Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Mono Developers Go Bye-Bye From Attachmate

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Originally posted by Detructor View Post
    uhm...name at least one language that is that easy to code, that powerful and has such a great performance.

    not to meantion Visual Studio, I've yet to see an IDE powerful and nice as that one.

    don't get me wrong: I don't like Microsoft and in most cases their software is just plain bullshit. But when it comes to Visual Studio and C#, they did something wonderful. And thanks to mono, we can enjoy that, too.

    yes, I am a C# programer. Yes I do want to learn C++ sometime, because I want to go "deeper" but as long as there is no IDE for linux that is capable of auto-completion and has a proper design, it's just pain in the ass. And yes I'm wondering how people could write such great things like the linux kernel and gnome withhout an IDE.
    Qt/C++, Qt Creator as IDE.
    This comes from someone who is coding C#/.NET all days at work in Visual Studio, and C++/Qt at home on my sparetime.

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by susikala View Post
      You make quite a few nice assumptions here. Although populism always sounds well, it rarely is true.

      1. Who says those people have "families and children to feed"? We're not in the 19th century. Most geeks I know are single and will die single.
      Look up their profiles.

      2. It's not like those people are going to starve now. Germany is a social country. The worst they'll get to is still more than your average student working half time here earns. It may be poverty or something, by only by really high western standards, meaning they can't afford a car or something. They're not going to starve.
      These programmers worked in the US, not Germany. How did you get that?

      3. Your reply sounds like any way to earn money is correct. Sort of like "the end justifies the means". Like, if those guys were participating in some illegal business, it would still be wrong for other people to feel relieved when they got caught.
      Scarecrow argument. They were not participating in illegal business.

      Free software. They wrote Free software. You may not have liked their product but you are still an asshole if you celebrate the loss of their jobs.

      Comments such as these make me ashamed to be part of this community. They are a perversion of everything free software stands for.

      Comment


      • #48
        Originally posted by Znurre View Post
        Qt/C++, Qt Creator as IDE.
        This comes from someone who is coding C#/.NET all days at work in Visual Studio, and C++/Qt at home on my sparetime.
        Qt Creator is probably the best free C++ IDE.

        But since the original poster already knows C#, I'd suggest learning a programming language outside the C family: Python, Ruby, Ocaml/F# are some great choices.

        Comment


        • #49
          This is the best outcome for Mono ever.

          Comment


          • #50
            Originally posted by lopho View Post
            code::blocks
            eclipse

            there. two nice ide.
            yeh, I tried code::blocks two times, but somehow the auto-completion doesn't work...I'll try to compile it tomorrow.

            eclipse...that's just a big accident IMHO.

            Qt -> KDE, that's not really "multi-platform".

            I tried Python and I really like it (no brackets yay ) but somehow I can't get really into it.

            A colleague of mine had to program using Ruby some time ago...I can still hear his screams of pain in my ears .

            F#, yeh I wanted to try that for some time. but are ocaml and F# really that compatible?

            Qt/C++, Qt Creator as IDE.
            This comes from someone who is coding C#/.NET all days at work in Visual Studio, and C++/Qt at home on my sparetime.
            hmm...seems I really should try it :/

            Comment


            • #51
              Originally posted by FunkyRider View Post
              I won't be empathizing you when you get your ass sued to a pile of mishmash by Microsoft when you created your entire business based on Mono. Mono is evil, just get over it. No matter how hard you try, it is still based on a corporation that tries to kill you all the time.

              Lay off all Mono devs, lol good! I like it! Now you mono devs can kiss your ass good bye for 'doing the wrong thing'.
              .NET is an ECMA standard, stop letting your irrational paranoia control your thoughts. Only mono stuff relating to windows compatibility is in any remote danger of patent issues, and those parts aren't needed for developing linux applications.

              Comment


              • #52
                Originally posted by V!NCENT View Post
                Who needs Mono to create apps anyway? Are they lazy to learn other languages or simply incompetent to use alternatives?

                If you can't code in Java then you can't code. If you are lazy then I don't want to run your software as I hate fat software. And who doesn't?
                Troll much?

                Comment


                • #53
                  Originally posted by Detructor View Post
                  Qt -> KDE, that's not really "multi-platform".
                  What on Earth are you talking about?

                  Qt is cross-platform, and runs on everything.
                  QtCreator is cross platform, and should run wherever Qt runs.
                  You can use Qt Creator without using KDE classes.
                  You can also use Qt Creator without using Qt classes.

                  You're complaining about Qt not being multi-platform and you use Visual Studio

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Originally posted by bwat47 View Post
                    Only mono stuff relating to windows compatibility is in any remote danger of patent issues, and those parts aren't needed for developing linux applications.
                    C# is not needed for developing linux applications either.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Originally posted by Detructor View Post
                      F#, yeh I wanted to try that for some time. but are ocaml and F# really that compatible?
                      F# is a cleaner, more modern version of Ocaml. It's backwards compatible to a point.

                      These are multiparadigm languages so you can program in the style that most suits you. Gradually you'll start finding the functional style more natural (simpler, safer) to use and soon after you'll never see programming the same way again.

                      C++ is a good language to have in your toolkit, but a functional language will make you a better programmer than C++ ever will. Besides, the more diverse your skills are, the higher the chances of getting the job when you reach for a non-grunt level position.

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Originally posted by pingufunkybeat View Post
                        C# is not needed for developing linux applications either.
                        Neither is C++, Python, Java, Ruby, Perl, PHP or Haskel. Yet there you are.

                        Diversity is the destiny of Free software.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Originally posted by bwat47 View Post
                          .NET is an ECMA standard, stop letting your irrational paranoia control your thoughts. Only mono stuff relating to windows compatibility is in any remote danger of patent issues, and those parts aren't needed for developing linux applications.
                          The following namespaces are open:

                          System
                          System.Collections
                          System.Diagnostics
                          System.Globalization
                          System.IO
                          System.Net
                          System.Reflection
                          System.Runtime
                          System.Security
                          System.Text
                          System.Threading
                          System.Xml

                          The following namespaces are proprietary:

                          System.CodeDom
                          System.ComponentModel
                          System.Configuration
                          System.Data
                          System.Deployment
                          System.DirectoryServices
                          System.Drawing
                          Ssytem.EnterpriseServices
                          System.Linq
                          System.Linq.Expressions
                          System.Management
                          System.Media
                          System.Messaging
                          System.Web
                          System.Windows.Forms

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Which doesn't mean you cannot re-implement them and use them in a Free application. Ffmpeg is under pretty much the same situation (arguably worse, since there's no patent promise) but that doesn't stop Free software from relying on it.

                            If you really believe that, then are you willing to delete anything related to mp3, mpeg1/2/3, h264, flash and skype from your computer? Didn't think so.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              For extra commentary, I would like to see a legal implementation of the open namespaces. Any attempt by Microsoft to enforce patents on them would fail miserably because of their legally-binding community promise. This open framework would also pose no threat to them because Windows apps couldn't be ported. The aim of the project wouldn't be to have compatibility with .NET, it would be to use the CLR as the foundation of a viable platform. Focusing only on the open namespaces would greatly reduce the amount of work and maintenance required. Third party projects could fill in the gaps with data access and so on.

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Originally posted by wswartzendruber View Post
                                The following namespaces are proprietary:
                                ...
                                System.Linq
                                System.Linq.Expressions
                                Just an FYI, but at least those 2 assemblies/namespaces are covered by patent grants:

                                http://dlr.codeplex.com

                                Check out the license file (Apache 2.0 for those too lazy to investigate for themselves).

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X