volume raggiunge un puinto critico, difficilmente superabile.
Tenendo conto di queste considerazioni, è ovvio che la situazione è quella che troviamo oggi, nonostante siamo passati alla versione 3.5, che vuol dire tutto e niente.
Questo è ovviamente solo il mio pensiero...
-
condivido... e teniamo anche conto che a lavorare effettivamente sul suo sviluppo sono ancora in pochissimi: Minisini è quasi solo.
-
ma allora, dati i presupposti, conviene ancora investire tempo nel conoscere e portare avanti questo linguaggio?
Sono convinto che dietro a Gambas sia presente una grossa comunità che non aspetta altro che svilupparlo e renderlo fruibile anche da chi della programmazione ne fa un mestiere.
Il limite è solo quindi il suo creatore?
Per la cronaca anche io ho avuto qualche problema con gli aggiornamenti, cose che prima funzionavano hanno smesso di andare.
-
condivido... e teniamo anche conto che a lavorare effettivamente sul suo sviluppo sono ancora in pochissimi: Minisini è quasi solo.
Minisini vuole essere solo perchè:
1) Non ascolto volentierii suggerimenti della communità. Io stesso, tempo fa, inviavo diverse email a lui ed ogni volta mi diceva "in to do list". Ogni santissima volta. Mai una volta che abbia detto discutiamone o questa idea fa schifo e la accantono subito.
2) Storse il naso quando Fabio partorì Gambas Plus perchè portava dei miglioramenti a lui chiesti diverse volte ed ogni volta ignorati.
3) Partorisci documentazione idonea ed avrai aiuto idoneo. È una delle regole fondamentali. Oppure Fai in modo che il tuo linguaggio sia FACILMENTE espandibile ed avrai migliaia di moduli senza fare un piffero.
-
1) Non ascolta volentierii suggerimenti della communità.
Che Minisini non sia dolce di sale... si sa. ;D ...anche se ho come l'impressione che ultimamente si sia un po' ammorbidito.
-
1) Non ascolta volentierii suggerimenti della communità.
Che Minisini non sia dolce di sale... si sa. ;D ...anche se ho come l'impressione che ultimamente si sia un po' ammorbidito.
Gambas-it, insieme a Gambas-es, è sempre stata una delle community più attive. All'inizio abbiamo cercato di far pesare la nostra attività a Minisini portando utenti e codice. Siamo stati ignorati. Ora paghi le conseguenze delle sue scelte. Mi dispiace dirlo ma se non sei devoto al mondo Open Source non ti ci puoi infilare dentro.
-
Una questione basilare - purtroppo molto presente anche nel WEB (che invece paradossalmente ed ipocritamente si auto-dichiara retoricamente portatore di apertura e di libertà) - è che molti fenomeni e strutture (siti, blog, forum, etc) sono tutt'altro che "a gestione collettiva", democratici. Gambas ha questo stesso vulnus: è guidato, deciso ed indirizzato sostanzialmente da uno solo......
-
rinnovo la questione
in una situazione del genere vale ancora la pena investire su gambas?
ha ragione chi dice che è un linguaggio senza futuro?
è un bel giocattolo, ma se voglio impiegare tempo e risosrse forse è meglio che rivaluto altri linguaggi (Python in testa).
-
Senza isolarci, io suggerisco - per chi volesse partecipare al dibattito - di iscriversi alla Mailing List ufficiale e di intervenire anche là.
-
ok
questa però non la chiuderei del tutto, la sposterei solo in open bar
-
rinnovo la questione
in una situazione del genere vale ancora la pena investire su gambas?
ha ragione chi dice che è un linguaggio senza futuro?
è un bel giocattolo, ma se voglio impiegare tempo e risosrse forse è meglio che rivaluto altri linguaggi (Python in testa).
Attualmente il linguaggio ha dei forti limiti per poter essere preso seriamente in considerazione. Chi vuole usarlo deve farlo con la consapevolezza che non ci potrà comandare un drone o caricarlo su sistemi particolari. È un linguaggio molto rapido per fare cose molto belle ma finchè rimani nei suoi schemi.
-
Ripeto il ragionamento che ho appena accennato un po' prima.
Credo si debba capire e chiarire una cosa: questo limite, ricordato da Ceskho, è un fatto oggettivo o soggettivo ? Mi spiego.
Se il limite è una questione legata all'architettura fondamentale del linguaggio Gambas, l'atteggiamento di Minisini ha poca influenza; ed allora vale più che mai la sollecitazione di Ceskho ad avere sempre presente a se stessi che questo linguaggio di programmazione è comunque, per quanto possa essere con il tempo migliorato, limitato.
Se il limite è una questione legata, invece, ad una scelta, ad una "politica" di Minisini (e non vi sono reali problemi di natura tecnica oggettivi del linguaggio in sé), allora è evidente che c'è un problema di indirizzo, decisione e scelta dello sviluppo del Progetto Gambas. A questo punto la domanda è: " Chi decide il percorso di sviluppo che il linguaggio Gambas deve compiere ? ". Chi ha l'ultima parola nel decidere di implementare questa o quella funzionalità, o di non implementarla ? E' possibile un confronto ragionato, un dibattito, una decisione un po' più collettiva (ovviamente fra un certo numero di persone più esperte e più dedite alla programmazione e sviluppo del linguaggio) riguardo al percorso che Gambas deve seguire, e dunque alle sue caratteristiche tecniche ed alle sue risorse e funzionalità ? Oppure tale decisione del suo futuro è affidata ad una sola persona: il suo ideatore ?
Entrambe le posizioni sono in se stesse legittime; ma la legittimità formale non attribuisce a loro conseguentemente ed automaticamente il carattere dell'opportunità e della convenienza. Si tratta di scegliere una risposta.
-
andiamo sul concreto
elenchiamo vantaggi, svantaggi, peculiarità e limiti del linguaggio.
È un vero peccato che Gambas non decolla, potrebbe rappresentare una vera e propria "killer application"
In ambiente Windows Visual Basic ha rappresentato la possibilità per tanti come me di realizzare applicazioni senza impazzire dietro a linguaggi più complessi. VB è anche alla base dell'automazione di MS Office (VBA) e
si possono costruire applicazioni molto interessanti senza essere scienziati.
E se qualcuno decidesse di aprire un fork di gambas?
-
E se qualcuno decidesse di aprire un fork di gambas?
È già stato sperimentato su questo forum questa via. Nacque Gambas Plus (c'è ancora la testimonianza in area download). Purtroppo la cosa richiede troppe energie che non ci sono e competenze che mancano ancor di più.
-
non volevo fare una proposta, ma verificare se Gambas possa avere un futuro svincolato dal suo papà.
Nell'ipotesi fantascientifica che Minisini chiuda il progetto esiste la possibilità di creare un fork?
