WTL going open source ???
-
According to this[^] article , WTL an ATL c++ class approach to GUI development (a very simplistic explanation for the guys that don't what the hell is this *thing*) , is considering moving WTL to the Open Souce domain :eek: For WTL CPians lovers out there , I could be good news since it could improve a lot the features of WTL, making it a much better and valid alternative to old and trusty MFC development. Cheers,Joao Vaz And if your dream is to care for your family, to put food on the table, to provide them with an education and a good home, then maybe suffering through an endless, pointless, boring job will seem to have purpose. And you will realize how even a rock can change the world, simply by remaining obstinately stationary.-Shog9 Remember just because a good thing comes to an end, doesn't mean that the next one can't be better.-Chris Meech
Joao Vaz wrote: For WTL CPians lovers out there , I could be good news since it could improve a lot the the features of WTL, making it a much better and valid alternative to old and trusty MFC development. True, might be a good move, but wait until you see the first "WTL for Linux - LTL" announcements :) Anyway, I would prefer some SDK quality WTL documentation.
Off to Brazil in a few days
-
According to this[^] article , WTL an ATL c++ class approach to GUI development (a very simplistic explanation for the guys that don't what the hell is this *thing*) , is considering moving WTL to the Open Souce domain :eek: For WTL CPians lovers out there , I could be good news since it could improve a lot the features of WTL, making it a much better and valid alternative to old and trusty MFC development. Cheers,Joao Vaz And if your dream is to care for your family, to put food on the table, to provide them with an education and a good home, then maybe suffering through an endless, pointless, boring job will seem to have purpose. And you will realize how even a rock can change the world, simply by remaining obstinately stationary.-Shog9 Remember just because a good thing comes to an end, doesn't mean that the next one can't be better.-Chris Meech
WTL is one of those niche libraries that falls between the legacy MFC code that lots of us maintain and the new .NET framework. I primarly write database related applications so for me a move to WTL for anything other than quick apps would seem like a sideways step. There isn't much advantage to using WTL in updating legacy MFC based apps. Any new apps that I write really need to be targetting the .NET framework as that is where Microsoft are moving. If I am to take advantage of the new .NET class libraries, then I'm probably better off using C# rather than C++. Whilst WTL provides a good way of writing Win32 applications, I'd rather leverage my years of experience with MFC than change over for Win32 apps. With .NET, I know I'm going to have to learn something new as MFC isn't going to be in the 'brave new world'. I might as well use C# as it is the only language that has been designed especially for .NET Michael 'War is at best barbarism...Its glory is all moonshine. It is only those who have neither fired a shot nor heard the shrieks and groans of the wounded who cry aloud for blood, more vengeance, more desolation. War is hell.' - General William Sherman, 1879
-
WTL is one of those niche libraries that falls between the legacy MFC code that lots of us maintain and the new .NET framework. I primarly write database related applications so for me a move to WTL for anything other than quick apps would seem like a sideways step. There isn't much advantage to using WTL in updating legacy MFC based apps. Any new apps that I write really need to be targetting the .NET framework as that is where Microsoft are moving. If I am to take advantage of the new .NET class libraries, then I'm probably better off using C# rather than C++. Whilst WTL provides a good way of writing Win32 applications, I'd rather leverage my years of experience with MFC than change over for Win32 apps. With .NET, I know I'm going to have to learn something new as MFC isn't going to be in the 'brave new world'. I might as well use C# as it is the only language that has been designed especially for .NET Michael 'War is at best barbarism...Its glory is all moonshine. It is only those who have neither fired a shot nor heard the shrieks and groans of the wounded who cry aloud for blood, more vengeance, more desolation. War is hell.' - General William Sherman, 1879
There is a traitor among us :suss:
Off to Brazil in a few days
-
Joao Vaz wrote: For WTL CPians lovers out there... Well, for the WTL lovers it is no news since the article is simply extracted from a discussion on the WTL mailing list. Best regards, Paul. Jesus Christ is LOVE! Please tell somebody.
