Linux/Unix Sections
-
As long as the MS bashing and attitude does not come with it, I think it would be great to have a Linux portion on CP. I wonder though, how the peace can be kept when many Linux people cannot see no further than "M$". I for one, do not care to see that garbage every time I look at a post on the site. Rocky <>< www.HintsAndTips.com - RSS Enabled www.JokesTricksAndStuff.com www.MyQuickPoll.com Me Blogs: wdevs - MSN Spaces (new)
I donno... might actually help to kill some of that "grass is greener" attitude that grows so quickly when you're writing for a platform by necessity rather than choice. See how the other half lives, etc.
"The time has come," the Walrus said, "To talk of many things..." -
I donno... might actually help to kill some of that "grass is greener" attitude that grows so quickly when you're writing for a platform by necessity rather than choice. See how the other half lives, etc.
"The time has come," the Walrus said, "To talk of many things..."I code on both with C, C++ and java, and let me tell you, the API and frameworks are shockingly similar. Socket programming, as you could see in the class I posted is very much like winsock. GDI is very much like Gnome GDI, and MFC is similar to GTKmm. Glade and Glade2 is similar to the RAD forms tool in visual studio, and the unix curses library is similar to conio.h from the win library. pthread library for POSIX threads is almost exactly like the windows C++ threading model with beginthread(&address, pvoid); and the rest of the win API, it's very similar to POSIX, but not quite. This happens alot between win and linux, similar constructs, but not exactly. Then there are also differences between the two platforms, like the compilers and tools most people use. I think if anything people would see how similar the 2 systems are as far as libraries to interface with C++. I'm not talking about stuff like COM or OLE, but rather win32.
-
As long as the MS bashing and attitude does not come with it, I think it would be great to have a Linux portion on CP. I wonder though, how the peace can be kept when many Linux people cannot see no further than "M$". I for one, do not care to see that garbage every time I look at a post on the site. Rocky <>< www.HintsAndTips.com - RSS Enabled www.JokesTricksAndStuff.com www.MyQuickPoll.com Me Blogs: wdevs - MSN Spaces (new)
Just kill the variations of m$ and micro$oft like you do any other vulgar word. Also as long as there isn't any linux bashing either that would be great. -Steven Hicks
CPA
CodeProjectAddict
Actual Linux Penguins were harmed in the creation of this message.
More tutorials: Ltpb.8m.com: Tutorials |404Browser.com (Download Link)
-
As long as the MS bashing and attitude does not come with it, I think it would be great to have a Linux portion on CP. I wonder though, how the peace can be kept when many Linux people cannot see no further than "M$". I for one, do not care to see that garbage every time I look at a post on the site. Rocky <>< www.HintsAndTips.com - RSS Enabled www.JokesTricksAndStuff.com www.MyQuickPoll.com Me Blogs: wdevs - MSN Spaces (new)
-
any news on this? Anybody want to help me work on my winGDI abstraction over Xlib? I'm starting my class framework
When I do Linux programming it will only be C#/Mono :) After doing C/C++ for 15 years, I personally am no longer interested in it or APIs. Give me a nice oject oriented framework with exception handling as in .NET, and I am happy ;) Rocky <>< www.HintsAndTips.com - RSS Enabled www.JokesTricksAndStuff.com www.MyQuickPoll.com Me Blogs: wdevs - MSN Spaces (new)
-
When I do Linux programming it will only be C#/Mono :) After doing C/C++ for 15 years, I personally am no longer interested in it or APIs. Give me a nice oject oriented framework with exception handling as in .NET, and I am happy ;) Rocky <>< www.HintsAndTips.com - RSS Enabled www.JokesTricksAndStuff.com www.MyQuickPoll.com Me Blogs: wdevs - MSN Spaces (new)
http://channel9.msdn.com/ShowPost.aspx?PostID=30488 P.S. -- There WILL be native versions of the Longhorn API. Looks like you won't have to use C# to use the new longhorn API afterall. Maybe my years of complaining about it on GDN payed off. Maybe I'm just lucky. At any rate, Mono on linux is about as useful as perl or bash right now, and even there. I want to stick this in an about 500KB .so file like MFC is on win so people can redistribute the runtime with their RPM's or windows install sheild, just like an MFC merge module. .NET and mono on linux is a huge runtime, that must be installed before the actual program is installed. That is the huge difference there. It is the same difference between requiring that mfc42.dll be installed and that the entire .NET framework be installed to run your program. I think that my library will be of some use to people when it has enough api to be usable. My goal right now is to run the examples from the petzold book over my X abstraction layer.