È un progetto open source, quindi sicuramente è possibile, ma a che condizioni?
Naturalmente ci vogliono le persone che lo continuano, dettaglio irrilevante......
Questo solo per avere un orizzonte temporale più ampio
-
Ciao Akrobaticone,
verificare se Gambas possa avere un futuro svincolato dal suo papà.
Lunga vita a Benoit e Linus! :dj:
Qualche volta il fork nasce anche troppo presto, esempio:
le GTK-3 sono già in voga contemporaneamente alle GTK-2
che continuano a dare nuove edizioni. Come posso sapere chi andrà più avanti?
Al limite, tra 30 anni, vedremo il nostro programma girare su un emulatore
Gambas, che girerà su un emulatore Ubuntu, che girerà su un emulatore
kernel Linux, che girerà su un emulatore Pentium Quad, che girerà
su ... chissà...
A parte i versi: è più probabile che un progetto, a licenza libera, sia ripreso
da una mente capace, quanto più il progetto è semplice.
Non ho mai visto il sorgente del run-time di Gambas e, soprattutto...
... la mente di Benoit o Linus...
... e poi ci vuole parecchio tempo libero ed entusiasmo ...
Unix SCO, RM-COBOL sono ufficialmente abbandonati, ma non erano liberi,
eppure, pur sempre con difficoltà crescenti, programmi a 25 linee e 80
colonne continuano a essere usati nelle banche e nelle fabbriche,
coi vecchi run-time con l'aiuto di librerie di emulazione.
Ciao.
-
Fammi indovino e ti farò ricco
in effetti è una domanda dalle milLe risposte e dai mille scenari
in poche parole una domanda un po ...stupida
Anche per me lunga vita a Linus, Benoit, Richard e ....BILL!!!
Mi piacerebbe sapere però tuttil i limiti ai quali accennava Ceskho
qualcuno l'ho trovato, altri non li conosco ancora
-
Mi piacerebbe sapere però tuttil i limiti ai quali accennava Ceskho
- Non portabilità
- Macchina Gambas alle volte troppo pesante per giustificare il codice scritto
- Scarsa modularità
- OOP a volte integrata in maniera anomala
- Estrema dipendenza dal sistema operativo GNU/Linux
- Impossibilità di creare software Gambas al di fuori dell'ambiente Gambas
- Troppi bug tra gtk e qt
- Onerosi problemi ad ogni cambio di versione
- L'instabilità di Gambas provoca instabilità anche dei software scritti in esso
-
dici poco... :'(
questa discussione mi da la sensazione di un"abbandonate la nave"
Gambas ne esce massacrato
concordo su diversi punti, compreso il fatto che gli aggiornamenti spesso portano problemi e che sarebbe meglio concentrarsi sulla soluzione dei bug e sull'affidablità piuttosto che continuare ad aggiungere nuove funzionalità.
Spiegami meglio cosa intendi con
creare software Gambas al di fuori dell'ambiente Gambas.
-
Se vuoi scrivere un programma in gambas devi aprire l'IDE di Gambas. Creare codice con un editor di testo qualsiasi è impensabile.
-
ma anche con linguaggi come VB devi aprire IDE
è un linguaggio fortemente vincolato alla parte grafica
-
ma anche con linguaggi come VB devi aprire IDE
è un linguaggio fortemente vincolato alla parte grafica
Per me questo è un limite. Se voglio fare manutenzione ad un software via ssh da terminale non posso.
-
Per me questo è un limite. Se voglio fare manutenzione ad un software via ssh da terminale non posso.
Se puoi modificare il codice sulla macchina target, ci dovra' essere l'ambiente di sviluppo pero', non accedere da ssh e' limite, ma piccolino davvero. Al bisogno, c'e' la famiglia Vnc
-
Per me questo è un limite. Se voglio fare manutenzione ad un software via ssh da terminale non posso.
non accedere da ssh e' limite, ma piccolino davvero
Spero tu stia scherzando. In ambienti professionali una cosa del genere è impensabile. Buona parte del mio tempo da programmatore lo passo in ssh per capire che cappero succede sui server dei clienti. anche solo infilare un debbugger nel codice di gambas è pressochè impossibile da terminale.
-
Io uso ssh per aggiornare i miei software... certo con un piccolo 'trucco' se cosi' si puo' dire:
Faccio le modifiche in locale...
Compilo e invio via ssh al server...
I client, quando avviano l'applicazione, controllano se nel server risiede una versione piu' aggiornata del software, lo copiano in locale e si riavviano...
Per quanto riguarda i debug dei client, gli stessi prima di morire con il fatidico messaggio 'This application has raised una vaccata' manda un messaggio di debug all'applicazione server...
Questa discussione per me e' comunque... fuori discussione! :)
Non credo che in questo forum, a parte un ristretto gruppo di nicchia (e qui io mi escludo categoricamente) sappia usare gambas in ogni sua parte o comunque abbia la conoscenza per realizzare una vera e propria 'killer application' con qualsiasi altro linguaggio...
Innanzi tutto penso che ogni linguaggio di programmazione abbia i suoi pro e contro e comunque un suo, diciamo, campo di software realizzabili... certo con il C ci faccio di tutto (non io ovviamente :) ), ma per fare un gestionale o un programma per la manutenzione non ce lo vedo proprio comodo...
Comunque gambas e' cresciuto molto a mio dire e non credo che si riesca a creare un software utilizzabile per tutte le distro di linux senza dover fare modifiche del caso per farlo funzionare, ma lo vedo potente in applicazioni costruite ad hoc.
-
Spero tu stia scherzando.
No, dico solo che Gambas e' per fare certe cose, altri linguaggi sono per farne altre. Tutto e bene non credo lo faccia nessun ambiente.
-
Spero tu stia scherzando.
No, dico solo che Gambas e' per fare certe cose, altri linguaggi sono per farne altre. Tutto e bene non credo lo faccia nessun ambiente.
Ci sono altri linguaggi che le cose le fanno meglio. A me dispiace dirlo ma mi sembra una cosa molto oggettiva. Gambas, ad oggi, è l'unico che permette di scrivere software con interfaccia in 12 secondi! Dovrebbero premere su questo.
-
Ci sono altri linguaggi che le cose le fanno meglio.
Tra quelli piu' diffusi, in questo periodo sto usando abbastanza Python, alla 3.3. L'impressione, dopo qualche mese, non e' quella di pulizia: ci trovo un ondeggiamento pauroso tra la voglia di standardizzare la scrittura del codice con quella di creare "scorciatoie" nella scrittura stessa, e un po' di contraddizione tra l'estensione della libreria standard e il fatto che alcune funzioni, es quelle per le immagini (che potrei definire basilari!), proprio non funzionano!
Gambas, ad oggi, è l'unico che permette di scrivere software con interfaccia in 12 secondi! Dovrebbero premere su questo.