Paul Selormey wrote: Well, for the WTL lovers it is no news since the article is simply extracted from a discussion on the WTL mailing list. Thanks for the info, it's that I'm full of work and doing a lot of alternative development in others languages (finnished my c# project and returning to java and php :-( ), and I'm don't read the wtl posts any more :-( Cheers,Joao Vaz And if your dream is to care for your family, to put food on the table, to provide them with an education and a good home, then maybe suffering through an endless, pointless, boring job will seem to have purpose. And you will realize how even a rock can change the world, simply by remaining obstinately stationary.-Shog9 Remember just because a good thing comes to an end, doesn't mean that the next one can't be better.-Chris Meech
-
Joao Vaz wrote: For WTL CPians lovers out there , I could be good news since it could improve a lot the the features of WTL, making it a much better and valid alternative to old and trusty MFC development. True, might be a good move, but wait until you see the first "WTL for Linux - LTL" announcements :) Anyway, I would prefer some SDK quality WTL documentation.
Off to Brazil in a few days
SaurweinAndreas wrote: I would prefer some SDK quality WTL documentation. I would prefer instead official suport and documentation. :-) Cheers,Joao Vaz And if your dream is to care for your family, to put food on the table, to provide them with an education and a good home, then maybe suffering through an endless, pointless, boring job will seem to have purpose. And you will realize how even a rock can change the world, simply by remaining obstinately stationary.-Shog9 Remember just because a good thing comes to an end, doesn't mean that the next one can't be better.-Chris Meech
-
WTL is one of those niche libraries that falls between the legacy MFC code that lots of us maintain and the new .NET framework. I primarly write database related applications so for me a move to WTL for anything other than quick apps would seem like a sideways step. There isn't much advantage to using WTL in updating legacy MFC based apps. Any new apps that I write really need to be targetting the .NET framework as that is where Microsoft are moving. If I am to take advantage of the new .NET class libraries, then I'm probably better off using C# rather than C++. Whilst WTL provides a good way of writing Win32 applications, I'd rather leverage my years of experience with MFC than change over for Win32 apps. With .NET, I know I'm going to have to learn something new as MFC isn't going to be in the 'brave new world'. I might as well use C# as it is the only language that has been designed especially for .NET Michael 'War is at best barbarism...Its glory is all moonshine. It is only those who have neither fired a shot nor heard the shrieks and groans of the wounded who cry aloud for blood, more vengeance, more desolation. War is hell.' - General William Sherman, 1879
Michael P Butler wrote: I primarly write database related applications so for me a move to WTL for anything other than quick apps would seem like a sideways step. Good point . C# and ADO.NET or MFC/ADO 2.X plays better this paper for this kind of apps , but for apps that demand small memory footprint(i.e mobile apps) or fast execution WTL IMHO could have a good paper on this programming niche. Cheers,Joao Vaz And if your dream is to care for your family, to put food on the table, to provide them with an education and a good home, then maybe suffering through an endless, pointless, boring job will seem to have purpose. And you will realize how even a rock can change the world, simply by remaining obstinately stationary.-Shog9 Remember just because a good thing comes to an end, doesn't mean that the next one can't be better.-Chris Meech
-
According to this[^] article , WTL an ATL c++ class approach to GUI development (a very simplistic explanation for the guys that don't what the hell is this *thing*) , is considering moving WTL to the Open Souce domain :eek: For WTL CPians lovers out there , I could be good news since it could improve a lot the features of WTL, making it a much better and valid alternative to old and trusty MFC development. Cheers,Joao Vaz And if your dream is to care for your family, to put food on the table, to provide them with an education and a good home, then maybe suffering through an endless, pointless, boring job will seem to have purpose. And you will realize how even a rock can change the world, simply by remaining obstinately stationary.-Shog9 Remember just because a good thing comes to an end, doesn't mean that the next one can't be better.-Chris Meech
The Microsoft representative inteviewed in the article says they are investigating releasing WTL under a shared source licence, which could mean "look but don't touch" or "non-commercial use only" style restricted source licence. In any case the article headline is misleading. Shared source isn't Open Source.
