> > In general i think that we really need task forces in plural.
>
> Agreed, but some we already have some (like kernel hackers, X.org guys,
> people who build desktop environments, ...).
I know that a few project have very organized task forces. However neither of those you mention shows much of that.
> > There are a lot of overlapping projects. One example is that KDE and Gnome should merge, at least when it comes to key technologies.
>
> That would certainly help to reduce the desperate shortage of manpower.
> > 1. We need a standardized method for embedding objects. Like Java Beans and OLE/ActiveX in Windows. I mean how do you view a office document in a VS application, or create a PDF report? You find an ActiveX that can do it. KDE has KParts and Gnome has something similar, but we really need a standard for this. Or in other words we need a standard for Custom Controls. In OLE/ActiveX an object can be inproc (dynamically or statically linked) or out of proc (external server process that starts on demand). Also the app is totally oblivious to w
> >
> > 2. We need a visual editor that can create new Custom Controls, or design containers like forms/windows.
> >
> > The Lazarus FreePascal IDE is an interesting project.
>
> So instead of learning how to properly use existing libraries and then
> writing nice and clean code yourself you prefer to have some kind of
> gizmo spit out some crap for you and you actually call that programming?
> Thank god that most people writing free software don't take the same
> approach, because I'm convinced that's just a way of making things
> rapidly deteriorate. Don't get me wrong - I know these are very powerful
> tools in the hands of a true professional, but they're also helping to
> make things suck so much more when some lazy and incompetent fuck is
> just abusing them to roll his piece of crap ASAP so that he could start
> making easy money out of it and doesn't even have a clue of how to use
> them properly. Unfortunately I've seen way too much crap that was
> "programmed" exactly this way to prove my point.
What? Can you be more specific in how you come to this ramblings out of what i wrote? How would having a standard rather then (at least) two incompatible solutions create such a mess?
> > Another thing that we need is a good native database library. We have
> JDBC and ADO.NET. Perhaps one of them could be ported to C/C++? We also
> have PHP Data Objects that is quite nice and probably implemented in C,
> perhaps the C code could be used to make a "C Data Objects"?
>
> There are quite a few - libmysql, libpq, libsqlite... many of them with
> bindings to whatever language you like. Just pick the best fit for your
> desired application.
So how do i use libmysql to connect to my postres database again? None of those are database libraries. They are database-specific client libraries.
The only C database lib i know that is actively developed i libzdb (http://www.tildeslash.com/libzdb/documentation.html).
> I think the bottom line is that the programming model is completely
> different and those who just want to make their job easy and cobble
> something up without actually knowing anything about coding are gonna
> have a very hard time getting used to it.
In what way is it different? Most things i suggest are already in the programming model. The OLE/ActiveX-component type of component model for OO programming does exist. It exists in the form of beans, kpart and bonobo. The only difference with creating a standard is that kde objects would be usable in gnome and gnome objects in kde.
> > In general i think that we really need task forces in plural.
>
> Agreed, but some we already have some (like kernel hackers, X.org guys,
> people who build desktop environments, ...).
I know that a few project have very organized task forces. However neither of those you mention shows much of that.
> > There are a lot of overlapping projects. One example is that KDE and Gnome should merge, at least when it comes to key technologies.
>
> That would certainly help to reduce the desperate shortage of manpower.
> > 1. We need a standardized method for embedding objects. Like Java Beans and OLE/ActiveX in Windows. I mean how do you view a office document in a VS application, or create a PDF report? You find an ActiveX that can do it. KDE has KParts and Gnome has something similar, but we really need a standard for this. Or in other words we need a standard for Custom Controls. In OLE/ActiveX an object can be inproc (dynamically or statically linked) or out of proc (external server process that starts on demand). Also the app is totally oblivious to w
> >
> > 2. We need a visual editor that can create new Custom Controls, or design containers like forms/windows.
> >
> > The Lazarus FreePascal IDE is an interesting project.
>
> So instead of learning how to properly use existing libraries and then
> writing nice and clean code yourself you prefer to have some kind of
> gizmo spit out some crap for you and you actually call that programming?
> Thank god that most people writing free software don't take the same
> approach, because I'm convinced that's just a way of making things
> rapidly deteriorate. Don't get me wrong - I know these are very powerful
> tools in the hands of a true professional, but they're also helping to
> make things suck so much more when some lazy and incompetent fuck is
> just abusing them to roll his piece of crap ASAP so that he could start
> making easy money out of it and doesn't even have a clue of how to use
> them properly. Unfortunately I've seen way too much crap that was
> "programmed" exactly this way to prove my point.
What? Can you be more specific in how you come to this ramblings out of what i wrote? How would having a standard rather then (at least) two incompatible solutions create such a mess?
> > Another thing that we need is a good native database library. We have www.tildeslash. com/libzdb/ documentation. html).
> JDBC and ADO.NET. Perhaps one of them could be ported to C/C++? We also
> have PHP Data Objects that is quite nice and probably implemented in C,
> perhaps the C code could be used to make a "C Data Objects"?
>
> There are quite a few - libmysql, libpq, libsqlite... many of them with
> bindings to whatever language you like. Just pick the best fit for your
> desired application.
So how do i use libmysql to connect to my postres database again? None of those are database libraries. They are database-specific client libraries.
The only C database lib i know that is actively developed i libzdb (http://
> I think the bottom line is that the programming model is completely component type of component model for OO programming does exist. It exists in the form of beans, kpart and bonobo. The only difference with creating a standard is that kde objects would be usable in gnome and gnome objects in kde.
> different and those who just want to make their job easy and cobble
> something up without actually knowing anything about coding are gonna
> have a very hard time getting used to it.
In what way is it different? Most things i suggest are already in the programming model. The OLE/ActiveX-
_______ _______ _______ _______ _______ _______ _______ _______ _______ __ new.windowslive mobile. msn.com/ SE-SE/windows- live-hotmail/ default. aspx
Hotmail i mobilen på 5 sekunder!
http://