Qui sono d'accordo. Capisco le voglie di fare cose "strane" per i programmatori, ma a volte la strategia mi sembra perdente.
-
Ci sono altri linguaggi che le cose le fanno meglio.
Tra quelli piu' diffusi, in questo periodo sto usando abbastanza Python, alla 3.3. L'impressione, dopo qualche mese, non e' quella di pulizia: ci trovo un ondeggiamento pauroso tra la voglia di standardizzare la scrittura del codice con quella di creare "scorciatoie" nella scrittura stessa, e un po' di contraddizione tra l'estensione della libreria standard e il fatto che alcune funzioni, es quelle per le immagini (che potrei definire basilari!), proprio non funzionano!
Uso 10 ore al giorno python (più alcuni suoi framework) per lavoro. Posso assicurarti che, confrontato con altri linguaggi, fa quello che deve fare un linguaggio di alto livello: agevolarti la vita! Le immagini per me non sono una funzione basilare come non lo è il suono o il video. Tuttavia ho utilizzato le sue librerie immagini anche per creare barcode particolari e funzionavano molto bene.
Gambas, ad oggi, è l'unico che permette di scrivere software con interfaccia in 12 secondi! Dovrebbero premere su questo.
Qui sono d'accordo. Capisco le voglie di fare cose "strane" per i programmatori, ma a volte la strategia mi sembra perdente.
Le strategie dello strafare non sono mai perdenti se il programmatore che vuole farle non le ritiene tali. Sarebbe come dire a Bolt di correre piano perchè tanto a nessuno serve che lui vada così veloce. Basta muoversi.
-
....per me non sono una funzione basilare come non lo è il suono...
:'(
-
Tuttavia ho utilizzato le sue librerie immagini anche per creare barcode particolari e funzionavano molto bene.
Beh, intanto PIL non funziona con Python 3, non mi sembra poco, e provando i bindings piu' diffusi le prestazioni sono piuttosto scadenti (personalmente mi sono trovato costretto a usare richiami diretti a ImageMagick): database e suoni ne frequento pochi, ma processando testi (analisi di percorsi utensili per macchine cnc) Gambas (dietro ovviamente a C++ e Lua) da' distacchi clamorosi a Python. Mi lascia parecchi dubbi anche l'uso ricorrente di montagne di moduli esterni per realizzare funzioni accessorie, non si puo' dire che e' politicamente scorretto, ma una volta veniva deriso chi usava troppi ocx nel Visual Basic. A volte mi pare pure che i dir sui moduli importati siano un po' troppo lunghetti :)
Poi ovviamente ha anche i suoi bei pregi, tipo la diffusione, la quantita' di moduli gia' fatti, tipo quelli su PyPi, la documentazione, la portabilita' tra so, insomma, non ne parlo certo male (del resto lo uso anche io), dico che non mi pare perfetto!
-
Tuttavia ho utilizzato le sue librerie immagini anche per creare barcode particolari e funzionavano molto bene.
Beh, intanto PIL non funziona con Python 3, non mi sembra poco, e provando i bindings piu' diffusi le prestazioni sono piuttosto scadenti (personalmente mi sono trovato costretto a usare richiami diretti a ImageMagick): database e suoni ne frequento pochi, ma processando testi (analisi di percorsi utensili per macchine cnc) Gambas (dietro ovviamente a C++ e Lua) da' distacchi clamorosi a Python. Mi lascia parecchi dubbi anche l'uso ricorrente di montagne di moduli esterni per realizzare funzioni accessorie, non si puo' dire che e' politicamente scorretto, ma una volta veniva deriso chi usava troppi ocx nel Visual Basic. A volte mi pare pure che i dir sui moduli importati siano un po' troppo lunghetti :)
Poi ovviamente ha anche i suoi bei pregi, tipo la diffusione, la quantita' di moduli gia' fatti, tipo quelli su PyPi, la documentazione, la portabilita' tra so, insomma, non ne parlo certo male (del resto lo uso anche io), dico che non mi pare perfetto!
Non possiamo basare la stabilità di Python parlando del ramo 3. È il ramo ancora in sviluppo perpetuo e non ne, ovviamente, esente da problemi; primo tra tutti incompatibilità con moduli di terzi. Quello che però voglio evidenziare è che se dai alla gente un linguaggio modulare, nel giro di poco tempo ti troverai a disposizione migliaia di moduli esterni e tu, sviluppatore principale dei miei stivali, potrai concentrarti solo ed esclusivamente sul core del linguaggio. Non devi fregartene più nulla di moduli per immagini, suoni, video, parser, report, connessioni e cazzate varie. L'open source ti da queste opportunità? E sfruttale cazzarola.
Io stesso se devo crearmi piccole utility per me stesso le scrivo in gambas perchè così in 10 minuti ho finito ed amen. Ma se devo scrivere del codice da distribuire entro in crisi.
-
...continua...
" Stepping in this old conversation to point out my take:
-computers nowadays are fast enough to run a VM that's fast enough to
run a normal aplication
-If Benoit says it's complicated, what's left for us ??????????????????
- so instead of trying to port gambas, why not making a installer that
sets everything up for the inexperinced user??? Something like the
SmallTalk approach.
Making a small footprint VM+Linux+Gambas...they're all opensource, we
can get rid of everyhing that Gambas dont need...even more, making a
ligth weight Gambas or tagging components as "portable" and others "not"
Say it's a 500MB installer? C'mon my android phone has "Hello world"
like apps that weight 30MB, half giga is 15m download...even here in the
ass of the world (small town Argentina)
As for porting Gambas, it will be really good. I have the time (but not
the brain) to help anyone that joins the party and has the know-how for
a start.
martin p cristia "
" The Future and what kind of Gambas do we
want? Well, this is a question general enough
that I can understand it and put in my modest contribution:
I have just started using Gambas. A year ago I
started asking a question or two on this forum
about using it to write for an embedded system on
small aircraft. It is the application I wish to
concentrate my limited time on, not Gambas and
certainly not Linux, both of which I wanted to
use. My questions were pretty naive and simple,
like how to set up and use multiple serial ports
for a processing system. I was previously and
still am using a Windows 2000 lite sytem with
software I have written in VB6, about which I
know enough to get by. I also know enough about
Windows to know it was not ideal. My system is
not commercial (though I thought it might become
one 10 years ago). But I was not going to pay for Windows Embedded.
In the meantime along come boards like the
Raspberry Pi and the Beaglebone Black. Raspberry
Pi has about 2 million boards sold. That's where
the future lies for Gambas - not with computer
experts on desktops, but with people who want to
use cheap systems largely for educational and
hobby projects. People like myself who were
prepared to dig into VB6, but not go with
successive versions of VB.net and Embedded Windows.