-
The Microsoft representative inteviewed in the article says they are investigating releasing WTL under a shared source licence, which could mean "look but don't touch" or "non-commercial use only" style restricted source licence. In any case the article headline is misleading. Shared source isn't Open Source.
markkuk wrote: The Microsoft representative inteviewed in the article says they are investigating releasing WTL under a shared source licence, which could mean "look but don't touch" or "non-commercial use only" style restricted source licence. In any case the article headline is misleading. Shared source isn't Open Source. Huh? Aren't WTL sources already available? What changes, then? :confused: My latest article: GBVB - Converting VB.NET code to C#
-
WTL is one of those niche libraries that falls between the legacy MFC code that lots of us maintain and the new .NET framework. I primarly write database related applications so for me a move to WTL for anything other than quick apps would seem like a sideways step. There isn't much advantage to using WTL in updating legacy MFC based apps. Any new apps that I write really need to be targetting the .NET framework as that is where Microsoft are moving. If I am to take advantage of the new .NET class libraries, then I'm probably better off using C# rather than C++. Whilst WTL provides a good way of writing Win32 applications, I'd rather leverage my years of experience with MFC than change over for Win32 apps. With .NET, I know I'm going to have to learn something new as MFC isn't going to be in the 'brave new world'. I might as well use C# as it is the only language that has been designed especially for .NET Michael 'War is at best barbarism...Its glory is all moonshine. It is only those who have neither fired a shot nor heard the shrieks and groans of the wounded who cry aloud for blood, more vengeance, more desolation. War is hell.' - General William Sherman, 1879
The interesting thing about WTL is that it is particularly well suited for the "niche" market I'm working on: Windows CE (Pocket PC 2002 and the Smartphone soon). Interestingly, MFC is not supported in the Smartphone platform so, if you want an application framework for C++ that's truly portable and close to the metal, WTL is the way to go. The .NET CF is not really what I have in mind for my purposes...
-
According to this[^] article , WTL an ATL c++ class approach to GUI development (a very simplistic explanation for the guys that don't what the hell is this *thing*) , is considering moving WTL to the Open Souce domain :eek: For WTL CPians lovers out there , I could be good news since it could improve a lot the features of WTL, making it a much better and valid alternative to old and trusty MFC development. Cheers,Joao Vaz And if your dream is to care for your family, to put food on the table, to provide them with an education and a good home, then maybe suffering through an endless, pointless, boring job will seem to have purpose. And you will realize how even a rock can change the world, simply by remaining obstinately stationary.-Shog9 Remember just because a good thing comes to an end, doesn't mean that the next one can't be better.-Chris Meech
Joao Vaz wrote: MS is considering moving WTL to the Open Source domain I don't buy this. Why should MS care about something they have given source code for ? MS is betting on something they control. WTL is a no bet. Beware of those MS-related distractions. MS is only interested on money and control. Technical things are just PR for the masses. MS is considering moving WTL to the Open sausage domain. :wtf: I buy that one instead. :laugh:
-
The Microsoft representative inteviewed in the article says they are investigating releasing WTL under a shared source licence, which could mean "look but don't touch" or "non-commercial use only" style restricted source licence. In any case the article headline is misleading. Shared source isn't Open Source.
markkuk wrote: "look but don't touch" or "non-commercial use only" style restricted source licence. Yuck . Stupid license . No Commercial ??? That doesn't make sense ... They are some clients that are using for small and medium comercial projects , so a no-comercial license will be a no-no kind of stuff for this kind of clients ... Cheers,Joao Vaz And if your dream is to care for your family, to put food on the table, to provide them with an education and a good home, then maybe suffering through an endless, pointless, boring job will seem to have purpose. And you will realize how even a rock can change the world, simply by remaining obstinately stationary.-Shog9 Remember just because a good thing comes to an end, doesn't mean that the next one can't be better.-Chris Meech
-
The interesting thing about WTL is that it is particularly well suited for the "niche" market I'm working on: Windows CE (Pocket PC 2002 and the Smartphone soon). Interestingly, MFC is not supported in the Smartphone platform so, if you want an application framework for C++ that's truly portable and close to the metal, WTL is the way to go. The .NET CF is not really what I have in mind for my purposes...
