Originally posted by locovaca
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Mono Developers Go Bye-Bye From Attachmate
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by RealNC View PostComplex layouts in 5 lines of code.
There's plenty that can be done in C# with one or two lines of code that require many more lines (or is impossible) in other languages. Every language has that.
Comment
-
Originally posted by locovaca View PostExamples? All complex layouts can be broken down to simpler layouts.
There's plenty that can be done in C# with one or two lines of code that require many more lines (or is impossible) in other languages. Every language has that.
Show me one .Net layout class that goes to such lengths in looking 100% platform native on KDE, Gnome, Windows, Mac OS X. Even differences in such details as spacing between items, text alignment, etc, are respected.
Comment
-
Originally posted by locovaca View PostExamples? All complex layouts can be broken down to simpler layouts.
There's plenty that can be done in C# with one or two lines of code that require many more lines (or is impossible) in other languages. Every language has that.
This is an example from one of my current projects.
A layout such as this, while pretty simple, is hard to do in .NET Forms.
EDIT: And yes, all this is you see here is laid out by the layouts.
Nothing is manually positioned.
Comment
-
Originally posted by RealNC View PostYeah, but for GUIs, Qt is really top-notch. You wanted an example, so here is one:
Show me one .Net layout class that goes to such lengths in looking 100% platform native on KDE, Gnome, Windows, Mac OS X. Even differences in such details as spacing between items, text alignment, etc, are respected.
I never said QT is bad. I wouldn't choose it if I were targeting Windows only, but if I were coding in C++ and looking to do something cross platform it would be a good solution. On the other hand, if someone were to create a C#/Mono Wrapper for QT like they have with GTK you could have something like that available to the Mono community. That would really help Mono. While GTK# is... "nice", it's still GTK at its core.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Znurre View Posthttp://ompldr.org/vOGtlOA/qtdesigner.png
This is an example from one of my current projects.
A layout such as this, while pretty simple, is hard to do in .NET Forms.
EDIT: And yes, all this is you see here is laid out by the layouts.
Nothing is manually positioned.
Comment
-
Originally posted by locovaca View PostI see a table layout with 4 group boxes and a table layout in each group box, in .Net terms. That's not overly complex.
Yet, although it is easy to describe in ".NET terms", doing the actual work is way more time consuming and the end result will usually not be as pixel perfect, since you end up doing a lot of manual adjustments.
Comment
-
Originally posted by locovaca View PostExamples? All complex layouts can be broken down to simpler layouts.
There's plenty that can be done in C# with one or two lines of code that require many more lines (or is impossible) in other languages. Every language has that.
Comment
-
Originally posted by dufoli View Postfed up of anti-mono trolls....
Have you ever try QT/GTK/Winforms.
I use GTK because I have too to be integrated in gnome but GTK is far more complicated and less designed than Winforms.
I play a lot with mono/banshee/monotorrent/... and mono/.Net Framework is well designed.
So then when they come to Linux they go all eww that's all disgusting cannot adept, must use MS tech. It's like the guy eating McDonald's shit throughout the year and then when he's taken to a proper restaurant he doesn't appreciate the food because he's so used to his McDonald's crap. So next time he's invited to a proper restaurant he brings his own burgers with him.
I'm sorry but you don't do that. Go back to McDonald's or Microsoft if you're in love with burgers or MS tech, we don't need you and we don't want you here. We've gotta have standards.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Znurre View PostNo, I said this was relatively simple.
Yet, although it is easy to describe in ".NET terms", doing the actual work is way more time consuming and the end result will usually not be as pixel perfect, since you end up doing a lot of manual adjustments.
I could have the basic layout done in 5 minutes.
Comment
Comment