Yesterday, working on Gambas 3.5.1 running on
OpenSUSE 13.1 running on VM under Windows 7, I
finally got as far as writing a small program
that actually received data over a serial
port. I was almost there several days ago -
thanks to the Gambas examples and helpful input
from this forum. However, I got held up , as an
ordinary (non-root) user, by not being able to
open the serial port! A trivial matter, you
might think, but I had to dig into Linux to join
the network group that had permission to access
the serial port! For me, Linux is simply there
as the carrier of Gambas and I do not have the
time in which to become a happy chappie forever playing with Linux.
I note there is GambOS. I have not yet looked at
it, but I get the intent. For home automation,
it seems the right idea. I have little doubt
that boards like Raspberry Pi and Beaglebone, and
tablets and smart phones will dominate the
market in future. Right now, Gambas and Linux go
together. But if you want a much greater takeup
of Gambas, you must make the installation and use
of an O/S with Gambas easier and more
transparent. Look at the hardware and users it
is likely needed for. Here's an image, burn it
on an SD card and away you go. Right now I would
love to be able to download a current
installation image for the Raspberry Pi that had
Gambas and Wiring Pi integrated. Similarly for
the Beaglebone Black. So that the user can get
right down to programming his device using a
custom version of Gambas that suits the
hardware. I should not have to purchase a small
library of books on Linux. I would advocate more
effort towards the non-expert user who wants to
use popular and inexpensive hardware.
That's my take.
Carl "
" Sounds like a good idea to me. I'm planning on creating my own LiveCD to
allow users to run my game on Windows and OSX. Not a great solution, but
there aren't many options that the average user will stomach.
For your idea I think we'd need to set up a script or small executable
that would:
1. Install VirtualBox.
2. Extract a premade vdi (Virtual Disk Image) containing only what
Gambas needs to run its components (probably a lot).
3. Extract a premade vbox file (VirtualBox Machine Definition) so
VirtualBox knows about the VM and all its settings.
4. Create desktop and menu shortcuts to launch the VM.
I remember Windows had self-extracting executables, like a zip file with
an .exe extension. Perhaps there's an open source program that can
create those on Windows and then run a script afterward? If so that
would take care of everything except creating the Gambas VM. From my
experience with doing the latter, the image always ends up around 7-8
GB. I think getting the file size down to 1-2 GB is going to be tough.
Kevin Fishburne"
-
...continua...
" That seems like what we try to do with GambOS. It is primarily meant as
a learning environment, a Lubuntu 12.04 dressed down of all the
excessive applications and with Gambas pre-installed and some guides to
start learning.
Exporting it to a pre-made Virtual Disk Image gives a .ova file of about
2.6 GB, but I believe that this can be brought down a bit more.
Making an installation .iso of GambOS (for those who want to install it
themselves) is about 1.2 GB.
I have tested importing the .ova file into a Virtual Box running on
Widows XP and that worked just fine. So for those running Widows and
with little to no know how on Linux, this is an easy approach for
running Gambas.
If there would be a decent Gambas repository for Debain, I would love to
base GambOS on Debian (instead of Lubuntu), so that a Raspberry Pi
version of GambOS could be made. This would be a pre installed
Debian/Gambas on a SD card. All the ideas are there, but the lack of
some needed experts is missing in the project.
I'm still hoping for a Debian packager who can make a recent Gambas
repository (the Debain ones suck), as all it would take is a ftp
location at gambos.org, to put all the stuff and from there all can be
installed and updated. But I'm no Debian packager.
I still need to buy a Raspberry Pi, to see what is possible there and
figure out how to make the OS on SD card. But again, GambOS needs to
have a repository with Gambas for that as compiling Gambas is no option.
People need to be able to easily update Gambas, not compile every new
version, as that seems to take ages on Raspberry.
At the moment I'm about the only one working on the project. The
initiator of the project somehow got to busy, and the person making the
iso has received the latest GambOS.ova to make the iso over a month ago,
but I haven't heard of him yet.
So the project is kind of stuck and meanwhile I'm attempting to make the
iso myself (first run in making an iso ended in a no longer working
GambOS VM).
If anyone is willing to work with me, that would be great.
--
Kind regards,
Willy "
" I do.
I'm a experienced VB6 user, have a very little C knowledge and 60%
Gambas, but learning fast.
martin p cristia "
" Wally:
To return to the RPi and the like:
As I posted on the Raspberrypi.org/phpBB3/ site on 22 Nov 2013 , I
gratefully used an image file loaded into dropbox by "fuller" (see
his post on 11 Aug 2012) for my wheezy-gambas3.img file - i.e. Debian
wheezy with pre-installed Gambas3.2.1. Any attempt to update the
Gambas to 3.5 failed. I did update my Linux, but any attempt to
upgrade also failed. Using the .img file to load the CD card was
easy. Then there was some messing around getting Gordon's Wiring Pi
installed and finally, using a script from "Brian's Life" and info
from Brian Hensley's site, I got the SPI working. I spent a great
deal of time hunting around on the 'net. As you note, I'm stuck with
those versions, but I do have a working image at that level which
should do me for a few years!. You bet I've backed it up and I'm
grateful for the help and assist i received from those sources mentioned.
Burning a new image is so simple even I can do it! The lack is a way
of keeping current with the developments of both Gambas3 and Linux,
not to mention necessary add-ons like Wiring Pi (with SPI) that are
necessary to properly utilise the attributes of the RPi. The same
thing would/will apply if and when I get a BeagleBone Black, which
considerably out-performs the RPi. I know it takes away some of the
important free aspects of Linux and gambas and the other components,
but I do pay for the hardware and I would not hesitate to pay for a
supported OS image which combined at least the Linux, Gambas and
"Wiring Pi" for these boards, so long as the price was commensurate
with the philosophy of the boards themselves i.e. low. You only have
to see how the few dollars cost of the apps for smartphones and
tablets gets multiplied by the take up to see how just a few dollars
for software can even make a lot of money. When you can multiply a
very small cost by a million you get quite a large sum!. That seems
reasonable to me. Otherwise I'm more of a parasite user than
anything else. I'll never be able to usefully contribute to the sort
of software development which occupies most of this mailing
group. I'm not sure if that contradicts the basic licences for
Gambas and Linux, and all, but maybe shareware "donations" would
help the take up of all this marvellous work by dedicated enthusiasts.
Just thoughts, Carl "
-
...continua...
" Willy:
My apologies - also to Wally. My previous on this subject should
have been addressed to you. It was in the early hours!
I suppose the more basic answer as to getting a greater take up on
this lovely language is that you have to identify and satisfy the
target market. I would guess by far the largest number of potential
- not current - users are those who have come from Windows and
VB6. If they are long-standing users of Linux, then they are
probably conversant with C, etc. and don't particularly need/want a
Basic derivative. There has to be some imperative for them to switch
to Linux. but once that decision is made, their troubles begin! It's
all in the installation, maintenance and use of Linux and added
components that a novice gets bogged down, not in Gambas
itself. Well, all that can be done there is to offer a packaged
installation that's as simple as possible to support and
maintain. After all, the user had some reason to switch to Linux, so
has to expect some learning process, just as with Windows.
