J j.e.taylor@uea.ac.uk wrote:
Brett Parker wrote:
J j.e.taylor@uea.ac.uk wrote: They do?! You mean that commercial get in your face, Pile Of Wank, get in the way IDE called Visual Studio? I wasn't aware that this was Free Software? or even available/accessable to the hundreds and thousands of programmers out there? I wasn't aware that the range of languages MS supports was actually very vast, or, even, very nice. And, above all, the Windows API is evil.
Yes. Acutally I do mean that "Pile of Wank" Visual studio. Something which provides a range of languages from increadbly easiy to pickup (although in-efficient) VB through to more complex Cpp varients.
So, VB, J# and C#, then, that's about it, is it not? As for VB being incredibably easy to pick up, there's a lot of things that are when it's just drag an' drop components, writing VB by hand, on the other point, if not nice, and if you're going to do that, you really should learn C.
You can not sit and define the Windows API as "evil" AND sit and say that versitility is the spice of life. The Windows API is just different, and for some aspects, potentially better. For aspects of sound and video in Windows is actually something that I think is better supported then in the posix enviroment.
Erm, ITYWF I said variety, not versatility, but hey. The windows MFC is very evil, in my opinion, I have several APIs for linux that I don't like, GTK+ is relatively nasty, but you get round it by using one of the hundreds of wrappers that make life nicer. You have less choice as to what you can do in Windows. As for sound and video... depends on what you're wanting, and, you're also forgetting that MS have the manufacturers wrapped round their little fingers. Give it a few years, Open Source drivers will become common place. As for talking to video and soundcards, erm, you played with sound via dsp? it's simple, you feed it raw PCM, which is easy to generate. Video, well, if it's 3d, you write it in GL, coo, look, cross platform code, and, with Mesa installed, it *JUST DAMNED WORKS* in linux (works better if you have 3d support on your graphics card, of course, but hey).
Hang on, now you've switched to package management?!
No. the use of the debian package manger is something that
*boggle* want to finish this sentence sometime?
No. I didnt switch to package managment. I mean the production of an executable file for another person.
Erm - because it's *so* difficult to produce binaries that will run on other peoples linux boxes...
That's. what. building. static. binaries. is. all. about.
Or, as debian works it, you have a package that contains the binaries for your platform, with dependencies pulled down too. And it's not even as if it's difficult to create a .deb file, there's a guide on the debian site.
Im meaning that this is a potential "style" of system engineering, that it can be applied to **any** system used in computers, that you can apply it to the way that your systems are transmitted to the other computers, that you can apply it to the system you are making, so that your systems that you make are generic and workable .
Im not even saying that the use of your devopment kit has to be the one that is recommended by whoever made your OS - if you want to write in something else, sure, go ahead, there are command line options for those compilers as well you know.
But at the same time, dosnt it make sense to use the development kit that is built to interface with the operating system that you are writing for? Surely even for RAP systems, they will be even the slighest bit more effcient then having written without one.
Yes, I am asking alot. Its great being alturistic isnt it? Or wasnt that the point of the email?
*boggle* now entirely lost track of what the hell your point was, and it seemed to dwindle further after here, so, erm. Yes, J. Whatever.
Brett.