Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Mono Developers Go Bye-Bye From Attachmate

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

  • #71
    Continuing in this slightly off-topic vein it seems as if Microsoft are focusing more on C++ for upcoming Visual Studio release(s), doesn't mean that it will be at the cost of C#/.NET development though of course. Still it underlines that C++ is as alive and healthy as ever.

    http://www.zdnet.com/blog/microsoft/...-business/9359

    Comment


    • #72
      Originally posted by Znurre View Post
      There is a lot more, and the only things you cannot really find any counterpart for in Qt is LINQ and WPF.
      Qt Quick and QML are Qt's answer to WPF. LINQ and extension methods are really useful, though.

      Comment


      • #73
        Originally posted by smitty3268 View Post
        Qt Quick and QML are Qt's answer to WPF. LINQ and extension methods are really useful, though.
        I haven't used enough QML/Qt Quick (not at all, to be honest).
        Does it have as strong Model/View capabilities as WPF?
        If so, yet another reason not to use C#/.NET :P

        Comment


        • #74
          Originally posted by BlackStar View Post
          To the idiots who celebrate when developers lose their jobs: a big, warm fuck you. You have just scraped the bottom of the barrel, wishing your fellow humans pain and misery. Those people have families and children to feed, yet you laugh at their loss - fuck you.
          They can always make c# apps for windows. If they chosen to work on Linux they could learn Qt. I won't cry, because some devs who were making anti-Linux software were fired.

          Comment


          • #75
            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.
            C++/Qt and wonderfull Qtcreator and Kdevelop. Oh and performance is much better.

            Comment


            • #76
              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.
              And how this makes a difference? There are parts in mono which aren't SAFE and which are packaged together with more safe stuff. Some people asked to split them, but it has never happened.

              Comment


              • #77
                Originally posted by locovaca View Post
                Troll much?
                No, he's saying the truth. Linux doesn't need mono. C++/Qt, Python, Vala etc. is enough.

                Comment


                • #78
                  Originally posted by bwat47 View Post
                  Agreed. Unfortunately these hypocrites constantly bashing mono will never realize common sense.
                  Oh, what makes 'us' the hypocrites? We're not saying we love Linux, so we code in mono. I'm saying f*ck you ms and I don't touch their c#. How this makes me a hypocrite?

                  Comment


                  • #79
                    Originally posted by V!NCENT View Post
                    Cross platform Mono. Shit... Give me a break... What is the only advantage of Mono? That's right; being supposedly easyer and thus lazyer. What is it good for? What makes it do for the end product? Java 1.6 has multithreading, OpenGL, GLSL, can run in a browser. What does Mono enable again?
                    Pass-by-reference parameters.

                    Comment


                    • #80
                      Originally posted by Znurre View Post
                      As for the syntax I am not quite sure what you are referring to, but there are at least a lot of things I miss in the C# syntax:[LIST][*]Pointers
                      C# has pointers.
                      [*]Being able to treat a pointer as an int (0 or >0) to test whether it's valid or not.
                      Code:
                      if (pointer)
                      vs if (pointer != null)[/code]? That's a tiny difference at best (and in fact our company's C++ coding guidelines request that we avoid the first for clarity).

                      [*]Separate header and source files
                      This is by far the worst problem in C and C++, i.e. the lack of a real module system. How could you possibly prefer writing the same code *twice* in order to achieve anything?

                      Besides, have you ever written cross-platform C/C++ headers? I have and the amount of platform-specific hacks necessary is ridiculous (this was a C++ OpenGL header with proper namespaces, enums etc).

                      I am just waiting for C++0x to make its debut, to improve the C++ syntax further.
                      Aren't we all? Btw it's called C++1x now.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X