Most smartphone users do not know much about Android - he/she just
immediately starts to use it and learns that way. I can't see Linux
ever becoming that simple - it's a different ball game - but there's
no doubt that the present process of getting Gambas up and running on
a popular board like RPi and using all the latter's attributes is
just too cumbersome and time consuming. If I hadn't been retired, I
would not have stuck to it so far. Gambas is not the end in itself -
you have to look at the end product and make Gambas a part of the
package the user is wanting to use. I'll get off the air now!
Carl "
" I strongly disagree here. C is not for same purposes than basic languages.
C is good for system programming and things that require fast execution
speed. Gambas is better for just about everything else.
Jussi "
" Well said!
I'm personally mostly using C for every day programming (because I like to
exploit my machine's characteristics and mix in assembly here and there).
My "every day programming" may not be everyone's "every day programming",
anyway.
But there is a time and place for every language and I tend to believe that
an experienced programmer knows this and isn't biased towards a language
just because it doesn't look as powerful in some areas as the language he is
accustomed to.
For me GUI applications are definitely Gambas' domain. This includes all the
front-end applications for command-line programs and all programs that must
control other programs (even without GUI). Also I wouldn't use anything but
Gambas for painting or database-related stuff (of the languages, I know of).
This is just what I observed, scrolling through my recently opened projects
in the IDE.
E.g., for the paper I'm currently writing (about connecting random points in
a circle and an upper bound for the length of the resulting path when using
a special algorithm), the graphics are from a Gambas program, less than 100
LOC - and they're good! I can't think of any other language where this task
is as easy as in Gambas (at least with the visual effects I wanted to have
in the graphics).
The same program gave me counterexamples for weaker bounds and tested my
hypothesis 150 million times within two hours. Of course, my yet-to-write
assembly test program will be much faster (especially if I get access to
some hardware RNG) but no chance to give me those fancy graphics!
But if it's about some "target market" (jeez!), we shouldn't forget people
like me (how self-absorbed am I today again?): Gambas was my very first
programming language. I got to know it from school, taught it myself,
though, as it wasn't on the curriculum and my brain was fresh enough back
then. What I want to say is: there are lots of schools and I know of some
teaching Gambas - and there is no reason why their number should decrease.
It's not that we should concentrate on VB6 veterans (and maybe make Gambas
more VB6). There are also seasoned Linux users who will appreciate Gambas
and there are youngsters whose first language Gambas may be. All the old VB6
users _I_ have met (shortly after their switch to Linux and Gambas,
admittedly!) were really confused about the distributions' way of package
management, Gambas components, etc. and more complained about the whole
situation. I can't remember having heard from them again...
No doubt, migrating windows users (VB6 or not) are potential Gambas users
and their number may be greater than the ones I was talking about but let's
don't concentrate on any particular group and let Gambas evolve naturally. I
don't like the notion of a "target market" anyway.
My two cents... spread over still too many paragraphs, sorry...
Regards,
Tobi "
" Tobias:
Thank you for reply. I think maybe you misunderstood a couple of
points I was trying to make.
I was not criticizing any language, particularly not Gambas. Nor was
inferring that Linux is not a great set of op. systems, one or many
of which would be of long-term advantage to a user. Switching to
Linux does however pose a early barrier that must be surmounted
before many people become comfortable with it. I have been
programming off and on for nearly 55 years, but only as a scientific
user and not a professional. I met Unix in the 1970's, but did not
continue to use it. To put VB6 onto Windows XP, I insert the CD,
click a few times, put in my keycode and it is done. Heaps and heaps
of online help, both from MS and the net. The installation process
for Gambas into Linux, plus other components gets better with time,
but is still challenging for many, including those with significant
past programming experience.
You said it yourself: "There are also seasoned Linux users who will
appreciate Gambas
and there are youngsters whose first language Gambas may be. All the old VB6
users _I_ have met (shortly after their switch to Linux and Gambas,
admittedly!) were really confused about the distributions' way of package
management, Gambas components, etc. and more complained about the whole
situation. I can't remember having heard from them again.".
That's my main point. The original question was about how to ensure
the future of gambas. Maybe that's already been done by it's
intrinsic quality. However, to increase the takeup and use - and
hence continued development long into the future - you have to pay
attention to potential users and meet their requirements for
installation and maintenance. A bit more attention to nearly two
million users of a board like the RPi would not go amiss. The
BeagleBone Black creates another opportunity. Why Python and not Gambas?
Carl "
" I cannot thank Benoit(et al) enough for Gambas.
I am very, very, happy with it.
I started with 1.0.4. Did a huge major corporate/mobile thing with 1.0.17/18
and working with 2 and 3 now on other items.
As an old-timer, I can write an old-style program or do super OO with it.
I cannot say enough.
Thank you
-Nando "
" I have to agree 100% with Carl!
I too have experience programming GUI's for about 15 years with VB6. I have a
very small amount of Linux experience.
The reason I am reading this list is that I did not like .Net and wanted to find
an alternative to VB6. I found Gambas and it looked good. I managed to get
(after a week of trying) a version of Linux running and got Gambas running on
it. All I wanted to do was create some sample user screens to show someone my
concepts. That was at least 6 months ago. The whole Linux experience was more
than I had time for or wanted to suffer through. The first graphical drag/drop
thing I tried to do wouldn't work with Gambas, however was not too difficult
with VB6.
I don't know how to compile a new version/release of Gambas when bug fixes come
out. Its far to complicated for me. If I had a few months of spare time,
maybe. So I gave up, found my old copy of VB6 and was running in about an hour.
I don't feel I can use VB6 for anything for a customer these days, so I am still
looking for something like VB6 that I can use without needing to learn a new
operating system to use it.
From what I have seen, and some of the playing around with Gambas, it looks
very nice and the closest I have seen to VB6.
I just get very frustrated when it takes months of work to do an eight hour project.
I know a lot of people will say "its not that hard" or "I did it in only four
hours" but you are already knowledgeable in Linux.
Tom "
-
...continua...
" No one has born with skills to use Windows or Linux. But installing Windows
or Ubuntu is almost exactly the same. I didn't notice any significant
difference. Then you go to Ubuntu Software Center and write "gambas" and
click on "install". With modern system this should be done in *much* less
than two hours (depending on Internet connection and amount of updates).
That was my first experience with Linux and Gambas.
I understand if you expect everything work like in Windows, you really have
troubles. You cannot find InstallGambas.exe anywhere and Gambas is not VB6
clone even though it's similar enough to easily convert your projects. But
instead of guessing what were the troubles, please tell us, it's only way
to improve things.