João Paulo Figueira wrote: The .NET CF is not really what I have in mind for my purposes... Why not ? You don't like the concept of managed apps for the mobile market ? Java is winning a lot of ground here with JME and java games , so why not a .NET CF ? Faster TTM (Time to market) and easier to program ... Note here that I'm a C++ fan and I prefer it to any managed language as c# ... Cheers,Joao Vaz And if your dream is to care for your family, to put food on the table, to provide them with an education and a good home, then maybe suffering through an endless, pointless, boring job will seem to have purpose. And you will realize how even a rock can change the world, simply by remaining obstinately stationary.-Shog9 Remember just because a good thing comes to an end, doesn't mean that the next one can't be better.-Chris Meech
-
Joao Vaz wrote: MS is considering moving WTL to the Open Source domain I don't buy this. Why should MS care about something they have given source code for ? MS is betting on something they control. WTL is a no bet. Beware of those MS-related distractions. MS is only interested on money and control. Technical things are just PR for the masses. MS is considering moving WTL to the Open sausage domain. :wtf: I buy that one instead. :laugh:
Stephane Rodriguez. wrote: MS is betting on something they control. WTL is a no bet. Unfortunately it isn't ... Stephane Rodriguez. wrote: MS is only interested on money and control. Technical things are just PR for the masses. Yup. but at least they were friendly on the upgrade cost to VS 2003 , only $29 e some cents . Stephane Rodriguez. wrote: MS is considering moving WTL to the Open sausage domain. LOL . That was funny :-) Cheers,Joao Vaz And if your dream is to care for your family, to put food on the table, to provide them with an education and a good home, then maybe suffering through an endless, pointless, boring job will seem to have purpose. And you will realize how even a rock can change the world, simply by remaining obstinately stationary.-Shog9 Remember just because a good thing comes to an end, doesn't mean that the next one can't be better.-Chris Meech
-
João Paulo Figueira wrote: The .NET CF is not really what I have in mind for my purposes... Why not ? You don't like the concept of managed apps for the mobile market ? Java is winning a lot of ground here with JME and java games , so why not a .NET CF ? Faster TTM (Time to market) and easier to program ... Note here that I'm a C++ fan and I prefer it to any managed language as c# ... Cheers,Joao Vaz And if your dream is to care for your family, to put food on the table, to provide them with an education and a good home, then maybe suffering through an endless, pointless, boring job will seem to have purpose. And you will realize how even a rock can change the world, simply by remaining obstinately stationary.-Shog9 Remember just because a good thing comes to an end, doesn't mean that the next one can't be better.-Chris Meech
I may be a little biased ;), but .NET CF with the current devices means two words to me: fat and slow. Sure, better time to market. But better app response time? My feeling is that this is going to be primarily for MIS development, not for packaged software, at least for the time being.
-
According to this[^] article , WTL an ATL c++ class approach to GUI development (a very simplistic explanation for the guys that don't what the hell is this *thing*) , is considering moving WTL to the Open Souce domain :eek: For WTL CPians lovers out there , I could be good news since it could improve a lot the features of WTL, making it a much better and valid alternative to old and trusty MFC development. Cheers,Joao Vaz And if your dream is to care for your family, to put food on the table, to provide them with an education and a good home, then maybe suffering through an endless, pointless, boring job will seem to have purpose. And you will realize how even a rock can change the world, simply by remaining obstinately stationary.-Shog9 Remember just because a good thing comes to an end, doesn't mean that the next one can't be better.-Chris Meech
I think it's cool, even though it probably wouldn't have much effect on the rate at which WTL develops. Right now, any good suggestions and bug fixes from the mailing lists are pretty quickly added to the distribution. Although, making it open source might relieve Nenad of maintainership responsibility, and he does need a break :-) What's the difference between a C++ programmer and God? God knows he's not a C++ programmer : anon
-
I may be a little biased ;), but .NET CF with the current devices means two words to me: fat and slow. Sure, better time to market. But better app response time? My feeling is that this is going to be primarily for MIS development, not for packaged software, at least for the time being.