-
http://channel9.msdn.com/ShowPost.aspx?PostID=30488 P.S. -- There WILL be native versions of the Longhorn API. Looks like you won't have to use C# to use the new longhorn API afterall. Maybe my years of complaining about it on GDN payed off. Maybe I'm just lucky. At any rate, Mono on linux is about as useful as perl or bash right now, and even there. I want to stick this in an about 500KB .so file like MFC is on win so people can redistribute the runtime with their RPM's or windows install sheild, just like an MFC merge module. .NET and mono on linux is a huge runtime, that must be installed before the actual program is installed. That is the huge difference there. It is the same difference between requiring that mfc42.dll be installed and that the entire .NET framework be installed to run your program. I think that my library will be of some use to people when it has enough api to be usable. My goal right now is to run the examples from the petzold book over my X abstraction layer.
Beer26 wrote: .NET and mono on linux is a huge runtime, that must be installed before the actual program is installed. That is the huge difference there. FWIW, some one is writing a linker for Mono. So you can bundle up your app and distribute a single executable, with no need to install the runtime. Nice, eh? :) BTW, this is a forum for suggestions - it would be polite to continue this discussion elsewhere.
"The time has come," the Walrus said, "To talk of many things..." -
Beer26 wrote: .NET and mono on linux is a huge runtime, that must be installed before the actual program is installed. That is the huge difference there. FWIW, some one is writing a linker for Mono. So you can bundle up your app and distribute a single executable, with no need to install the runtime. Nice, eh? :) BTW, this is a forum for suggestions - it would be polite to continue this discussion elsewhere.
"The time has come," the Walrus said, "To talk of many things..."From your link is the following quote, In the example above the resulting binary is a healty 7.5 megabyte file, This is no better than bundling the jvm with your .jar. This has been done for years now. If you can't tell the difference between a thin abstraction layer as a shared object library and a 2 line src binary that is dependant on a large runtime that must be lugged around with it where ever it's run, then I'm afraid I don't want to continue this discussion, here or elsewhere as you put it. Then you have the fact that mono does all pinvokes and winforms and drawing in win32 api calls over the wine emulation layer, so if you want anything that runs on a desktop, count on at least 30 extra megs in your rpm or linux install shield. Only a windows developer that is desperate to ship on linux, even if it's done super badly would see this as a good solution. It's not.
-
Beer26 wrote: .NET and mono on linux is a huge runtime, that must be installed before the actual program is installed. That is the huge difference there. FWIW, some one is writing a linker for Mono. So you can bundle up your app and distribute a single executable, with no need to install the runtime. Nice, eh? :) BTW, this is a forum for suggestions - it would be polite to continue this discussion elsewhere.
"The time has come," the Walrus said, "To talk of many things..."You may as well ship vmware in your redistributable as well, and tell them to install a full win98 system on linux to run your app, because it's almost as bad. BTW, unlike wine widgets that mono uses, I'm going to make sure my widget set actually looks like windows imagine that. I know they were planning on dumping mono and using GTK directly, but that will not provide true UI emulation either. I'm doing this directly over x, providing the fonts, color paletes, and drawing the menus. This is no cheap hotwiring to an existing library for forms. It's going to take a long time to get right.
-
Just kill the variations of m$ and micro$oft like you do any other vulgar word. Also as long as there isn't any linux bashing either that would be great. -Steven Hicks
CPA
CodeProjectAddict
Actual Linux Penguins were harmed in the creation of this message.
More tutorials: Ltpb.8m.com: Tutorials |404Browser.com (Download Link)
Because M$ and Micro$oft are not vulgar words! Do you really think that Chairman Gates and Company deserve respect for the beta quality software they sell to you? That's right you paid money for it and as such are entitled to reasonable expectations that it actually works out of the box. If "trustworthy computing" is more than a marketing hype why do some Micro$$$$$$oft products still have buffer overruns? Think back to programming 101. Weren't you taught to test so that you do not do something foolish like try to put 10 Kg of s**t into a 5 Kg buffer? When Micro$$$$$oft releases professional quality software then I will show them respect. Until then I will not turn away clients but I will not be politically correct when I make references to them.