Jussi "
" Hi, Tom. I have to take a small issue with your last few sentences. I an
definitely NOT knowledgeable in LINUX (Ubuntu) and definitely cannot compile
all the new changes in Gambas as they come hot off the press, but I did
manage to install Ubuntu in under an hour and create my first 'hello world'
program. I did this barely two months after installing Ubuntu (x64) on my
second development computer.
I, too, come from an extensive background in hardware & programming having
started in 1962 for 20 years in the US Navy (that's over 50 years now) and
state that creating programs in any language is simply a matter of becoming
familiar with it. Gambas has the advantage (for me, anyway) of being very
VB6-like. I have now (after six months or so) taken several of my in-house
utilities and converted them into Gambas utilities. One of the things I
would very much like to see is the direct importing of a MS .MDB file int
something Gambas can use. If that already exists, then I would welcome
someone pointing me in that direction. I have an extensive (some 3800
records) database containing my DVD/Vinyl/VHS/Cassette music & movie library
and really don't want to recreate it in Gambas.
I don't profess to know what happens (much) under the hood of LINUX, but as
I go along, I am learning. I keep a pen/pencil notebook near my development
computer that I use to keep track of things I learn about the OS and how to
manipulate it. At the end of the week, I transcribe them into a searchable
PDF file I created to hold all these goodies. You might try something like
that.
In time, I suspect that you will get the hang of Gambas and move more and
more of your work over onto that platform. Yes, it does take time. My
'hello world' program took three days to complete. As I gain confidence
(and skill) sections of code go much faster. As for migrating VB6 into
Gambas I simply take a subroutine/function and drop it into Gambas and work
on the errors it produces. Most of them are simple to fix. One big help is
opening the .FRM file in a text editor and using the values to re-create the
form in Gambas is relatively easy. Sometimes, you can do it in a matter of
an hour or so depending on how complicated the form actually is.
As I gain experience in Gambas, I keep finding new ways to do things that
are actually shorter and easier to do in Gambas than VB6. Who knew?
Bill "
-
...continua...
" Jussi said: "But instead of guessing what were the troubles, please
tell us, it's only way
to improve things."
That's a fair question.
Some time ago I had actually bought a set of DVD's with openSUSE12.2,
after unsuccessfully trying to intall Lubuntu and Ubuntu on an older
computer. (I'll try again some time). However, openSUSE 12.2
installed no problems. Then I looked for a repository for gambas3
and once again, munix9:gambas/openSUSE_12.2 came to the
fore. However, gambas3 would not install its examples because of
missing dependencies like imlib2, libogg and v4l-tools: I seached the
net, obtaining many pieces of advice on installing these. (Yes, the
process is now consuming heaps of time and energy). I started to
become familiar with "zypper". I tried
http://sourceforge.net/projects/enlightenment/. I'll say I neded
enlightenment! By the time I got to "sed -i
"DGifOpen/s:fd:&,NULL:"src/modules/loaders/loader_gif.c &.configure
--prefix=/usr --disable-static && make" and similar instructions the
cat (the one with four legs, not the Linux command) had the good
sense to leave the house! This went on for some days - days, not
hours! Looking now at my notes (and ignoring the expletives) I found
that imlib2 needed libmlib2.so.1 etc etc. Finally, I hit the
"search" facility at
software.opensuse.org/search?.g=lib&baseproject=openSUSE% and
installed the missing components. Yes, it's a learning experience in
Linux as it actually is, but no, it's not what I need when I really
want to get on with using Gambas.
If you try to install Gambas 3.5 on the Raspberry Pi running it's
version of Debian Wheezy, the CPU goes into overdrive and stays
there. That's what happens in the real world of newbies to Linux and
Gambas. No wonder Tobias "never hears from them again"!
Carl "
" > However, gambas3 would not install its examples because of
> missing dependencies like imlib2, libogg and v4l-tools: I seached the
> net, obtaining many pieces of advice on installing these.
>
All dependencies should be installed automatically... there were something
wrong in how Gambas was packaged.
I guess this is under work, if not fixed already.
> I tried
> http://sourceforge.net/projects/enlightenment/. I'll say I neded enlightenment!
>
By the time I got to "sed -i
> "DGifOpen/s:fd:&,NULL:"src/modules/loaders/loader_gif.c &.configure
> --prefix=/usr --disable-static && make" and similar instructions the
> cat (the one with four legs, not the Linux command) had the good
> sense to leave the house!
>
Nothing to do with Gambas and so completely unnecessary. Those commands
seems to be for compiling "enlightenment",
not just for installing it. Not newbie stuff at all.
> If you try to install Gambas 3.5 on the Raspberry Pi running it's
> version of Debian Wheezy, the CPU goes into overdrive and stays
> there.
>
Without details hard to say what happened. Compiling any C program is quite
CPU intensive and RPi isn't very fast.
So maybe it only took very *very* long.
> That's what happens in the real world of newbies to Linux and Gambas.
>
Sounds like I can't recommend openSUSE to newbies.
Jussi "
-
...continua...
" Jussi:
Re Ubuntu: I don't know what went wrong - maybe it was my hardware -
I'll try again sometime.
Re the munix9 repository: Yes, I think the packaging was at fault. I
saw a reference to that somewhere.
There was a useful guide to installation on
http://gambasdoc.org/help/install?en&view&v3, but it's a bit out of
date now. I did use it to install an earlier Gambas (3.2.1, I think)
on SUSE10 - on the above hardware.
Re the RPi and Wheezy: Not quite as you think: Gambas 3.5 appears to
install OK and finishes. It is when you try to use Gambas 3.5 that
the CPU usage goes to 100% and stays there. Other potential users
found the same thing. The only thing that got me a nearly up-to-date
Gambas on the RPi was the image with Gambas 3.2.1 installed that I
got from a private download. See previous post.
Re openSUSE and Gambas. To dissuade potential users from using
openSUSE would be wrong, IMO. Gambas 3.5.1 installs without any
problems on openSUSE 13.1 and Gambas works very well - once I had the
permissions under control! I find the latter OS with KDE a very nice distro.
To be constructive, here is my take:
1. There needs to be an up to date list of distros and
repositories, together with some installation instructions, that work
with recent versions of Gambas - what distros and repositories that
gambas will both install and work under. Just like the list referred
to above at gambasdoc.org, but kept up to date. (Maybe there is one,
but I have missed it?) The usual process is to first choose a Linux,
then try to install Gambas. One needs to be able to choose a
combination that installs sweetly. Like OpenSUSE 13.1 and gambas 3.5.1.
2. When you have boards that come out with potentially a huge
take-up, like the RPi, someone or some group (like Willy Raets has
proposed) needs to be able to get out an img file (or something
similar) that has a current Linux distro (or several alternatives)
with Gambas and other components (drivers) pre-installed. There's
an opening right now with the BeagleBone Black board. By all means
charge a modest price for the file, to cover the cost of producing
it. These boards attract newbies, because they open up fresh
computing opportunities.