João Paulo Figueira wrote: but .NET CF with the current devices means two words to me: fat and slow. So, you tested it right ? Or is a hunch on your part ? Bias aside , I'm a firm believer that any good development for the mobile device should be done in c++ , but this is just me . Now programming java games it's a different story , it should be a different and cool thing to do in our field (this coming from a guy that is studying game mathematics and directx programming just for fun) ... Cheers,Joao Vaz And if your dream is to care for your family, to put food on the table, to provide them with an education and a good home, then maybe suffering through an endless, pointless, boring job will seem to have purpose. And you will realize how even a rock can change the world, simply by remaining obstinately stationary.-Shog9 Remember just because a good thing comes to an end, doesn't mean that the next one can't be better.-Chris Meech
-
I think it's cool, even though it probably wouldn't have much effect on the rate at which WTL develops. Right now, any good suggestions and bug fixes from the mailing lists are pretty quickly added to the distribution. Although, making it open source might relieve Nenad of maintainership responsibility, and he does need a break :-) What's the difference between a C++ programmer and God? God knows he's not a C++ programmer : anon
Senkwe Chanda wrote: Although, making it open source might relieve Nenad of maintainership responsibility, and he does need a break Nenad despite being a restless guy , is human and for sure needs a refreshing wtl break :~ Cheers,Joao Vaz And if your dream is to care for your family, to put food on the table, to provide them with an education and a good home, then maybe suffering through an endless, pointless, boring job will seem to have purpose. And you will realize how even a rock can change the world, simply by remaining obstinately stationary.-Shog9 Remember just because a good thing comes to an end, doesn't mean that the next one can't be better.-Chris Meech
-
Stephane Rodriguez. wrote: MS is betting on something they control. WTL is a no bet. Unfortunately it isn't ... Stephane Rodriguez. wrote: MS is only interested on money and control. Technical things are just PR for the masses. Yup. but at least they were friendly on the upgrade cost to VS 2003 , only $29 e some cents . Stephane Rodriguez. wrote: MS is considering moving WTL to the Open sausage domain. LOL . That was funny :-) Cheers,Joao Vaz And if your dream is to care for your family, to put food on the table, to provide them with an education and a good home, then maybe suffering through an endless, pointless, boring job will seem to have purpose. And you will realize how even a rock can change the world, simply by remaining obstinately stationary.-Shog9 Remember just because a good thing comes to an end, doesn't mean that the next one can't be better.-Chris Meech
Joao Vaz wrote: but at least they were friendly on the upgrade cost to VS 2003 , only $29 e some cents It should be 100% free. It's only a service pack. The idea of MS giving away products for free is a lure. It's because they are evangelizing java developers, read : killing the competition. That's also what they are doing with the x-box. I don't like the idea of .NET being a patented technology, and a technology which is on the side of Microsoft, unlike MFC/WTL/... MS can break the API at any moment and force us to adapt (that's what they are doing for instance with the broken VS.NET 2003 project file formats).
-
Joao Vaz wrote: but at least they were friendly on the upgrade cost to VS 2003 , only $29 e some cents It should be 100% free. It's only a service pack. The idea of MS giving away products for free is a lure. It's because they are evangelizing java developers, read : killing the competition. That's also what they are doing with the x-box. I don't like the idea of .NET being a patented technology, and a technology which is on the side of Microsoft, unlike MFC/WTL/... MS can break the API at any moment and force us to adapt (that's what they are doing for instance with the broken VS.NET 2003 project file formats).
Stephane Rodriguez. wrote: It should be 100% free. It's only a service pack. Well from a purist view, it isn't only a service pack ,new enhancements of the net framework 1.1 , better mc++ support (read RAD mc++) , merged the cf net framework support and the best of all IMHO a very standard compliant c++ compiler and some other changes/integration ... Stephane Rodriguez. wrote: It's because they are evangelizing java developers Visual J# being the shameless part of it ... Stephane Rodriguez. wrote: I don't like the idea of .NET being a patented technology This could break the Mono project (which deserves my sympathy) into pieces , even they insist that Microsoft can't do it , I'm not so sure of this ... Stephane Rodriguez. wrote: break the API at any moment and force us to adapt (that's what they are doing for instance with the broken VS.NET 2003 project file formats). It's a shame , what's rest of the retro-compatibility philosophy and protecting the clients investment ??? Cheers,Joao Vaz And if your dream is to care for your family, to put food on the table, to provide them with an education and a good home, then maybe suffering through an endless, pointless, boring job will seem to have purpose. And you will realize how even a rock can change the world, simply by remaining obstinately stationary.-Shog9 Remember just because a good thing comes to an end, doesn't mean that the next one can't be better.-Chris Meech
-
Stephane Rodriguez. wrote: It should be 100% free. It's only a service pack. Well from a purist view, it isn't only a service pack ,new enhancements of the net framework 1.1 , better mc++ support (read RAD mc++) , merged the cf net framework support and the best of all IMHO a very standard compliant c++ compiler and some other changes/integration ... Stephane Rodriguez. wrote: It's because they are evangelizing java developers Visual J# being the shameless part of it ... Stephane Rodriguez. wrote: I don't like the idea of .NET being a patented technology This could break the Mono project (which deserves my sympathy) into pieces , even they insist that Microsoft can't do it , I'm not so sure of this ... Stephane Rodriguez. wrote: break the API at any moment and force us to adapt (that's what they are doing for instance with the broken VS.NET 2003 project file formats). It's a shame , what's rest of the retro-compatibility philosophy and protecting the clients investment ??? Cheers,Joao Vaz And if your dream is to care for your family, to put food on the table, to provide them with an education and a good home, then maybe suffering through an endless, pointless, boring job will seem to have purpose. And you will realize how even a rock can change the world, simply by remaining obstinately stationary.-Shog9 Remember just because a good thing comes to an end, doesn't mean that the next one can't be better.-Chris Meech
Joao Vaz wrote: Well from a purist view, it isn't only a service pack ,new enhancements of the net framework 1.1 , better mc++ support (read RAD mc++) , merged the cf net framework support and the best of all IMHO a very standard compliant c++ compiler and some other changes/integration ... What counts is what the product enables to do. I can't see here anything else than minor enhancements. Besides that, MS has released what they haven't been able to release with VS.NET 2002 just because they decided to release the product in Feb 2002. If you have VS.NET 2002, then VS.NET 2003 is a service pack. If you don't have VS.NET 2002 yet, then VS.NET 2003 is a full fledged product. But then you pay the price for it, not 29$. Joao Vaz wrote: best of all IMHO a very standard compliant c++ compiler Yes and no. No, because VC++7.x has more proprietary tags than ever. (for instance ATL attributes within cpp classes). In my former company, our code was cross-compiled and, as such, porting our code VC++7.x is not an option at all. But then, MS is retiring their older products. Joao Vaz wrote: what's rest of the retro-compatibility philosophy and protecting the clients investment ??? The company I work for has most of their customers using NT OSes. I don't know what .NET apps could do for them, especially when you know that, for instance, ASP.NET doesn't work on NT OSes. That brings us to the real point : Microsoft is breeding software technologies to make customers buy hardware, and then software again, etc. That's the main point about Microsoft's market dominance and how they are doing business. That's why I find so much ironical your point about WTL. I wonder why Microsoft should give a flying fuck about WTL.