I have used up more than enough space.
Carl "
" Yes Tobias, you put it in the last paragraph:
> No doubt, migrating windows users (VB6 or not) are potential Gambas users
> and their number may be greater than the ones I was talking about but let's
> don't concentrate on any particular group and let Gambas evolve naturally. I
> don't like the notion of a "target market" anyway.
>
Target markets are things we were fed up with when we came to Linux. Let
us avoid making the same mistakes as the big players on consumer markets.
If that's your only point, Carl
> continue to use it. To put VB6 onto Windows XP, I insert the CD,
> click a few times, put in my keycode and it is done. Heaps and heaps
> of online help, both from MS and the net. The installation process
> for Gambas into Linux, plus other components gets better with time,
> but is still challenging for many, including those with significant
> past programming experience.
>
I 100 % agree.
There are some more really good projects around in the Linux world, and
usually they take care to have their main releases put into the major
distros regularly - and in a way that lets them integrate flawlessly.
We cannot compare Windows with Linux here, however, as Windows is a
(relatively) homogenous environment whilst Linux PCs can differ in many
more ways. Package management is way more complex here.
Rolf "
" I'm one of those experienced VB6 users that used to swim in the Caribe,
and Microsoft sent to the Marianas abiss with .NET ; so I think there is
a huge amount of potential ex VB6 programmers to join the Gambas force.
So Gambas is not THAT easy to install or compile? Well, we're
programmers, lets show some effort...
Linux hard to install? Ubuntu sets a computer up in 20m, and if its a
decent one, the only thing you need to know is your time zone. Otherwise
it is all answered in Askubuntu.
Our goal has to be making Gambas compiled program END users, use
whatever O.S. they want, using a one-file-downloadable-installer.
martin p cristia "
-
...continua...
" If they're running Ubuntu, it's just a matter of a few clicks to install
Gambas through the software center. If they're trying to compile the whole
thing from source and are having difficulty, they probably don't need to be
compiling from source anyway. Just because you CAN do something under Linux
that you can't do under Windows doesn't mean that you have to do it.
Packages made with Gambas should automatically have the right dependencies
and the required packages should be pulled in during installation.
I just don't see this as a big issue. Ubuntu, Debian, Suse and Fedora all
include Gambas as part of their package management systems. Those four and
their derivatives cover easily 90% of all desktop Linux users. Yes, there
will be issues with architectures not typical of desktop computers, like
MIPS or ARM. Those aren't officially supported, and it's up to users with
those platforms to get Gambas working on them if the packages automatically
generated by Debian (etc.) don't work.
If you really think Windows development tools are better in that regard,
try getting VB6 running on PowerPC, which was officially supported by
Windows during VB6's lifetime. It never happened. If you google "visual
basic" "powerpc", the fourth hit is actually a Gambas package which runs on
PPC. Today you can make VB.NET apps that run on Windows RT (ARM
architecture) if for some reason you actually wanted to, but I'm also
guessing that never happens with most VB.NET apps because no one really
cares about Windows on ARM except Microsoft.
And even that's a huge step up from the previous second-class Windows port,
WinCE for ARM and MIPS, used up until about a year or two ago on $99
laptops that were punishing to use. I've heard you could write your VB apps
in a certain way and cross-compile them to run under WinCE, but I've never
seen an app built that way.
Gambas programs, on the other hand, will work on any flavor of Linux once
the Gambas interpreter is fully ported. They aren't officially supported,
and on many platforms where the Linux kernel is supported, Gambas will
never work because they're embedded devices without X or (in the case of
Android) even glibc. But the wonder of free software is that anyone can
take the source and make the port if they put enough effort into it. You
can't do that with most Microsoft tools.
> decent one, the only thing you need to know is your time zone.
> Otherwise it is all answered in Askubuntu.
Unfortunately, with laptops (which are most of the PCs sold today), that
isn't always the case. For example, my new Lenovo Ideapad has function keys
that don't even generate keycodes unless you press the Fn button with them;
on their own they do things like adjust volume and brightness. And there's
no SysRq key so no magic key combinations, no NumLock key so there's no
mouse accessibility for when its touchpad goes haywire which is about a
dozen times a day, and the ATI graphic driver has a memory leak resulting
in the X server swapping constantly after about a day, and trying to revert
to the free driver causes the updater to crash in 13.10, and not a single
one of these issues has a solution on AskUbuntu, though several have been
asked and left unanswered. (Don't buy a Lenovo Ideapad.)
Of course, in my Windows days there were many, many issues that couldn't be
solved in online forums, since you had the source to almost nothing and bug
fixes were driven by PR, not technical merit or even, in those days, security.
From time to time, someone chimes in with "We need to make it as easy to
develop and distribute Gambas apps as it was to develop VB apps", but the
truth is, Gambas is already far more flexible and easy to distribute apps
in than VB6 ever was. You just have to let go of leftover Windows notions
like "setup.exe is the pinnacle of package management" or "applications are
best distributed in one big file containing all the dependencies statically
linked" or "it's up to the compiler's author to port to my non-standard
architecture", because none of those are true.
Rob "
" Rob:
...and so maybe a million new users get introduced to Python -
already loaded in the Wheezy RPi distro, not Gambas. If you want to
secure the long term future of Gambas, one of things that must be
done is to attract new users. These new users, like me, are just the
ones that don't have the necessary skills or experience to install
and update Gambas on these platforms. These architectures are a wave
of the future.
Carl "
-
...continua...
" First of all, as someone who abandoned Gambas app development in favor of
what we now call HTML5 years ago, you're appealing to the wrong guy with
that argument. Python is a capable enough language, though I personally
dislike it due to its retarded indentation requirements (if meta-Q destroys
my program logic, your language has a problem, not me). Bottom line, I
don't have a horse in this race anymore; I'm actually waiting for Benoît to
let me know when to send him the transfer codes for the gambasdoc.org
domain that I've been hosting for the last 9 years since that server is
likely to disappear soon. Desktop apps just haven't been a priority to me
for a long time.
Second, I would argue that the Raspberry Pi isn't "the future", cheap
Chinese Android devices are. Gambas being ported to Android isn't going
to happen anytime soon as despite having a Linux kernel, Android doesn't
even have the most basic GNU libraries (or a replacement for those) that it
would need to be POSIX compliant. Education might be moving toward ARM for
desktops, at least in CS/CSE programs where kids are meant to be hacking,
but the business world isn't, and that's where most of us are coming from.
Most of us have ARM phones and x86/x64 desktops. I have a couple cheap
Chinese Android sticks hooked up to TVs too. I had hopes to use them as
desktop replacements but in their current state (early 2013 vintage)
they're really not. I could put Debian on them but they wouldn't even have
2D video acceleration and I might not be able to get back. (I write my
Android apps in Java, for the most part. What a terrible, verbose,
top-heavy language, but if you use anything else you're stuck with a subset
of the platform's capabilities and good luck finding support.)
As a corollary, even if Gambas is available on those systems, as you say,
Python is installed by default and the Raspberry Pi project pushes it
pretty hard. Students sitting in front of RPis are going to get taught
Python unless their teacher is someone like me who strongly dislikes
Python, and I suspect Gambas isn't going to be the next thing on their
list.
Third, you can't install or update Gambas on a platform on which it doesn't
compile and run, and if you're one of "the ones that don't have the
necessary skills or experience to install and update Gambas on these
platforms", I would hope you'll shell out the 50 bucks to send your pet
hardware platform to someone who volunteers to make it work, or to Benoît
if it's a bigger job than patching out some Intel-architecture-specific stuff.
It isn't like there's a big red "Port to ARM" button that we've all refused
to push out of spite. The developers need the hardware and the time to
figure out what doesn't work and why. Apparently it compiles, because the
packages are available. I don't think any of us had heard it was broken at
runtime until someone reported it earlier in this thread. The bug has still
not been officially reported on http://code.google.com/p/gambas/issues/list
. Developers can't fix what they don't know about, especially if they don't
even own the hardware it fails on.
Isn't there a Raspbian support group or something that has people who know
how to read gcc error messages?
Rob "
" G'day Rob:
I concede to your greater knowledge and experience. Just a couple
of points in response:
Firstly, I chose my words "a wave of the future" carefully. I did
not say "the wave ..." Hopefully the future holds many good waves.
Secondly, I was simply following the thread, which may or may not be
correct, that securing the long term future for Gambas requires a
continuing or even periodic intake of new users. RPi's are not just
used for education, although that was their prime intent, they are
also useful for embedded systems and, in particular, hobbyists. That
segment is still quite large. I guess I fit in that category - a
cheapskate with time and no great programming skills! My particular
point was that it seemed a missed opportunity to me that boards like
RPi , Beaglebone and the coming Intel board did not better support
Gambas and that it was up to the Gambas community to take up those
and similar opportunities to ensure a Gambas future. Certainly
Gambas 3.2.1 compiles and runs on the RPi.
Carl "
-
:-[
Scusate se un gamberetto imbranato si inserisce nella discussione a esporre la sua, per prima cosa ci terrei a dire (malgrado la cosa mi costi visto che è un cugino) che concordo con chi sostiene che M. Benoît Minisini è un grande ecc. :2birre:
Concordo con lui (M. Minisini) nel voler rimanere in ambito Linux e non volersi scontrare con colossi che ti possono schiacciare quando vogliono (i colossi hanno soldi, tanti soldi e con i soldi si possono comprare tante cose...), e poi proprio adesso? che grazie a Ubuntu, Linux sta diventando il più facile dei sistemi operativi, che ai noi grazie alla crisi anche le amministrazioni pubbliche stanno passando all'open source?, e pure molte aziende iniziano a pensarci seriamente intendo quelle piccole e micro che avranno bisogno di programmi tipo quelli che facevo anch'io che ero un frillo grazie alla facilità di VBA e VBE.
Concordo con Akrobaticone ma solo dove dice che sarebbe utile un rapporto simbiotico con Libre Office.
Al grande vuott dico di non ascoltare certe voci, che non tenere conto delle possibilità dell'audio o suono o anche musica in ambito programmatico sarebbe davvero un grave errore, se penso alle tantissime persone ipovedenti impiegate nelle aziende e al grande aiuto che potrebbero avere da un programma di lavoro dialogante.
Per me questo è il futuro (vostro, che io oramai sono alla frutta).
Un salutone a tutti :ciao:
-
:-[
.
Concordo con Akrobaticone ma solo dove dice che sarebbe utile un rapporto simbiotico con Libre Office.
per curiosità, con quali delle cose che ho detto non ti trovi d'accordo?
Aggiungerei un nuovo fronte di sviluppo:
Prima o poi uscirà anche Ubuntu touch su tablet e smartphone
Perchè non usare anche lì gambas?
Mi piacerebbe sapere cosa ne pensa Minisini, magari anche della questione di gambas su libreoffice..
-
per curiosità, con quali delle cose che ho detto non ti trovi d'accordo?
Aggiungerei un nuovo fronte di sviluppo:
Prima o poi uscirà anche Ubuntu touch su tablet e smartphone
Perchè non usare anche lì gambas?
Mi piacerebbe sapere cosa ne pensa Minisini, magari anche della questione di gambas su libreoffice..
:-\
Scusa mi sono espresso in modo inappropriato, oltre a tutto arrivo bell'ultimo e pare che critichi proprio un benemerito di Gambas.
Intendevo dire che sono in accordo con te ma non dove parli di fork e di portabilità...
e sono pure in accordo con quanto scrivi ora.
ciao :ciao:
-
per curiosità, con quali delle cose che ho detto non ti trovi d'accordo?
Aggiungerei un nuovo fronte di sviluppo:
Prima o poi uscirà anche Ubuntu touch su tablet e smartphone
Perchè non usare anche lì gambas?
Mi piacerebbe sapere cosa ne pensa Minisini, magari anche della questione di gambas su libreoffice..
:-\
Scusa mi sono espresso in modo inappropriato, oltre a tutto arrivo bell'ultimo e pare che critichi proprio un benemerito di Gambas.
Intendevo dire che sono in accordo con te ma non dove parli di fork e di portabilità...
e sono pure in accordo con quanto scrivi ora.
ciao :ciao:
Tra me e i benemeriti passano anni luce!
il fork era solo una ipotesi nel caso che Minisini preso da improvvisa follia decida di abbandonare Gambas
la portabilità è questione assai delicata, mi chiedevo solamente se il fatto di poter utilizzare su più piattaforme le stess applicazioni non fosse un incentivo ad utilizzare questo linguaggio.
Per dare una risposta semplice alla domanda del titolo della discussione mi piacerebbe che Gambas possa diventare per Linux quello che Visual Basic è stato per Windows, uno strumento semplice ed efficace alla portata di molti che permette di realizzare applicazioni distribuibili senza difficoltà e un sistema semplice per l'automazione di software complessi come Libreoffice al pari di VBA per MS Office.
-
Tra me e i benemeriti ...
Per dare una risposta semplice alla domanda del titolo della discussione mi piacerebbe che Gambas possa diventare per Linux quello che Visual Basic è stato per Windows, uno strumento semplice ed efficace alla portata di molti che permette di realizzare applicazioni distribuibili senza difficoltà e un sistema semplice per l'automazione di software complessi come Libreoffice al pari di VBA per MS Office.
...e allora (adesso :)) posso scrivere che concordo al100%
:ok: