Free IDE Gambas Reaches 1.0

A few months ago, the GPL IDE Gambas reached 1.0 release candidate phase, and now reader drfreak writes "Gambas has now hit 1.0 and looks promising as GNU/Linux's answer to Visual Basic. Now, if it ran in Windows too, it would truly crush VB for database applications. Check it out at gambas.sourceforge.net." A 1.0.1 release came out on January 3rd to fix a few bugs.

Comments

Best logo

[Uukrul]

NI think that the project is good enough to try to get a new design (and a new logo).
This project with a more professional look can be a great success.
Any thesigners out there?

Re:Best logo

[keesh]

If you're going to abuse them for lack of professionalism, why not just point out that they use elements?

Re:Best logo

[Diabolical]

Hey.. that's to attract all those Windows/IE users...

Re:Best logo

[Zone-MR]

Yeah, but elements aren't supported on IE :)

Re:Best logo

[Diabolical]

Mod this down!!! This idiot doesn't know what he is talking about!!

Re:Best logo

[adeydas]

Don't blame the poor guy, he is just used to Microsoft's glossy GUI and broken code...

Re:Best logo

[yerfatma]

Poor craftsmen, tools . . . all that.

Re:Best logo

[Spetiam]

I think that the project is good enough to try to get a new design ...and they need to get away from The GIMP styled interface (or is that what you meant by design?).

Re:Best logo

[Anonymous Coward]

have you ever used IE? Im looking at the website as we speak in IE and it ain't blinking

Re:Best logo

[resourcefulidiot]

I think he meant their website needs a new design

Re:Best logo

[Eslyjah]

Finally, motivation to edit the browser:blink_allowed setting in about:config. I had been meaning to do this for some time. Thanks, Gambas!

Re:Best logo

[aichpvee]

Maybe they're modeling it after the early versions of VB and plan to switch to MDI for version 4...

Re:Best logo

[JoshRoss]

That about:config is reall cool. Thanks for the post.

Re:Best logo

[Anonymous Coward]

A poor craftsman is also one who doesn't recognize that his tools are poor, and choose better ones when they are available(or create better ones when they aren't for that matter).

Re:Best logo

[oliverthered]

nope, he's french. The french have always had some 'interesting' design, I kinda like the mascot.

Personally I think this whole square box copy XP/Windows that KDE are doing looks bad.

So now it's ok to like VB?

[Anonymous Coward]

Ok, so when you have all the features you laughed and belittled in Visual Basic on linux, there ok all of a sudden?

Re:So now it's ok to like VB?

[RenatoRam]

I guess VB is belittled not because of features, but because of the horrid quality of common vb apps.

And for the poor quality of the language.

And 'cause it tends to change and be incompatible from version to version ...and so on...

Will gambas apps be better than vb apps? If they are written by the same monkeys I don't think so.

The release of gambas IS great news, however, simply 'cause now we can reply to the endless "there is no simple RAD solution under linux" rants with "then use gambas, you fool!"

Re:So now it's ok to like VB?

[noselasd]

Well, with VB you can atleast release your program under whatever license you want without paying fees to a Norwegian company :-)

Re:So now it's ok to like VB?

[onion2k]

VB was only ever meant to be a rapid prototyping tool. You knock up a quick'n'dirty VB version as a proof of concept, then you write the proper version in a more robust language. Unfortunately the management/lazy coders almost always step in with "but we have a working version there.. lets release that".

If people used VB in the way it was meant to be used noone would have any complaints about it. (well, fewer complaints at least..)

Re:So now it's ok to like VB?

[Lussarn]

with VB You have to pay to an american company to release under ANY licence.

Re:So now it's ok to like VB?

[alba7]

All-encompassing integrated development environments are an invention of the 1970ies, nothing new. Smalltalk and Emacs come to mind. So you got to distinguish a few aspects.

• IDE vs. plain shell, also known as Emacs vs. vi.
• Bunch of separate source files vs. single opaque repository
• Implementing the language-specific IDE in the language itself (elegant, proof of concept) vs. providing the fastest implementation (easily detoriates into a hack)

In some kind this is all a matter of taste. But then Smalltalk, Emacs, Oberon and Eclipse are written in their respective languages. Visual Basic is too weak a language to accomplish the same feat. And instead of fixing the language Microsoft used the IDE to compensate, adding hack after hack.

Re:So now it's ok to like VB?

[Anonymous Coward]

I want to clear up any misunderstanding immediately. Gambas does not try to be compatible with Visual Basic, and will never be. I'm convinced that its syntax and internals are far better than the one's of its proprietary cousin ;-) ... I dislike the very bad level of common Visual Basic programmers, often due to bad pratices imposed by the bugs and strangeness of this language. So I will try to make Gambas as coherent, logical and reliable as possible, and I hope that Gambas programmers will make effort in return ! ;-)

Does one really need to say more?

Re:So now it's ok to like VB?

[Spacejock]

I can never understand this attitude towards VB.

The reliability of apps written in VB has nothing to do with the language, and everything to do with the programmer. If you slap some code together, run it to make sure there are no syntax errors and then release it as version 1.0 how is that a fault with Visual Basic?

Without wanting to blow my own trumpet, I get many emails thanking me for my useful, stable programs, every one of which is written in VB. They're not simple apps, either - my major project is over 6 megs of source code.

VB allows me to code efficiently, quickly and with a minimum of errors, and until I come across something which allows me to code even quicker, even more efficiently and with even less errors I'm sticking with it.

I'm not claiming to be some guru level programmer, I'm just pointing out that it's a bit hard blaming VB for bad software just because beginners can dash in and code the World's Best Program in their lunch break.

Anyway, look on the positive side: If all those beginners started out with C# you'd have thousands of crappy, bug-ridden programs written in that language, and the 'VB generates crap' argument would go up in smoke.

Re:So now it's ok to like VB?

[PerlDudeXL]

I messed around with Gambas and I have some VB experience, but I never enjoyed programming with
VB. Gambas may have some nice concepts and I could write simple apps with it, but its BASIC syntax scares me.

I wrote my first programs with BASIC, but with growing age and more exprience with other
languages I couldn't see any advantage in using BASIC-like languages. I think that I prefer languages with a C-like syntax.

Re:So now it's ok to like VB?

[onion2k]

You missed the point in my post. Coders write quick'n'dirty VB apps with the intention of redoing them in (for example) C++ later. The management then come in and want to release the quick'n'dirty version. I'm not suggesting you can't write robust VB code, I'm saying lots of people don't.

Besides which, Microsoft realised people use VB as a proper language instead of a RAD tool now, and they smartened it up a lot a few versions ago. Go back to the mid 90s and VB was NOT a stable dev platform.

Re:So now it's ok to like VB?

[wertarbyte]

The reliability of apps written in VB has nothing to do with the language, and everything to do with the programmer. If you slap some code together, run it to make sure there are no syntax errors and then release it as version 1.0 how is that a fault with Visual Basic?

There is one simple solution to all problems of your VB app: On error resume next; YEEHA!

Re:So now it's ok to like VB?

[juhaz]

No, it's not ok.

I wonder how tightly this is tied to the Basic implementation, and if it would be possible to switch the underlying language to something decent - say, python - without basically rewriting the whole mess?

Re:So now it's ok to like VB?

[Orgg]

There is one simple solution to all problems of your VB app: On error resume next; YEEHA!

Try structured exception handling (at least in VB.Net)

Re:So now it's ok to like VB?

[pdc]

Except that VB.NET isn't really the same language as VB; it's more like C# with the keywords changed to resemble VB6.

Some of the VB Developer Studio features that make VB 'user-friendly' are not present in Visual Studio.NET or in the VB.NET language. (On Error being just one of them.)

VB.NET is not all that bad a programming language, especially if your keyboard lacks Shift, '{' and '}' keys. But I don't think we can use VB.NET features to justify the VB6 language... :-)

Re:So now it's ok to like VB?

[Anonymous Coward]

Alright, slow down, here comes some hard to grok stuff:

Everything cool? Ok, let's go on...

Do you think that it's possible that the Linux community consists of DIFFERENT personalities with DIFFERENT opinions? Just maybe? And that the people who hate VB still hate VB and others who didn't think VB sucks to start with started this project?

I know, I know, this was too hard for you, but maybe try to sleep a few nights over it, maybe one day you will be able to understand such difficult concepts...

Re:So now it's ok to like VB?

[Anonymous Coward]

That was my first thought as well. I actually quite like the look of the IDE, but Basic? I've found something to like in almost every language I've tried, with the single exception of Visual Basic. More power to anyone who does like it, but I still find it amazing that anyone not forced into it would actually choose something VB-like when something, anything, is available.

Re:So now it's ok to like VB?

[danheskett]

That's not true. You have to license the software if you wan't the IDE. You can develop very happily from the command line and compile and distribute or sell till your heart is complete via the .NET SDK. You get free compilers and headers and access to 100% of the features of the .NET runtime.

Plus there are *never* any runtime or distribution royalities.

Ohh, one more thing. If you are a VB programmer or a C# programmer, you should investigate Mono with GTK#.

Re:So now it's ok to like VB?

[iBod]

VB is a Rapid Application *development* tool, not a Rapid Application *prototyping* tool.

Of course, many can and do create prototype and throw-away applications using VB, but it is good tool for developing many serious Windows applications.

If the design is right and the code is clean and maintainable, what exactly would be the advantage in recoding it in C++ (assuming execution speed is not an issue and even then, just critical parts can be written in C++ and put in a DLL)?

I have developed app in VB and C++ for years and decide which tool is the best to use at the outset. I have never found it necessary to start out using VB then recode everything in C++.

So, if I were a development manager, why would I pay for the project to be done over again to achieve the same end result?

Re:So now it's ok to like VB?

[Anonymous Coward]

Coders write quick'n'dirty VB apps with the intention of redoing them in (for example) C++ later

No, they don't.

Why would anyone do that? "Let's write it all in one language. Now let's throw that all away and re-write it in another language just to say it's written in C++".

If I plan to do a project in C++ (managed C++) I do it from the start, it's no worse than starting a new project in VB/C#.

"Now that we've got a bunch of bugs in the VB version, let's port it all to C++ and introduce even more bugs".

I've seen UI written in VB, hooking into C++ engine work, but that's a completely different animal.

Re:So now it's ok to like VB?

[garethwi]

Don't worry, if this was the Apple section, the same comments would be being made about RealBasic.

Re:So now it's ok to like VB?

[Val314]

>Coders write quick'n'dirty VB apps with the intention of redoing them in (for example) C++ later.

Back in the VB5/6 days i never heard anyone who did VB stuff that this is only meant as prototype. it was allways meant to be released as VB App. (with some DLLs written in VC++)

Re:So now it's ok to like VB?

[FireFury03]

I have always seen VB as a Bad Thing (and I see this in the same light).

IMHO BASIC is not and never has been a suitable language for writing real world applications. Gluing all the extra functionality needed onto a language such as BASIC has always seemed like a really bad idea to me and IMHO a lot of the VB syntax is very inconsistent because of this.

Additionally, I think that VB has probably single handedly cause a lot of buggy software to be introduced:

- Any muppet can create something in VB that _looks_ good
- Said muppets are not trained in how to program so the back end logic is probably screwed and bugridden to hell.
- Managers don't use the software they buy for their underlings so they buy based on the fact that it looks good rather than how well it works.
- The underlings who actually use the software now have to put up with the bugs.
- Managers perceive that they are getting a "good deal" by getting the pretty software from cheap untrained coders.
- People who actually can program lose their jobs in favor of the cheaper untrained people (who are producing software that looks as good but is full of bugs).
- planes and satellites fall out of the sky
- nuclear reactors melt down
- world ends :-/

Writing languages which make things easier for people who _can_ code is a Good Thing, but care must be taken to prevent people who can't code from producing bug ridden applications that they can sell to the managers. Like it or not, no matter how much pointy-and-clickyness you add to a programming language, you need some brain work at the back end to write the logic that ties it all together - people who don't have the mental discipline can't do a good job of this.

Re:So now it's ok to like VB?

[danheskett]

IMHO BASIC is not and never has been a suitable language for writing real world applications.
You know, that's a funny position. I've worked with dozens of small to medium sized companies that have sold very excellent industry leading platforms upon the VB5/6 platform.

but care must be taken to prevent people who can't code from producing bug ridden applications that they can sell to the managers.
Right. There is a programming elite, and that elite should be trained to keep the unwashed masses from touching a compiler.

What ever happened to freedom? Open Source is about freedom - the freedom to have a compiler, to tinker, and to create value.

In the marketplace and the wider world, crappy programs of any stripe fail. A crappy "muppet" application could easily be foisted on an unsuspecting manager, but that manager will be brought to account by his customers, and his customers customers, and ultimately, by the market.

Re:So now it's ok to like VB?

[Anonymous Coward]

The idea of using the language to implement the language is cute but really has little to do with a language's usefulness.

Re:So now it's ok to like VB?

[the unbeliever]

The vast majority of programmers I know say that the Visual Studio line has the best IDE interface they've ever seen, and write all their code in it, regardless of the target platform.

Re:So now it's ok to like VB?

[FireFury03]

Right. There is a programming elite, and that elite should be trained to keep the unwashed masses from touching a compiler.

Ok, badly worded - I didn't mean "prevent", I just meant to not make it too easy. The problem is that 9 times out of 10 the people buying the software aren't the people who are going to use it. So the buyers will pay for the cheaper software if it *looks* good, even if it's a bugridden pile of crap. This is bad for everyone in the long run.

What ever happened to freedom? Open Source is about freedom - the freedom to have a compiler, to tinker, and to create value.

That works fine if the freedom also applies to the people who are actually using the software. However, in business that doesn't happen - the manager will buy something and you will be told to use it. This has been seen many many times (especially in government organisations, probably because they are forced to be more open about cockups). Many times have systems been implemented where it is clear that the people who will actually be using them have never been consulted. (Often results in them finding the system completely unusable).

In the marketplace and the wider world, crappy programs of any stripe fail.

There is plenty of proof that this is completely untrue. Even in a sector where the _users_ get the choice, we see crappy software like Internet Explorer having a massive market share over better software such as FireFox.

Of course the same is true in other markets, not just software. Look for example at the people who still insist on contracting the likes of EDS even after they've made well publicised and massive cockups.

Re:So now it's ok to like VB?

[Anonymous Coward]

So by your logic, anyone who uses VB can't code.

It has been my privilege to know many highly talented and experienced developers who routinely used VB5/6 (prior to .NET) to implement very sophisticated UIs in multi-tier apps.

These guys could program in anything and typically used C++ for the middle and backend tiers but almost always used 32-bit VB where a Windows UI layer was required.

I didn't hear then bitch and moan too much about 'inconsistent syntax'. They acccepted the limits of the language as a tradeoff for its usefullness in a particular application.

I'd love to see how they would react to being told they wree 'muppets' and couldn't code by some opinionated jerk who only graduated four years ago (fucking comp sci, no less!) and has only ever had one job at a no-name company.

Get over yourself buddy.

Re:So now it's ok to like VB?

[danheskett]

I just meant to not make it too easy
The problem is that "easy" for a good programmer is also "easy" for a bad programmer.

The problem is that 9 times out of 10 the people buying the software aren't the people who are going to use it.
That is just an absurd number. Really, quite literally made up out of whole cloth. Look at it like this: in organizations with IT departments, you have a fighting chance that software purchases will go through procurement process that includes for decently large sales an onsite demo, customer references, and high level meetings with an account executive. In cases where an organization is small and doesn't have an IT department the purchases are directed or phycially made by the intended user or an immediate supervisor. Either way, the user has an advocate in the process. The only times the user has no advocate is when you have a crony in the IT department, which is a problem of course. Regardless, the companies peddling crappy VB programs will fail. Companies selling high-quality VB programs will succeed, and often at rates higher than companies selling high quality C/C++ applications. The cost to develop VB programs is *significantly* lower than comparable platforms of the day.

Even in a sector where the _users_ get the choice, we see crappy software like Internet Explorer having a massive market share over better software such as FireFox.
Such a bad example. For so many reasons! First, IE's market share is tanking at perhaps an all time high. Firefox is gaining users at a very rapid pace. That's fact #1. On top of that you have the fact that most people do not associate IE with being crappy. Most people do not associate IE with anything other being "The Internet". Additionally, much of IE's market share is related directly to the fact that a modified version is used by AOL for their 20M+ (or whatever it is today) users. Finally, IE is - despite its security problems - a decent product. It does a good enough of job to get the job done for a majority of people in a majority of circumstances. It's not perfect, and it's never going to be perfect. But it does work, and work as intended for the majority of its users. Therefore it is not by definition crappy software. It clearly has some "crappy programming" as part of the equation. And that is exactly why FireFox is gaining market share while IE loses it.

Bad software fails. Your refernece about EDS is also absurd. EDS has had well publicized failings. EDS has also had a huge string of successes throughout its career. But again, you've missed the big picture. EDS's mistakes have cost them, and cost them dearly. They are a company at serious risk of failure. Which is exactly what they should be.

Re:So now it's ok to like VB?

[uradu]

VB.NET, not VB6. This here looks more like a VB6 wannabe.

Re:So now it's ok to like VB?

[FireFury03]

most people do not associate IE with being crappy.

That could well be down to not realising that there is anything better... which again reenforces my point that crappy software doesn't always fail in favor of good software. If someone is prevented from seeing the good software (e.g. by whatever buying practices their company uses) then they will assume that the bad softwaer is all that exists and will have to put up with it.

Additionally, much of IE's market share is related directly to the fact that a modified version is used by AOL for their 20M+ (or whatever it is today) users.

Unlikely - I know plenty of people who do/did use IE and I know noone who uses or has ever used AOL - the two are reasonably unrelated.

Finally, IE is - despite its security problems - a decent product.

It could be argued it is a "decent product" from a monopolistic point of view (i.e. ignoring all standards because people will have to comply with the monopoly anyway). From a technical point of view I have seen very little software which behaves worse than IE.

Re:So now it's ok to like VB?

[LordBodak]

Plus, as you said, it's only VB-like. Is it really worth learning a new language just to use this IDE?

I'm not sure this is worthwhile at all. It's nice to see a RAD platform for Linux, but learning a new language (and being based on BASIC, probably not a terribly useful new language) just to use it seems like a waste.

Re:So now it's ok to like VB?

[icypyr0]

Why would anyone do that? "Let's write it all in one language. Now let's throw that all away and re-write it in another language just to say it's written in C++". Because they don't want to complete a full blown design phase. If I want to write a quick app that is reasonably complex, then I have two options: 1. Jump right into the programming with VB 2. Spend a long time designing every facet of the program before hand I've found that by creating a prototype in VB I can better plan out the final app than if I were just to plan out a design, and run into unforseen problems before I do the real implementation. In the end, I actually save time this way.

Re:So now it's ok to like VB?

[danheskett]

IE is failing. That is fact. It is losing market share very, very rapidly. Going from nearly 100% market share to around 90% in six months, and now into the 80%'s after another 6 months is a big thing. Obviously a 100 million users wont switch over night, but millions already have. The technical clueful people already have, and now, even regular users are switching. Of course some people are ignorant, but Mozilla/Netscape/FireFox has reached a self-sustaining point - users know of it and switch, tell a friend, etc.

Unlikely - I know plenty of people who do/did use IE and I know noone who uses or has ever used AOL - the two are reasonably unrelated.
That means nothing. IE has approximately 100 million users in the US. AOL has about 20 million subscribers in the US, and more than that in users. Do the math. It is a substainal share of IE's user base.

It could be argued it is a "decent product" from a monopolistic point of view
It can and is substantially arguable that it is a "decent product" in that many people who use it are not compelled to switch even when they know of FireFox or another browser. Firefox will never completely kill IE. IE will always have loyal users. As far as technical merits, if you have never seen worse software than IE you have absolutely no business pretending you know anything about IE. I urge you to get a clue, and look around.

Finally, a last point. IE is not a monopoly, and even if Windows used to be, it certainly isn't now. People switch from IE all the time and go on to live happy productive lives.

Re:So now it's ok to like VB?

[FireFury03]

Finally, a last point. IE is not a monopoly

I didn't say it was - reread my comment. I said it was designed from a monopolistic point of view (i.e. "we are (almost) a monopoly so we can do WTF we want and everyone else will have to follow suit")

Re:So now it's ok to like VB?

[uradu]

You can write clear and maintainable programs in any language that can create executable applications, including VB6. I have seen lots of very well written and maintainable VB apps. The problems with VB as a "serious" language are more subtle, and different issues annoy different people. What gets me the most are these:

- no boolean expression short circuiting, leading to sometimes unnecessarily awkward IF constructs and extra temporary variables
- no INCLUDE mechanism at the individual file level, making library code reuse more awkward
- very small code library in the box, in particular there are hardly any container classes or other advanced data structures
- poor string handling, requiring MID() for character access, leading to slow code
- very poor GUI encapsulation, requiring straight win32 API calls for a lot of more advanced operations

After several years with VB6 I've developed enough support libraries and code to work around most of these issues. Still, .NET is a huge step ahead and a worthwhile productivity enhancer. If one works in a MS shop, that is. Personally, I've been a long-time Delphi fan, but you go where the money is.

Re:So now it's ok to like VB?

[raindog2]

Oh, the people who want to troll have already started coming back with "Gambas?! Ha! It doesn't even compile into .NET code!" Which, thankfully, is a lot less compelling an argument than "You don't even have a VB type thing under Linux!"

Even if Linux got a 90% market share you'd still have people explaining why it'll never have a chance against Windows, so it's best not to worry too much about that stuff.

Re:So now it's ok to like VB?

[raindog2]

In fact, a company I worked for 6 years ago got paid seven figures to write a VB prototype of a teller application for one of the five biggest banks in the world. We had the inside track to get the bid on the eventual final version in primarily C++, but then they merged with one of the other top 5 banks and it went up in smoke.

It didn't seem like an exceptional circumstance; I think it happened quite a bit back then if it doesn't now.

Re:So now it's ok to like VB?

[raindog2]

Gambas (the language) actually more resembles VB.NET than VB6, even if the IDE kinda resembles VB4.

Re:So now it's ok to like VB?

[danheskett]

Fine, that is fine. You've made nothing but a mess of this topic. Do you have anything else to spout off about, or are you all set now?

Re:So now it's ok to like VB?

[smallpaul]

VB has really terrible exception handling which DOES make it hard to write reliable code. It also has pathetic data structures which makes it difficult to write efficient code.

Re:So now it's ok to like VB?

[AbbyNormal]

Right.

What about monkey's writing Perl, C++, Java, C#, VB.NET? Poorley constructed code can be written by anyone.

Gambas has made HUGE improvements to the language. Please see Here.

Also, VB6.0 has not changed in 6 years.

Small business is what stands the most to gain. A RAD solutions has always been needed and is now almost available. That alone, will give a lot of vb project managers food for thought, when considering their next upgrade cycle. Linux server or Windows 2003?

Re:So now it's ok to like VB?

[Anonymous Coward]

As with any language, it comes down to the quality of the programming. Let's not pretend like there's not some horrid code written in non-Microsoft languages. Do you have any idea how tired I am of seeing "select * from tablename" in all kinds of open source php applications? People like to bash VB because it's a Microsoft thing and that's what supposedly makes crappy code. Nope. Spend some time studying traditional structured programming and then come back and see me. The language you program in doesn't make a damn bit of difference.

Re:So now it's ok to like VB?

[hh1000]

There is a difference between a VB clone that includes features based on merit and usefullness, rather than the real VB which is driven by a corporate agenda.

Re:So now it's ok to like VB?

[lucason]

For what it's worth YES.

It's just what Linux needs to really push into the business desktop.

Businesses need light and soft development environments where non-proIT people can create a small DB and a couple of forms and reports.

Sure, it's not going to spawn any revolutionary programming, but it will help businesses achieve their goals.

RAD is very important to businesses. And VB is pretty good in that respect. Now a smart company would say:"Any VB program that has a longer life or higher business impact that expected or defined must be reviewed and corrected by IT professionals." or something like that to curb the wildfire of bad programming.

Re:So now it's ok to like VB?

[diamondsw]

Go back to the mid 90's and Linux was NOT a stable dev platform. What's your point?

Re:So now it's ok to like VB?

[Anonymous Coward]

The OOP in VB is pretty hideous, it is a hodge podge of classes that do not have any coherence. (this was my veiw after seeing numerous manuals and course material to learn it)

It wasnt a bad book, it is a bad design of the language.

Re:So now it's ok to like VB?

[limegreen]

The reliability of apps written in VB has nothing to do with the language

Yes, it does. In VB6 one's program can quit very suddenly with "Run time error 6 - file not found". No clue is given to the name of the file not found and no recompense is offered. To avoid this every function needs "on error goto" to trap all errors just incase.

Re:So now it's ok to like VB?

[FooBarWidget]

The problem is, many VB programmers (especially the tons of 13 year olds!) don't get past the "OMG I can code lolololololololol!"-stage. For example, take a look at the horrible user interfaces of Revemu, ApezBot, etc.

Re:So now it's ok to like VB?

[Homburg]

VB allows me to code efficiently, quickly and with a minimum of errors, and until I come across something which allows me to code even quicker, even more efficiently and with even less errors I'm sticking with it.

What else have you tried? I'm doing some VB work at the moment, and I'm finding it bloody horrible - I'd much rather be using python or (ugh) PHP.

VB is full of irritations - the almost-but-not exception handling (ON ERROR GOTO); the horrible inconsistencies, like a different syntax for calling functions and subroutines (WTF?) or having to end each block with a specific keyword (WEND, NEXT, END WITH); the rubbish standard library (Collection is utterly painful compared to the C++ STL, let alone python tuples, lists and dicts).

I guess all this stuff can be got used to, but I would have thought trying any new language would be a breath of fresh air. I'd be interested to hear what you've managed to find that was less good than VB.

Re:So now it's ok to like VB?

[Anonymous Coward]

- no boolean expression short circuiting, leading to sometimes unnecessarily awkward IF constructs and extra temporary variables
- no INCLUDE mechanism at the individual file level, making library code reuse more awkward
- very small code library in the box, in particular there are hardly any container classes or other advanced data structures
- poor string handling, requiring MID() for character access, leading to slow code
- very poor GUI encapsulation, requiring straight win32 API calls for a lot of more advanced operations

Exception handling (or lack there-of) is the nail in the coffin for me! It makes it very difficult to write robust code... as in the type of robust that allows multiple developers to work a project, allows an application to be modified and still work reliably, and allows code to be reused easily.

I know all these things are _possible_ in VB[1] but in much the same way as Windows _can_ be secure, these things are not easy!
[1] I speak of VB6 -- things might be better in VB.Net, but I wouldn't know!

Re:So now it's ok to like VB?

[Anonymous Coward]

I do work for a software house.
We have had our management decide to purchase expensive tools that looked good when demoed by the vendor that suck big time in use.

Re:So now it's ok to like VB?

[rpdillon]

One of the main problems with VB is that it locks you into a platform. The mere fact that an open-source work-alike exists suggests that a decent community could grow around it and make it cross-platform. This alone would alleviate my main gripe with VB. I think it is more valuable to devote your time to learning languages that are flexible, extensible, open, cross-platform, etc. than those that are closed and single platform.

Re:So now it's ok to like VB?

[Anonymous Coward]

>>this was my veiw after seeing numerous manuals and course material to learn it

Uh, ok! So you saw 'various manuals'.

So I take it you've never actually done any OOP in VB then?

While not perfect, VB5/6 supports most of the basic elements if OO like encapsulation, polymorphism and inheritance (albeit a kludge).

Further more, the current VB (.NET) supports OO fully and in every conceivable way.

But hey! Let's not let facts get in the way of unfounded opinions spouted so authoratatively.

Re:So now it's ok to like VB?

[Marxist Hacker 42]

And Linux/Gambas might just win out on cost alone- if a support contract isn't required. Last I looked, it was $700 for a copy of Visual Studio Enterprise...

Re:So now it's ok to like VB?

[Anonymous Coward]

Oh yeah man!

It really does that all the time!

Especially if you're a total fucking ass hat that hasn't got a clue what's going on and WHY it would do it!

What sort of 'recompense' would you like exactly? Maybe VB runtime could say:

"Hey, sorry pal! Couldn't make the dynamic link to that DLL function because the DLL can't be loaded - but I'll carry on regardless and just imaging I executed that DLL call instead of raising RT6!"

Sheesh!

Re:So now it's ok to like VB?

[Anonymous Coward]

Hey! Welcome to the real world of software development!

It's your job to convince your managers that you sould have a say in what tools are purchased.

I mean, what are you, a professional or some sort of slave?

Re:So now it's ok to like VB?

[uradu]

> Exception handling (or lack there-of) is the nail in the coffin for me!

Yes, forgot that. Actually, you can write robust exception handling in VB as well, but the semantics are awkward with a lack of structured exception handlers--back to GOTO and line labels, yuck!

> I speak of VB6 -- things might be better in VB.Net, but I wouldn't know!

Yes, .NET has finally joined our times with try..catch..finally blocks. The only thing is the horrendous performance when an exception is generated. It can take over a second to enter the exception handler, so exception handling is quite useless as a branching mechanism in .NET. I was spoiled in Delphi, which can handle exceptions at blazing speeds. In .NET the advice is the good old "check each return value and don't use exceptions for general branching!" Bleh!

Re:So now it's ok to like VB?

[bcmm]

So, what you're saying is that programming languages should be hard enough that stupid people can't write in them?


--Disclaimer: although I don't actually hate VB, it annoys me too. I don't really mean the above.

Re:So now it's ok to like VB?

[dbacher]

It depends on the complexity of the application, etc.

VB is great at dealing with applications that take a supported data source, bind it to fields, and provide a user with a mechanism for editing.

The exception handling isn't great, but then none is right now on any front. You have to do substantial coding to get useful information out of a production application, regardless of the language involved, and substantial coding to avoid just dieing with an error message. In a production environment, even if you are using open source applications, the first priority is to get the app back up and running, and the second priorit is to identify why it failed. It's important not to require a core dump, etc. from a production application, because the dump could contain data you don't want exposed to the world (forcing dumps was, at one time, a common technique to obtain passwords, for example).

The begin/end block is purely a matter of taste. Borland used begin/end blocks in Turbo Basic, Quick Basic was a "we're not a clone" of Turbo Basic, and then Visual Basic inherited Quick Basic's syntax. For...Next, etc., were inherited from the original basic syntax, and it was felt to be important that BASIC code require minimal changes.

Having worked on a project that moved from GW Basic to Pro Basic to QuickBasic to Visual Basic to VB.NET, being able to reuse old code helped meet deadlines, but yes, readability wasn't always there. But not having to rewrite every line of code every time we upgraded languages really did help, and there wasn't a way to do that if they watned to change the syntax.

Visual Basic's IDE is very good at generating data bound forms -- that is forms that tie directly to either database files or files from a fixed file proprietary database. It requires very little code to make such applications, and most of that code is dedicated to error handling and graceful recovery.

In contrast, most GUI frameworks on C++ require piles of code and far moer effort. Python, likewise, tends to take actual effort to create these kinds of applications.

VB has traditionally had fairly good string processing, and VB interfaces with other Windows applications extremely well, and with much less code than C++ requires, for example.

If you are doing heavy array processing, you probably want to use C++. C++ is a lot faster at array processing tasks, although it performs less error checking.

If you are doing heavy list processing (which is different), and sometimes for set processing, you probably want to use a LISP derivitive, Python, etc.

You use the right tool for the job. .NET is a different animal -- there's not a compelling reason to use VB.NET over C#. On the .NET side of things, you use whatever language you know and allows you to efficiently implement the code. That could be IronPython or LISP, if you choose, or it could be C# or VB.NET.

Re:So now it's ok to like VB?

[witwerg]

I maintain a few VB codebases for work. Only for the past 3 years or so, but, my experience has been the same. All those points are rather annoying.

The situation with boolean expression are a hair (and subtly) worse, I would argue. There is no short circuiting because there are NO LOGICAL operators. In fact, Boolean values are simply 0(all bits 0) and -1(all bits 1), and "not"/"and"/"or" are simply bitwise operators.

This can lead to some very strange issues if you aren't aware of it. Particuarlly when working with COM objects because there is nothing that normalizes boolean values to 0 or -1. I've seen third-party objects that will return 1(i.e. 00000001') for true instead of -1. This is initially ok because internally vb uses the true := non-zero rule applies, but when you do a negation the boolean is filled with '11111110' which is true. So logically in this case:

true := not true

Restating myself, all the issues are annyoing, but having to dip into the WINAPI and The exception handling are probably the most annoying for me.

The only really solution is developing your own work arounds and using other people's(or move to .NET). I have a couple VB addins I use in addition to a couple that I've written. VB Addin Programming seems inadequently documented... A friend and I also wrote some code that kludges object expection handling on top of the numeric errs that can be thrown, controlled by a global object (with decent optional but unrefined execution profiling).

Everything, though, is still rather ugly, but workable. While augments to VB do take some of the edge off, I too have been eyeballing Delphi.

Re:So now it's ok to like VB?

[crazy.tyae]

I hope that people who would like a "heavy" IDE for Python would contribute some of their time to the Boa Constructor project. Project homepage: http://boa-constructor.sourceforge.net/ VB it isn't, but it does fit a similar niche.

Re:So now it's ok to like VB?

[Spacejock]

Ok, I've written several online shops & ordering systems in PHP - I have no problem with this language, it's great. It's my first choice for anything to do with the web, but I can't write an ebook reader in it. (My yBook program has just been named one of the Windows apps of the year in a UK computer mag - they just asked me whether they could include the software on their cover CD.)

Programming software I've developed in since 1983? ZX81 basic, Sinclair Basic, ST basic, GFA Basic, Quickbasic 4.5 (I wrote a multiuser accounts and manufacturing control system in this), Powerbasic, Visual Basic 1.0 for Dos (converted the accounts to this), Visual Basic 3.0 for Windows, VB 4.0 for Windows (Another accounts prog), VB 5.0 for Windows (yet another accounts prog), VC++ 5.0, Java (A couple of small projects with no GUI), Visual Basic 6.0 (A multiuser accounts prog which we're still using at work), VC++ 6.0 (I use this for DLLs with my VB apps when extra speed is required - e.g. calculating stock market indicators in my charting app.)

Others I have tried & discarded: Realbasic, Borland Kylix, Kdevelop with QT, Anjuta IDE, Mono with Monodevelop, Gambas, Glade(?), writing complete apps in Visual C++, and a few others I can't remember.

One of the biggest problems is the big library of routines and dlls I've built up which I can include individually in any VB project. They represent a lot of work, they're debugged to the nth degree and I know they work. I have frameworks for loading and saving program settings, connecting to the web to check for updated versions, html conversion, etc etc. (Over 100 source files, many many routines.)

Using that framework I can write a new program pretty quickly (e.g. roughly 1/2 a day for a web site building program which generates all the pages from template & include files.) That's one of the things I meant when I said I can work efficiently. I realise there are frameworks included with other programs to do many/most of these things, but there are always other issues like Windows-only, Linux-only, expensive licenses (QT Windows), etc, etc.

Back on topic - I've just tried Gambas and it's really good. It seems to be an abstract layer on top of QT, which will suit me fine - when Linux has about 97% of the desktop market ;-)

Killer Application

[Anonymous Coward]

Rant and hiss all you want. This application has the potential to move an entire generation of mid-40ish "Windows and VB4 still works for me" people - who are basically stating the truth - to Linux / OSS enviroments.

And no Blahblah about Eclipse Basic being somewhere close to RAD or QTDevelop being a sort-of half way kinda RAD tool and "whats all the excitement about, I only need Perl and a few bazillion extra libs and dependency resoltions to write nice TK-Apps that are ugly as hell" will change that.

As for me, I'm sold. Congratulations to the Gambas team.

Re:Killer Application

[Anonymous Coward]

Wow you cut and pasted post 10636412 from the linked /. article, congratulations.

Re:Killer Application

[DrXym]

Well it does and it doesn't. Certainly it has the potential to move simple VB apps over, but apps that use OCX / ActiveX controls? Forget it.

And that's part of the problem. VB was until VB6 such a hopelessly shitty language that it was impossible to extend it in interesting ways. Either you resigned yourself to using the meagre toolkit that it came with or you supplemented it with 3rd party controls (written in C++) that you bought elsewhere. Consequently only toy VB apps stand a chance of porting easily, unless of course GAMBAS could somehow invoke WINE to host native controls.

By VB6 you could finally produce your own ActiveX controls and apps in VB that you could embed in other apps but even so most controls were still produced native binaries in C++.

In fact I reckon that only VB.NET stands the chance of smooth porting to Linux (via an IDE and Mono), but even that would not be plain sailing since the shortcomings in Windows.Forms mean many .NET apps are already infested with PInvoke calls and hooks to other proprietary libraries.

Re:Killer Application

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't think the point is to port apps actually, but port working forces.
Someone who did several years of VB devel. and wants to have a look at linux can be assured to find an VB _equivalent_ on the linux platform.
Someone who's discovering linux and whishes to begin programming, this one will also find a _simple_ alternative.

Re:Killer Application

[Anonymous Coward]

Parent post is illogical.

It doesn't matter what age you are, if you haven't bothered to move off VB to go to .NET then you certainly won't do it for Linux + Gamdas.

FWIW, I don't know ANYONE who hasn't moved from VB to .NET - and that was a couple years ago.

Re:Killer Application

[AbbyNormal]

Absolute Bingo. Nice post.

I see a major opportunity for Gambas and the hundreds (or thousands) VB/ASP shops that cannot afford to take the .NET plunge. An intermediary step would be a Godsend (with eventual consideration to a .NET interpreter..maybe).

There are only three items that are missing: MSSQL support, Windows environment support, ASP/Apache.

Even if companies do not decide to run it on a Linux platform, they would still want to switch their VB to Gambase because: a.) no lockin, b.) Support is ongoing. c.) Eventually they can upgrade to .NET (or Gambas writes a VB.NET Mono plugin).

I, and the many VB shops out there salute you Gambas (especially when you add the Perl Regex stuff). Great work, and PLEASE keep pushing for a Windows GTK version.

Re:Killer Application

[Anonymous Coward]

I totally agree with this post, I actually have fooled around with this software since version 0.9 and it was impressive even then. It has support too for connecting to MySQL and other databases, so It would be very easy for some one who developed a database app in vb to come over to Linux and create a front-end for it there. The only thing now is a Crystal Report clone that can be plugged in for reporting.

Re:Killer Application

[beforewisdom]

I would like to add one big gian "DITTO" to your comment. I had moderator points when I read your comment and the only reason I didn't mod you up was that your comment was already at 5

Looks Good

[ibentmywookie]

I haven't used it for a while, but back then it didn't have an MDI interface, which I didn't like.

I prefer all the windows to be under the control of a single parent window. I guess it's the same reason why the GIMP interface is kind of annoying.

However, on Linux, if you give the app it's own desktop to sit on, it's manageable.

Re:Looks Good

[91degrees]

It's been a whilke since I've seen any IDE with an interface I like. I marginally prefer this splattered all over the screen format over the Visual studio interface. Simply close windows when you're not using them and usually you'll only have a project and editor window.

I simply find the MDI a little cluttered. What I really want is two windows - one for the editor, and one for all the other stuff. Multiple windows with their own icon bars that components can be shuffled between would be nice.

Re:Looks Good

[Anonymous Coward]

It's pretty simple.

Single parent MDI windows in Linux suck ass.

Why?

Because there is no reason for it. In windows it's nessicary because you have to dumpall your windows into the same space. With Linux you have multiple virtual desktops.

Say you have Gimp. You setup 2 virtual desktop windows, one for artwork and toolbar, the other to contain all of the dialogs. (like for brushes, layers, selections, patterns, etc etc)

That way you quickly switch back and forth (I use a simple keycombo).

This arrangement is much more superior then what is possible if Gimp used a single window-parent style like Photoshop does, and it is the reason people design applications like they do.

In Windows you need this because all the windows occupy one space. If you have more then one app open all the different windows get mixed up together and it's a huge pain in the ass to keep them all sorted.

People who heavily multitask have to do things like move the task bar to the side of the screen and make it so that they can read the names of the windows. Total usability crappiness.

Photoshop does what it does because it was originally a Mac OS application and the MDI window emulates the actions of the Mac OS desktop.

in Mac OS each application has it's own virtual desktop. When you click on a Window it brings the ENTIRE application to the front, instead of just the particular window you clicked on.

That's one of the major reasons why Gimp has such a bad rap. Because it's designed to be used in a enviroment that has superior window handling capabilities instead of the still-stuck-in-the-early-1990's style that Windows uses.

Beleive me. Single window-parent MDI interfaces SUCK. Especially when you have multiple monitors. They just introduce severe limitations on the user.

much better to have a bunch of secondary windows on one or two desktops on either side of your main workspace and you switch to them when you need them, then keep the main area were you work constantly in the front and pretty much full screen.

That way you don't have to dick around with searching thru a bunch of menus and crap to find what you want. Go left of current screen you have everything you are looking for right in front of you and were you left it.

Go left, go right, go up, go down. Each direction can have not only the windows associated with the MDI app your working with, but other related applications or things you need to keep a eye on, such as irc-clients or Mozilla open on slashot.

Also reduces the need for massive expensive monitors, too.

Once you get used to it it is very intuitive.

Of course if your coming from a Windows background with only a single workspace to operate in I can see how it's a bit confusing at first.

Re:Looks Good

[Anonymous Coward]

I have a Windows background. Basic VD doesn't feel logical. I see GUIs as application contexts. Having related windows under the same context feels logical. It pleases my strongly hierarchial way of thinking.

VD would make more sense if one was automatically created and logically named for each application. Each VD would be displayed in the global "task bar". There would be an optional "window bar" for each VD. I also want to temporarily combine multiple VD's to purposely show multiple non-related windows simultaneously. Moving single windows or window groups between VD's is not an option, because it breaks the contexts.

If VD managers conforming to my wishes exist, I would like to know about it.

Re:Looks Good

[Anonymous Coward]

Clearly, GIMP should provide both styles, with a simple option to switch between.

Re:Looks Good

[Anonymous Coward]

What your talking about is basicly how OS X (and earlier Mac OSes) handle applications.

They use a form of virtual desktops, each one created for each application, and the menu bar is always in the same place at the top of the screen.

Each virtual desktop is put on top of the previous one so it looks like your all on one big space, clicking on any window associated with a particular application will bring that application to the front.

Also you can do stuff like drag images and text between applications in that way.

The dock has a graphical representation of each program that is running with a little black arrow pointing at them from the bottom.

The icons "bounce" as applicatoin is starting up to draw your attention.

It's quite a bit slicker then either Windows or X windows setup, but it's less flexible then X Windows. However it is a very good design and intuative. Easy for new users to pick up quickly vs the massive amounts of variations that are possible with X Windows.

Your pretty much describing OS X user interface exactly.

(makes me wonder) :-P

Re:Looks Good

[Anonymous Coward]

That would be nice, but it's a significant step to design your own window managment sceme.

I suppose if someone coded a option for that into gimp it would be accepted by the developers.

If your using X Windows you have the option to use something called "xnest", this creates a embedded X windows enviroment within a window, which would create a simulated single-parent-window Style MDI interface.

Re:Looks Good

[PitaBred]

Stupid Mac fans. Did you not read his whole post? How he said "Photoshop does what it does because it was originally a Mac OS application and the MDI window emulates the actions of the Mac OS desktop. in Mac OS each application has it's own virtual desktop. When you click on a Window it brings the ENTIRE application to the front, instead of just the particular window you clicked on."?
Stop being a twit.

Re:Looks Good

[Anonymous Coward]

I know.

I am the same AC that wrote both posts.

Silly person.

The guy that replied to me the first time described what he would want in virtual desktops. So I said that he basicly was describing OS X's window handling.

then you called me a twit. :-P

Re:Looks Good

[Amorya]

Apple's old Project Builder did that I think. It let you choose when you started whether you wanted one window, few windows or many windows. I think few was project + single editor.

I chose many windows - I can't stand MDIs (and that includes tabbed browsing and other such things). I guess it's good to have the choice though...

project's aims (from site)

[mincognito]

This project aims at making a graphical development environment based on a Basic interpreter, so that we have a language like Visual Basic(TM) under Linux(TM). The phenomenal quantity of bugs and inconsistencies that makes Visual Basic so delightful persuaded me to start this project ;-) It seems that Microsoft is aware of the poor quality of its language, as VB .Net is not backward compatible with older versions of Visual Basic. I think they have thrown away the Visual Basic interpreter source code, and that VB .Net is just a .Net runtime compiler whose syntax looks like the Visual Basic one. Well, it's just my own opinion... ;-) I want to clear up any misunderstanding immediately. Gambas does not try to be compatible with Visual Basic, and will never be. I'm convinced that its syntax and internals are far better than the one's of its proprietary cousin ;-) I took from Visual Basic what I found useful : the Basic language, the development environment, and the easiness to quickly make programs with user interfaces. But I dislike the very bad level of common Visual Basic programmers, often due to bad pratices imposed by the bugs and strangeness of this language. So I will try to make Gambas as coherent, logical and reliable as possible, and I hope that Gambas programmers will make effort in return ! ;-) At the moment, I'm looking for programming help. The kernel of Gambas is now stabilized, if not well documented. There is a component example to help people learning how to write components. I hope other people will join me to help to increase the possibilities of the language. There is so much to do !

Re:project's aims (from site)

[Anonymous Coward]

Have you used enough winkies there?

Re:project's aims (from site)

[Anonymous Coward]

But.. why not improve eclipse and python (or some other)?

I have installed eclipse(1) and the plugling for python(2) and i it works really good. Why not improve funtionalities of projects that are working instead of begin another one?
Is a real question, I want not to bother you.

(1)-> http://www.eclipse.org/
(2)-> http://pydev.sourceforge.net/

Re:project's aims (from site)

[bramez]

I notice you wink a lot. Is there something in your eye?

Re:project's aims (from site)

[JamieF]

>(TM)

Show-off.

Re:project's aims (from site)

[Threni]

> I notice you wink a lot. Is there something in your eye?

You tend to get this when net newbies are trying to show that they are not net newbies. I guess we should be thankful he's not LOLing and OMGing all over the place.

Re:project's aims (from site)

[mikeage]

So what tool do you use to put ;-) after every other sentence?

Re:project's aims (from site)

[RichardX]

So I will try to make Gambas as coherent, logical and reliable as possible

Well I certainly hope ;-) it's going to be more coherent logical and reliable than ;-) your project aims statement ;-)

Re:project's aims (from site)

[uradu]

It looks like they don't have a forms designer yet, though, right?

REALbasic

[dadjaka]

REALbasic almost beat you to it, with an IDE for Mac and Windows, and building for Mac, Windows and Linux.

Pity it's not free.

Re:REALbasic

[Spacejock]

I've evaluated it twice, and it's not close enough to VB for me to use. Just stupid things like having to press TAB to autocomplete instead of space (which is right under your thumb)

I took a real good look at it, I love the idea of cross-compiling but the environment is too alien. (I write and release most of my apps freeware: www.spacejock.com so I'm not going to spend big bucks on an IDE I won't use.)

Anyway, Gambas is no use to me unless it will either:
A) run natively on Windows too or
B) compile VB6 projects unedited on Linux.

A is more likely, in my opinion.

Re:REALbasic

[Anonymous Coward]

If you're looking for a free, cross-platform Basic, have a look at wxBasic. It's based on wxWidgets, an excellent cross-platform C++ library (yes, the widgets are native on Mac, Windows and Linux).

It's still beta, the IDE is only now being developed, and the Mac port doesn't exist yet (any volunteers?), but it fits the "free" criteria...

Re:REALbasic

[Anonymous Coward]

If you use the space bar, you would always have to auto-complete. You couldn't decide to type a space and continue.

The philosophy of REALbasic is to let you know that help is available rather than shoving it in your face (the way VB does) and telling you to ignore it if it's unwanted.

REALbasic isn't exactly like VB but it's close enough that people are porting VB projects to REALbasic. Check out these out:

http://www.realsoftware.com/company/pressreleases/ pr_computest.html

http://www.realsoftware.com/realbasic/case_studies /spamx/

Re:REALbasic

[Spacejock]

I know the spacebar autocomplete is a weak example. More important to me was the lack of treeview and listview (I think those were the missing controls?) I'm sure there are alternatives, but the brief time I had available to look it over showed up too many incompatibilities or missing essential pieces for my own use. Others will have their own requirements, and I'm sure it's a fine solution for many projects.

Cluttered IDE

[Osty]

Maybe I'm in the minority here, but I don't like the "spread-out" IDE layout they've got going on here. It reminds me too much of the GIMP, and not in a good way. Perhaps it's my Windows background, but I want a single window with toolboxes and sidebars inside that window (see Visual Studio or KDevelop). This "Let's have a bunch of floating windows with nothing tying them together" approach just makes me think the developers are trying to copy Mac apps rather than Windows apps, with the main drawback of not having a single app menu across the top of the screen to tie everything together (yes, I know that various desktop environments can optionally move app menus to the top of the screen, but how consistent are they? Will they keep the menu from the "Project" window up top when I have the "Toolbox" window focused? Do they know that the "Properties" window and code window are related, and should raise together?). I'm not saying that copying from either is bad or wrong, just that if you're going to do it, do it right.

Re:Cluttered IDE

[Lussarn]

I don't think they are copying either windows or mac, they are merely following what have been the unix way for the last 10 years. On unix we have virtual desktops and they are there to be used.

Re:Cluttered IDE

[Anonymous Coward]

I have to agree with you. Why not have it programmed so you can set it as an option: Willy Nilly windows everywhere for people who want that, a parent window for the rest :).

Re:Cluttered IDE

[Khazunga]

"Let's have a bunch of floating windows with nothing tying them together"

Wrong! The Virtual Desktop is there to tie them together.

So, yes you're right. It's your windows background...

Re:Cluttered IDE

[JamieF]

Argh. It's the old "why make decisions when you can just add yet another preference pane" cop-out. See also: Mozilla.

Re:Cluttered IDE

[oliverthered]

Well I hate MDI It reminds me of trying to move large bits of furniture in and out of the house and grazing my knuckles on the wall.

Personally I like Borlands 'menu bar at the top, everything else floating and dockable'.

They should give you a choice though.

Re:Cluttered IDE

[Tarwn]

I agree with your sentiments, despite what other may say. That is/was the biggest turn off for Gimp for me. I actually find it to be an obstacle in using the program because there is nothing tying them together (maybe it's a coneptual gap, I don't like having to think about it every time). I don't necessarally need my applications to all have slide-out tool panes like Visual Studio, but a background container with the option to dock windows on the sides or toolbar does wonders for keeping all the various bits of the application together, allowing me to focus on doing what I am doing without accidentally switching focus to a browser or terminal I left open.
Sure once I get everything shuffled to another window I don't worry as much, and some people might be comfortable "outside the box" with their applications, but I would prefer to stay inside the box, thank you. I don't think this is a revolutionary interface design concept, I think it is an interesting one that doesn't quite work as well as was expected.

If I am going to work on an application then my preference would be to siomply work on it, without pausing every 5 seconds to think about where to find a toolbox i sent to the background. Now in window 3 of 4 and crap, did I lose 4 somewhere?
That's one of the elements I liked about Paintshop Pro: the floating, dockable, collapsible menus. Everything was kept in the one application area and you could pretty much put the boxes anywhere you wanted, but being inside that window made the toolboxes naturally belong to the application. Plus I could get more screen acreage simply by allowing them to collapse, without losing them into the background.

Re:Cluttered IDE

[linebackn]

Well, I like MDI :)

True some programs use it inappropriately, but in cases where you have many windows that are part of the same application it can be very useful. A good example of a good use is a paint program where you may be working with dozens of pieces of images, the MDI form works kind of like a clip tray and makes it easy to manage all of the images at the same time.

Ideally in most apps, yes it should be an option. (In VB 6 it is)

Re:Cluttered IDE

[Kjella]

Perhaps it's my Windows background, but I want a single window with toolboxes and sidebars inside that window (see Visual Studio or KDevelop).

Agreed. But some of these let you undock windows so you can essentially make it look like a bunch of windows anyway. Personally, I want a single full-screen background saying "now I'm in the IDE", since I usually have a dozen other programs running. And that makes it natural to place stuff on the "edges", be they separate windows or not.

Kjella

Re:Cluttered IDE

[oliverthered]

As a 'bad' example.
KDevelop in Ideal mode, try putting two windows side by side. Say I'm doing a translation from french to English, or trying to code to a spec.

Re:Cluttered IDE

[mabinogi]

The X selection buffer will work in _every_ X application, and always has.

The other type of clipboard is supported in all the major applications.

Whilst it's true that *nix (why do people always single out Linux?) desktops can be inconsistent, they are generally far more consistent than windows already, and with continuing cooperation between the major desktops and major standalone apps like Openoffice.org, the situation will improve all the time.

Also cringing at the output from free is silly.
The fact that a lot of memory is being "sucked up" is a feature, not a bug.
On my laptop free tells me that 500 meg of memory is used (after subtracting buffers and cache).
Now I could rant about how ridiculous it was that KDE was using 500meg of memory, and how therefore bloated it was, or I could stop and think for a second, and realise that there's no way it could possibly _require_ that much memory, especially since I know it runs fine on my PII with only 128meg.
Instead, I'd say that applications are oportunistically grabbing as much memory as they can, and are _using_ it to improve performance.

Afterall, what good are "lean" applications, that use only a couple of meg of memory, but have to keep moving stuff to and from disk to keep the footprint down, whilst the whole time you have a gig or two of memory sitting there, doing nothing?

It's like people complaining about the only program that's running using 100% of the cpu - it's SUPPOSED to, anything less would be inefficient.

And yes, I'm sure TVTWM was very fast, but it doesn't really do the same things that KDE does, does it? Whether or not the speed / footprint / functionality tradeoff is worth it is another matter, and difficult or impossible to measure objectively - but for me, it's fine.

Re:Cluttered IDE

[coastwalker]

Another way of looking at it though is that monitors just arnt big enough - plugging two in at once is a help

My prediction for the year is the 27 inch flat screen monitor being a surprise hit...

Speadsheets wear out my wheel mouse, toolbars get disabled on every application, icon docks / start bars autohide and now we have twenty mdi window applications.

Give me more screen!!

Re:Cluttered IDE

[Anonymous Coward]

You must not be running dual monitors.

Re:Cluttered IDE

[evalencia1]

"Floating windows with nothing tying them together"? That's the layout they had in *Visual Basic 3*

Re:Cluttered IDE

[jayed_99]

AAAARGH!

What the screaming fuck do "virtual desktops" have to do with "bazillions of itsy-bitsy floating windows", you troll?!

Whew. Glad I got that out of my system.

Re:Cluttered IDE

[Anonymous Coward]

Wrong! The Virtual Desktop is there to tie them together.

Right. So show me a desktop environment that has the function to create a new virtual desktop when I open a new copy of an application, and remove it automatically when I close that application. Because I really don't think that forcing me to create manually a virtual desktop for every instance of every application I'm ever going to want to use, and manually switch to the right desktop before launching each application, qualifies as convenient.

In fact, just give me MDI. Which is essentially what I just described - with the added advantage that I can un-maximise my virtual desktops and view more than one at a time, if I want to!

Re:Cluttered IDE

[raindog2]

Some of us who use and develop Gambas agree with you. I began work on an MDI IDE for Gambas a year and a half ago, and released actual working code, but the language was such a moving target at that time (version 0.57) that I had to abandon it. I hope to produce one for Gambas 1.0 in the near future, and Benoit plans to add MDI functionality to the IDE in the development series for 2.0.

Re:Cluttered IDE

[Anonymous Coward]

The unix way for the last 10 years has been a mess of cluttered windows?

Re:Cluttered IDE

[brpr]

There's no need to "create" a new virtual desktop: you should have a few open by default. It's not much of a chore to switch to one VD before you open a particular application, and there's really no need to remove the VD after the app exits.

MDI just involves each application writing its own window manager, which is pretty dumb if you already have a decent window manager.

In fact, just give me MDI. Which is essentially what I just described - with the added advantage that I can un-maximise my virtual desktops and view more than one at a time, if I want to!

Easy enough to do without an MDI. You just have to move a window from one VD to another.

Re:Cluttered IDE

[bogaboga]

What distro was that? I love the fonts. My Mepis distro does not come close!

Re:Cluttered IDE

[Anonymous Coward]

Using separate top-level windows for the same application has been the unix way since the very first unix GUIs were invented, years before virtual desktops were invented for window managers. As far as I know, multiple pseudowindows inside a top-level window (MDI) is a Windows invention that has been much ridiculed by users of other systems and UI 'experts', but surely people have got used to it by now.

Compared to the Windows MDI approach, using separate top-level windows has the advantage that you can easily mix and match windows from different applications, so that you see exactly what you want at the same time. However usage does require a somewhat different mindset than Windows MDI.

It is unfortunate that most X11 window managers have no other features than virtual desktops to support applications with multiple top-level windows. The standard window manager protocol does support tagging all the windows with the application they belong to, so that it is easy to simultaneously minimize, raise or lower all the windows of a single application. However, AFAIK only WindowMaker has proper user-level support for such features. Any others?

Re:Cluttered IDE

[AbbyNormal]

Just an FYI, I believe they are going to remove the MDI environment sometime in the future.

See Here

Re:Cluttered IDE

[omicronish]

Surprisingly enough, some of the earlier VB IDEs (and possibly up to whatever version that came prior to VB.NET) had this spread-out layout. It made usage incredibly annoying.

Re:Cluttered IDE

[Anonymous Coward]

Mandrakelinux

Re:Cluttered IDE

[cooldev]

I don't think they are copying either windows or mac, they are merely following what have been the unix way for the last 10 years.

Which is why Unix has been such a resounding success on the desktop for the last ten years, right?

Re:Cluttered IDE

[Ilan Volow]

Most of Linux's problems are cultural, not technical.

Linux was born of a culture (the unix culture) with a hardcore dislike of anything graphical. This parent culture has had a longstanding practice of revelling in things that are cryptic and difficult to use and labelling end-users who are thwarted by difficult and confusing things as stupid.

The unix culture is also a parts-based culture, which tries to break things down modularly into their smallest parts; they cringe at anything that has permanent, wide-scale integration. It's impossible to try to explain to a dyed-in-the-wool unix hacker that a successful environment for end users is one where the whole of the interface and code that makes it has to be greater than the sum of it's parts. All they see is a bunch of supposedly interchangeable parts, so naturally having ten billion different GUI toolkits seems perfectly justified to them.

In addition to the past 30 years of unix holding Linux back from the desktop, the current Linux culture also holds itself back. People are yelled for asking questions on IRC and told to RTFM. Then, when they get frustrated and (correctly) vent that the user interface for the software they were using really blew, they are called "whiners", they are told they should "go code it themselves", they are told they should drop whatever they are doing and become programmers, they are told they demean "the gift of volunteers" by criticizing it, or they are informed that the UI is not confusing, it's just that they're "used to Windows". But it gets better. Once the angry and frustrated user decides to stay with his proprietary alternative that only slaps him or her in the face three or four times a day and developers pretend to be nice and to give a damn because they're being paid money, the developers of the Linux application the user had tried to use blame the proprietary developers (read Microsoft) for the user not switching and hold themselves blameless. And since they have destroyed virtually every legitimate route to getting their software installed on end-users machines, they must then try to lobby to get their software installed in governments and in workplaces, where the user has no choice in what they run and must take whatever crap the Linux developers give them.

How could any effort built on such cultural foundations ever succeed?

Re:Cluttered IDE

[Anonymous Coward]

MDI just involves each application writing its own window manager...

No, proper MDI, with window manager support, is no more work for an application writer than any other method.

It's not much of a chore to switch to one VD before you open a particular application... You just have to move a window from one VD to another...

So what you're saying is, all I have to do is manage my windows manually? Thanks, but I want my WINDOW MANAGER to manage my windows for me! Which is why virtual desktops, which require manual window management on the part of the user, are a workaround for an underlying problem, not a solution.

MDI is also imperfect, but it seems (to me - you clearly disagree, which is great, different opinions are what fuel innovation) to solve the same problem in a way that's more convenient for me, the user.

Re:Cluttered IDE

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, I personally prefer the many-windows idea; it scales better across multiple monitors. When at work, I have a bunch of Emacs windows on two monitors, and it works really well for me. My $0.02.

Re:Cluttered IDE

[Anonymous Coward]

Would mod you up if I had any points.

Re:Cluttered IDE

[ChrisXS]

I for one welcome our new "spread-out" IDE layout overlords. Quite useful for those with multiple, large, high-resolution monitors.

Re:Cluttered IDE

[brpr]

No, proper MDI, with window manager support, is no more work for an application writer than any other method.

The point is that the method you use to switch between windows within the main frame of the application has to be coded into the application, not the WM. OK, the application may be using library code to do this, but that just means unnecessary inconsistency between applications using different toolkits.

So what you're saying is, all I have to do is manage my windows manually? Thanks, but I want my WINDOW MANAGER to manage my windows for me!

Your WM can't mind-read. Sometimes you might want to open an app in its own VD, sometimes you might not. If you're going to be using the application for more than 3 seconds, the effort of manually switching to a different VD is insignificant.

I agree MDI can be nicer in some situations, but I don't see that it has any overall advantage. It's also completely useless if you have multiple monitors, since you can't use the extra space effectively. WMs do need to be improved. For example tabs (as in tabbed browsing) should probably be a WM feature rather than an app feature really.

Re:Cluttered IDE

[Paul E Nolan]

The GIMP UI is a lot better since version 2.0 (now it only has 2 compact toolboxes, instead of a myriad of separate windows).
As to VB, I've never understood why a language like this has managed to survive so long (the only Basic I've found usable is BBC BASIC by Acorn - procedural, ROM-based - fast and with a built in assembler)

if you want VB on Linux why not just use REALBasic

[GK_2002]

Consider that already REALBasic 5.5 is loads ahead of this project in that much of the syntax is VB like, yet you can release one app simulataneously on Mac OS 9, OS X, Windows and Linux.

I don't see the advantage here... sure it's not free software but it works DAMN well. I have created a few small utilites internally for my company as well as a little CD Cataloging program just to teach myself the ins and outs of the language, but for those times I want to make something run as a non-web based application for a Mac, this is how I plan to develop the software.

5 years too late

[elfin_spectre]

I've been a VB programmer since version 1 and have had to move to web-based programming to get work over the past 5 years because hardly anyone was writing new desktop applications.

Offcourse

[Uukrul]

This is slashdot.

OO language

[Underholdning]

I finished university just before everything had to be object oriented, so I have my base in procedural languages. Granted, I can see a lot of advantages in OO, but why does everything has to be OO these days? Both Gambas and Visual Basic are now OO languages. If I wanted OO I'd chose Java or C++. But what if I don't want OO?

Re:OO language

[Vo0k]

'cause OO is way easier for team writing and huge projects. It's way easier to split the project into many "single man" or "single small team" tasks, then bind them all together through an easy to use and strictly defined methods with well defined "responsiblity" areas. The difference isn't all that big, except of some "protectionism" (private, public), simplification of some processes (inheritance instead of notorious evil "copy&paste") and strict defining of "responsiblity areas" (objects), instead of guessing whether convert_hostname_to_lowercase() belongs to hostnameconv.h or tolowercase.h :)

Re:OO language

[Jonti]

If you don't want OO, there's nothing to stop you from using an OO language like Python in the traditional procedural way.

Actually, I'd argue that's the "right" way to code some problems. I'm thinking particularly of the read-a-record; process it; write a record kind of processing that lies at the heart of much business computing. But that model of processing sucks badly when you try to write interactive applications. It's *much* easier to model or describe an interactive system in OO.

It's not so much that *everything* has to be OO. It's more that Python and the ilk have the advantages of OO available if needed.

Re:OO language

[lisaparratt]

You could always get your trusty hole punch out and continue handcrafting those cards?

Re:OO language

[samael]

Then don't usethe OO bits of the language. Very few languages _force_ you to make everything an object - you can usually fall back on procedural code.

Re:OO language

[halivar]

These days, modelling is a pretty much mandatory for group projects. OO help tremendously because it (if used right) enforces an organization of functionality that is far more easily modelled than a "functional" language.

It's also easier for me to keep it neat and tidy. I like that. :)

Re:OO language

[cheezit]

I went through the same transition. How to put this gently...if you want to work on most modern systems, it is a prerequisite for you to be somewhat OO-capable. If you choose not to you are limiting yourself, which is your call, but you can't complain when everyone else moves on.

Much of what people consider "clean" procedural code has benefited from applying OO principles, so sticking to purely procedural development doesn't really avoid OO. You just won't recognize the traces of it.

I would suggest that what is lacking is an in-depth exposure to an OO language. Can't blame the university for that; there's a zillion free tools, tutorials and resources for you to teach yourself.

Spend 3 months on Java or some other somewhat clean OO language (not C++!) and you will view Gambas and VB in a different light.

I don't believe...

[Vo0k]

I don't believe any open source solution in any near future could crush the Microsoft alternatives in the software development field.
The problem is that HERE marketing matters. Home users are free to pick a web browser or operating system of their choice. But when a big system for some business/industry is being developed, the platform decisione are made by the middle-to-upper management. And these guys really -believe- what Microsoft marketing people tell them. So the programmers, people who actually know a thing about the options don't really get the voice in most of the projects. "So... This guy at EXPO told me Visual Basic would solve all these problems. So we write the application in Visual Basic." There is no way the majority of the "big fishes" in programming could accept a hardly known free software language instead of the "famous, widely used Microsoft product" without the right marketing, and without some large funding behind the marketing...

Unless Sun, IBM or someone else with enough $$$ and not too much love for Microsoft backs up the project and takes care of marketing and promoting it. But the chances are very slim.

Re:I don't believe...

[Lussarn]

A search for asp on google reveals 557 000 000 hits
A search for jsp on google reveals 115 000 000 hits
A search for php on google reveals 864 000 000 hits

Yet the big players promote jsp and asp. Google is in no way scientific but php is very big without industry support from the big players.

Re:I don't believe...

[Vo0k]

ASP 1.0 - end of 1996.
JSP - Sun's response to ASP.
PHP/FI 1995, PHP3 - 1997.

And of course dubious fame of ISS which was the only supported platform for ASP until recently and similarity of PHP to Perl which was the language of CGI for ages.

Re:I don't believe...

[aled]

quantity != quality

Re:I don't believe...

[cerberusss]

Unless Sun, IBM or someone else with enough $$$ and not too much love for Microsoft backs up the project and takes care of marketing and promoting it. But the chances are very slim.

Why is this modded insightful? There are lots of examples where open source software became widely used without extensive marketing campaigns.

Marketing doesn't always start with a huge corporate marketing department doing brainstorms. It's also about developers and users who are enthousiastic about a piece of software and promote it through blogs, presentations, user group meetings, etc in their community whereever they can. Think here Linux, JBoss, KDE, Gnome, ALL of the Apache Jakarta products.

Re:I don't believe...

[Vo0k]

We're not talking about "generic software" or some "pet desktop app". We're talking about a new programming language that has the intention of replacing one that is strong on the market already and is meant for pretty specific usage - mostly in areas where the last word belongs to suits, where multi-million-dollar transactions are made and so on. If your failure/success cost is difference between earning and losing a million dollars, will you pick a mostly untested in such an environment, written largely by amateurs and almost unknown language, possibly very good but of unknown risks, or go with a solution where all the weaknesses are known, it was tested hundreds of times in such conditions, and methods to avoid the bugs and weaknesses are all known to professionals you hire?
We're not talking about nerd's or his grandmother's computer. We're talking of real, big and damn expensive production environment.

Apache wouldn't be near anywhere to what it is now without support of the giants behind the Apache Foundation. Firefox gains recognition because millions of home users are interested in it. PHP rode on the shoulders of Apache and Perl. Linux has enough attention to be trustworthy.
In the world where decreasing risk by 0.1% means $10.000 profit, picking untested alternatives is out of question.

Re:I don't believe...

[KingKire64]

What ive always heard from managment "No one ever got fired for picking Microsoft" Thats how they will continue to look at it. If microsofts solution fails "oh well its MS we have no other choice". If something other than MS is used and fails "why the hell didnt you use MS?"

Re:I don't believe...

[cerberusss]

Of course, noone in their right mind would use untested software in a production environment. I fully agree on that.

My point is that some open source software is so useful, that it gets used and tested in the field. When professionals begin to use it for customer-related work, they often demand support for it from the suppliers of commercial software. Witness Ant, the Java build tool.

Of course this is just one example, but I don't see why a new programming environment would be any different.

Re:I don't believe...

[AbbyNormal]

I agree with you, but I think its an opportunity for small shops to port their code over to Linux.

If I could simply add the "MSSQL" component into my new Gambas product and start coding away, and then port all of my legacy code over. I would do this in a heartbeat, instead of porting/re-writing all of my code in .NET.

Once again, Gambas needs a Windows Port. When the Windows Port and MSSQL pluggin are added, I am willing to bet that this will be a huge plus for Linux.

In terms of Marketing, what about Firefox? If Gambas becomes extremely easy to write / compile on either platform, developers will tell other developers..etc.

Re:I don't believe...

[k98sven]

No.. The main thing is not about marketing. It's about management decisions vs. engineering decisions.

Say you have Microsoft language A vs. Open Source language B. Now, if B is better from the technical standpoint than A, then B is the better language from the engineers standpoint.

To management, though, that is only one factor in the equation. They have other concerns:

Can we find staff trained in this language?

Will we be able to in five years?

Does the language have support?

Will it have support in five years?

Will the language continue to be developed to meet our needs in the future as well?

These are all valid concerns which need to be adressed for any operating system/language/platform to catch on in the corporate world. Don't be so naive as to think that all management types are PHBs who buy any marketing that comes their way.

Re:I don't believe...

[Anonymous Coward]

Perl, PHP, Java.

Real applications are written in these languages by real people, paid real money.

What was your point again?

Derek

Re:I don't believe...

[Vo0k]

What were the alternatives from Microsoft at the time of creation of Perl?
Isn't PHP a "favoured default" for Apache, backed by the Apache Foundation? What was the state of development of ASP when PHP has emerged from Perl?
And it's not Java. It SUN/Java.

Worse than INTERCAL

[KiloByte]

The last time I used BASIC was 20 years ago, when I was six -- and I'll be damned if I ever come back.
We got so many programming languages -- good ones and bad ones, that is simply doesn't make any sense altogether to use a Cobol-lookalike. Repent, folks!

Re:Worse than INTERCAL

[shimen]

the last time i used basic was when i was 3 years old and i'll never go back. But it shows how idiot proof the lang. is

Re:if you want VB on Linux why not just use REALBa

[Anonymous Coward]

Have you ever actually tried to use RealBasic to develop linux applications?

It may start here...

[wcitechnologies]

I think VB is a doorway for programmers who eventually get serious. Anybody who knows anything knows that VB isn't the language to program enterprise-class software. Still, VB is a good way to get the kids interested, and some of them grow up to be engineers. If this language really is the Linux equivelant to VB, you OSS guys should be happy, considering how this, (or something like this) may affect Linux's future.

Re:It may start here...

[Netsensei]

What about JAVA? At university, I learned OOP in java at university. For me, the step to C(++) from java wasn't that big. And my knowledge of PHP helped me a great deal to understand those basics in JAVA. Going from Java to VB: now there's a big leap! I bought me some VB.net books (discounts!). By golly! I'm glad I started of in java and PHP. Feels like I'm all starting over again in VB. Besides, even though JAVA isn't strictly GPL, at least it's platform independent. I don't have to port my crap Jabber IM cli client to work in either windhose or lunix.

Re:It may start here...

[Lumpy]

Anybody who knows anything knows that VB isn't the language to program enterprise-class software.

will you please tell the CTO of my company that????

our traffic and billing system, the crux of our entire company, is written in VB... most of the sales apps are VB except for the ones written in FoxPro.

and all of them suck horribly. and the saddest part is? we keep buying thisd crap-quality software because the vertical market we are in that is all that is available.

really low quality, or VB based. and both do not scale well whern you try to deploy it to 20,000 employees, and only make the IT department homocidal.

Re:It may start here...

[flacco]

and all of them suck horribly. and the saddest part is? we keep buying thisd crap-quality software because the vertical market we are in that is all that is available.

hmm, well, i'm thinking of leaving my job and developing vertical market apps. what are the applications you use? maybe you'd like python-based web application replacements? :-)

Welcome

[Anonymous Coward]

I, for one, welcome our new Gambas overlords.

DOA

[Anonymous Coward]

One glance over the screenshot tells me i'm not going to use this. Windows cluttered all over the place. It's a pity. Please, OSS developers, even if you hate MS Windows, a few things in there are actually done quite good...

Re:DOA

[Anonymous Coward]

One glance at your post tells me you are trolling. So one look at a screenshot that is probably meant to showcase as much of the application as possible tells you that it is cluttered and unusable?

I'm impressed.

I'm also getting tired of this constant whining about not doing it the MS way. Interestingly I never see these kind of complaints about OSX software, though even MS products are not using an MDI interface on OSX. So not doing it the MS way certainly doesn't say anything about the usability of an app.

Re:DOA

[Anonymous Coward]

"Windows cluttered all over the place."

A better word may have been strewn (http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?va=strewn):
1 : to spread by scattering
2 : to cover by or as if by scattering something

I agree with you, why not program an option in so we can have a parent window if we so wish. I have enough problems keeping track of my passwords without keeping track of program windows ;).

Re:DOA

[t_allardyce]

Have to agree there, Microsoft (and Apple) spend allot of time researching interfaces and watching average people use computers. If you havn't put time into research, atleast copy what they do ;)

Re:DOA

[Anonymous Coward]

One glance at your post makes me wonder if you can read. I did not say it is unusable, i said *I* am not going to use it. Whatever suits you.

And i did not whine about it, fanboy.

Re:DOA

[Anonymous Coward]

i>A better word may have been strewn

OIC. Thanks, and i dont mean that ironic in any way. ;)

Re:DOA

[Anonymous Coward]

Because on the mac, it works. The common menubar does wonders.

And if a screenshot is supposed to attract people, it shouldn't be so cluttered as to deter people. They should split it up into multiple images *gasp*.

Re:DOA

[Ilan Volow]

MDI is a horrible design, and any piece of software that gets rid of it does the world a favor.

That being said, I'm tired of seeing users with legitimate grievances with Linux usability being called "whiners" and then seeing the Linux community whine about how end-users aren't adopting their software and how "it's all Microsoft's fault".

The reason why there are so many complaints about something not being done the MS way is because the FOSS people were dumb enough to try to make their stuff look like Windows in some foolish attempt to make their software less intimidating. Guess what--if people see something that has been made to look just like Windows, they expect it to act just like Windows. So when your software doesn't act like Windows, the users expectations were getting violated. The reason why there are fewer complaints about OS X is that Apple didn't try to make their stuff look like Microsoft's stuff down to the last usability flaw.

Single Document Interface?

[Zephiris]

Having the windows 'spread out' like that reminds me of one thing in particular, the Delphi/C Builder IDEs. They too had a similar interface and were insufferable on Windows (probably just as bad with Kylix on Linux. While nice UNIX-based RAD tools are possibly a good thing, "bad" interface design (possibly the worst offense of which is not making SDI/MDI a configurable option) won't really help developers or for "open source" to gain better mainstream acceptance for users not interested in any amount of complexity.

Re:Single Document Interface?

[marcovje]

I prefer it, at least the delphi way.

As in being able to quickly increase and decrease the editor area surface (by maximizing the editor window so no others are visible except window bar with menu) for e.g. some major edit

Code monkey

[Uukrul]

Code monkeys do the best that they could as you can see graphically.

Funny wallpapers ...

[invi]

Oh well ... but they *do* have funny wallpapers ... and notice the clever placement of the windows, guess MDI has its advantages after all :)

Re:Funny wallpapers ...

[Anonymous Coward]

Anyone else notice that the Tux in the 2nd wallpaper is so overweight that he has tits? Makes me wonder if the creator looked in the mirror and made it a self portrait.

Tcl Tk

[DavidNWelton]

We already have a nice, cross platform language and graphical toolkit - Tcl combined with Tk. Or Python, if you like that.

Re:Tcl Tk

[RenatoRam]

I know perfectly well.

I use python to develop even on windows.

But people are normally whining for an integrated suite with drag and drop UI building... ...don't know, i program in vim only (even on win, obviously)

Re:Tcl Tk

[Quattro Vezina]

Eww...Tk is a horrible, horrible toolkit. It was horrible years ago, and it's horrible now. ``Ugly'' is a vast understatement.

I much prefer PyQt, or at least wxPython. Both of them are far superior to Tk/TkInter.

Re:Tcl Tk

[Berfert]

Actually, Tk isn't that bad, if you take the time to add some polish... its just that many people using it don't bother to do so, and wind up with the default "motif-style" look. In addition, Tk/Tcl 8.5 should include the Tile package, which greatly enhances the look of Tk widgets, and adds various new features.

Re:Tcl Tk

[hobbs]

As noted in a previous response, Tk actually has a themed widget extension call tile:

http://tktable.sourceforge.net/tile/

This works well enough for production apps now, but it will also become part of the Tk core in the near future. They interoperate with all existing Tk widgets, and the extension works with Perl's Tcl::Tk binding and with Tkinter.

Even without that, it is not more than a dozen lines of code to polish up the look of most Tk apps, it is just that many don't put that last spit and polish step into their code.

Crush VB for database apps?

[Jugalator]

Now, if it ran in Windows too, it would truly crush VB for database applications.

Hrm.. Like the Windows flag is burnt?
I wonder if it was really that necessary to be so childish, right on their front page.

It doesn't help their cause anyway, or defeat generalizations about "Linux being for childish basement geeks".

Oh well... To my question: Why would it crush VB .NET 2003 for database apps? Do you mean db apps in general? Or just a specific kind of db apps? What's so revolutionary about this package in that area? I couldn't find anything on their Gambas feature list even mentioning databases, except:

"Finish and clean the database component."

Oh, the irony!

Re:Crush VB for database apps?

[Anonymous Coward]

Leave it to an apparent expert to get hung up on the wallpaper.

Re:Crush VB for database apps?

[Anonymous Coward]

Offtopic here but VB.NET is totally different from VB. I think VB.NET was shoehorned in to .NET because it's so much more what VB should have been.

This is nice, but corporations employing developers want someone to blame if the environment fails. This will not give them that and it will therefore never gain any significant market share against Microsoft. On the other hand universities might take to this in their computer science departments, but I don't see it being anything more than an intellectual curiousity for students and faculty. Besides, the VB/VStudio IDE is the best I've seen. You'd have to go really far to beat it in its current iteration.

Re:Crush VB for database apps?

[Jugalator]

Leave it to an apparent expert to get hung up on the wallpaper.

I'm asking because I'm not an expert.

Re:Crush VB for database apps?

[Jugalator]

Yes, I'm wondering what they mean when they're comparing to "VB".

The one Microsoft is trying to make deprecated, or the new (as in "four years old"-new) VB?

It makes a pretty big difference regarding basically everything, including the database support I'm wondering about where they're boldly saying VB will be crushed in that field, even in (apparently from the release notes) unfinished quality. I just kind of assumed they're comparing to the latest version of Microsoft's app when they're talking about the latest version of their app, but in case they aren't, it should really have been mentioned in the article as it's two very different products.

Re:Crush VB for database apps?

[LWATCDR]

What Linux people want is an easy to use RAD system. yes python, perl, php, blah blah. They all work but it is not super easy to write an binary app and distribute it with those languages. Not to mention that they are not compiled so anyone can go in and fiddle with the source code. A plus for open source a negative often for the workplace.

How could Gambas crush VB. VB only runs on windows. What people want is an easy way to write programs that run on Windows, MacOS/X, Linux, and BSD.
Frankly I know I will get flamed but I feel Java is already the answer. The latest version seems to have fixed many of the gui speed issues and NetBeans makes a good GUI. Of course it helps to have a ton of ram :(

Re:Crush VB for database apps?

[GigsVT]

A plus for open source a negative often for the workplace.


How? If you set the permissions properly, no one will be able to edit the source that shouldn't be editing it anyway.

Regarding Java, most interperted languages will run on Windows, MacOS/X, Linux, and BSD, without the overhead of emulating some fake machine that doesn't exist.

Re:Crush VB for database apps?

[Anonymous Coward]

Geez, you need to fucking lighten up a bit.

Re:Crush VB for database apps?

[LWATCDR]

Even being able to view the source can cause issues. Like showing a person how to fake data. We have found it difficult to lock down a computer well enough in windows to protect code that is just a text file while letting people get work done. Other environments my differ.

"Regarding Java, most interpreted languages will run on Windows, MacOS/X, Linux, and BSD, without the overhead of emulating some fake machine that doesn't exist."

No you just have the overhead of interpreting the program each time. Modern interpreters and VMs tend to be very much alike. They both tend to use JIT compilers and such. On a modern system performance is getting to be a none issue for visual basic type programs. It does not take much cpu time to search a data base or insert a form.
No programing language is perfect for everyone. If you have not tired the latest version of Java on a modern machine I suggest you give it a try. I have written code in Perl, PHP, c++, c, asm, pascal, Modual-2, and even basic as well as java. I enjoy Java the most right now for large projects.

Re:Crush VB for database apps?

[GigsVT]

Even being able to view the source can cause issues. Like showing a person how to fake data.

If you are relying on secrets in your source code for security, you never had any security anyway.

I decided to give java another try, since every time I try to run some program in Java, it either doesn't work, breaks, or is extremely slow.

So I just downloaded Azureus2.2.0.2.jar, the most active java project on sourceforge. I'm running jar -x Azureus2.2.0.2.jar, to extract it now, but it's been running for 20 minutes with no messages. I'm going to kill it, I don't know what it's doing, but a 4 meg file shouldn't take more than 20 minutes to extract.

This isn't the only time this has happened. Something fucked up happens every time I get near that abomination.

Re:Crush VB for database apps?

[LWATCDR]

I know lots of people are using Azureus but judgeing a programing enviroment from one program seems short sighted. I wrote an app for our company that tracks customer calls. It has handled 200k phone calls and has been very reliable. I wrote it in Java.
It might be that Asureus is the abomination and not Java.

Re:Crush VB for database apps?

[snorklewacker]

So I just downloaded Azureus2.2.0.2.jar, the most active java project on sourceforge. I'm running jar -x Azureus2.2.0.2.jar, to extract it now, but it's been running for 20 minutes with no messages. I'm going to kill it, I don't know what it's doing, but a 4 meg file shouldn't take more than 20 minutes to extract.

Well since you're having that problem on Linux, I can now apply your logic to state that Linux is an abomination and teh suck and so forth.

Azureus installs and runs like buttah on Windows.

Re:Crush VB for database apps?

[GigsVT]

There might be something to that, I have little experience with Java on other platforms, other than Creo Synapse, which only runs on the Mac JRE, and will not run on any other platform (great cross-platform compatibility there).

As an addendum, my coworker, which is on an older linux which didn't have the gcj "enhanced" utilities installed, could jar -x it with no problems. He also got the gtk version up and running with little trouble.

Linux' REAL reply to VB

[SlashdotMeNow]

HAHA! (In a Nelson voice)

Tk getting a makeover

[DavidNWelton]

It's called "tile" and the goal is to make Tk look native on all platforms, in a 21st century sort of way.

http://tktable.sourceforge.net/tile/

Combine that with starkits, and you have 0 dependencies. Just distribute one file.

Re:Tk getting a makeover

[Anonymous Coward]

When Tk no longer depends on Tcl, let me know. Yes, even if you use Python or C or whatever for Tk, it still requires Tcl under the surface.

It's a decent toolkit, but Tcl has to go.

Wow

[md81544]

Purists may smirk at this, being VB-like and all, but I just compiled this from source and had a play... it's incredibly well done. I'm really impressed. I'd love to see something like this which builds proper executables and allows C or C++ for the language.

I haven't had a chance to investigate further (should be working, after all!) but does anybody know what you need to distribute to get an app working on another box? Does the RPM it creates install all the required libs etc or do they need Gambas installed too?

Re:Wow

[uradu]

> I'd love to see something like this which builds proper executables and allows C or C++ for the language.

There is: Kylix. It's got its issues, just like everything else, but it's there.

Re:Wow

[md81544]

I'll check it out... thanks for the tip :-)

Re:Wow

[LnxAddct]

If you can code in C++ than you can code in Java. Use netbeans for an amazing RAD IDE. Or if your looking for something a bit more lightweight, go with eclipse and its visual editor plugin.
Regards,
Steve

Re:Wow

[Micah]

Only problem with Kylix is that it's dead as a doorknob and doesn't work well (if at all) on recent distributions.

Borland could have had a hit with this one, but they screwed the pooch royally. Yet Another Reason(tm) why you should never depend on non-Free software for anything important.

Re:Wow

[uradu]

Yeah, after I posted that I went over to Borland to check what's going on with Kylix nowadays. Not much, apparently. Still at v3. Oh well, and to think of the breathless anticipation before they released the first version. Borland are awesome at killing their own markets.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Is it just me...

[Anonymous Coward]

or does Gambas sound a lot like Dumbass?

Bob: "So, Jim, what are you using for your new project?"
Jim: "Gambas."
Bob: "Oh you dumbass!"
Jim: "Excuse me?"
Bob: "I said Oh, that Gambas? How interesting..."

A better alternative

[Anonymous Coward]

For those who don't want to mess with ugly languages such as BASIC or horrendous GUI builders like Glade, there's a much better alternative: WideStudio.
It's complete, fast, small, supports multiple OSes, hardware platforms (Zaurus included) and languages (C, Ruby, Python, Perl and Java).

Re:A better alternative

[marcovje]

Or try Lazarus:

http://lazarus.freepascal.org

Re:if you want VB on Linux why not just use REALBa

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't see the advantage here... sure it's not free software

I guess a beliver in free software would se an advantage.

VB with source

[oliverthered]

Well I have two problems with VB.

1: It's slow and easy to write bad code in so it shouldn't be used for anything other than a UI in a multi-tear system and shouldn't be used for large(anything more than a few hundred function points) systems.

Gambas is still slow, so no wins there.

2: VB was incredibly buggy, even for the things it was good for (rapid prototyping, simple to maintain UI's) it would sometimes crash for no apparent reason bot adding an extra hidden text box or a random print seemed to fix things.

With Gambas you have the source so all bugs are shallow.

Having said that there are plenty of good free Java tools out there like JBuilder foundataion or eclipse, so maybe basic has had it's day.

Re:VB with source

[dtfinch]

About the "slowness" of VB, I was involved in an nes emulator project (basicnes, now maintained as olafnes) written in VB6 which we got running at full speed with near perfect emulation and no frame skip on a 350mhz pentium. Even tried a scale2x filter and it still ran full speed at 500mhz and no skip. 100% VB code.

If you avoid strings and objects, and tweak the compiler options for speed, VB is easily at least 1/2 as fast as C. Objects are slower than anything. Strings are about as slow as in most other languages.

Re:VB with source

[The Bungi]

It's slow

Ummm, bullshit. VB6 is compiled to native code and except for a very few types of string processing and other niche things is as fast as anything produced by the MSVC++ compiler... because that's the compiler it uses. In any case, database reads and writes are not going to be any faster if you code them in assembler or VB, and that's what most VB applications are used for. UI apps are (in three year-old or newer hardware) effin' blazing fast.

and easy to write bad code in

True, but that is a limitation of the developer, not the language or the technology the language is built on.

so it shouldn't be used for anything other than a UI in a multi-tear system and shouldn't be used for large(anything more than a few hundred function points) systems.

Really now, that's quite the proclamation considering that many people developed quite complex apps with a more than a few hundred "function points", did them right and made quite a bit of money in the process.

Re:VB with source

[oliverthered]

Ummm, bullshit. VB6 is compiled to native code and except for a very few types of string processing and other niche things is as fast as anything produced by the MSVC++ compiler... because that's the compiler it uses. In any case, database reads and writes are not going to be any faster if you code them in assembler or VB, and that's what most VB applications are used for. UI apps are (in three year-old or newer hardware) effin' blazing fast.

Not in my considerable experience though it depends what your doing as to how slow VB is.

True, but that is a limitation of the developer, not the language of the technology the language is built on.

So why not use Assembly and get rid of VB then? I know lets get every English speaker to write code in German.

The point, the 'harder' it is to write good code the more chance of error, in VB it is hard to write good code and as a result you get worse code.


Really now, that's quite the proclamation considering that many people developed quite complex apps with a more than a few hundred "function points", did them right and made quite a bit of money in the process.

Yes, I've seen complex apps hacked together in Excell too. If the apps where in Java or Delphi or ... then they would probably run faster, have less bugs, have a better code base, be more extensible etc... I've had to 'fix' million pound VB apps before and it would have been so much easier if they weren't in VB. I've also been on a project for a large finincial company several months before VB6 came out, how were going to run mission critical systems written using VB6, the project was a re-write of an old[couple of years] system that couldn't deal with the system load.

VB is hard to refactor, bug prone and doesn't have a good object model. Anyone who suggests that it is good for mission critical or large projects should go and look at Java, Delphi, C++ or practically any other language out there.

Re:VB with source

[oliverthered]

1/2 as fast.... no way. VB 6 was faster because it 'compiled' instead of interpreting (though most things were still done through function calls)

Even a simple nested loop in VB is slower than 1/2 the speed of C I've typically had about 10times or more performance in C over VB for intensive tasks ( 1/2 the speed is still slow in real terms you transactions are twice as expensive)

Oh, and for strings use byref's and pointers into the string to speed things up a lot (same is true for java)

Re:VB with source

[The Bungi]

Not in my considerable experience

Your experience must not be all that considerable then.

in VB it is hard to write good code and as a result you get worse code.

Nope, in VB it's easy to write crappy code, which is a considerably different thing. The fact that it's (or was) more component oriented than object oriented forced you to do things a bit different then you'd do in C++ or whatever, but then again Perl and Lisp are no different.

Yes, I've seen complex apps hacked together in Excell too

Ha, ha. Desktop apps you mean? I coded VB for many years and I rarely did anything with a GUI. You're obviously not aware of what VB could do.

If the apps where in Java or Delphi or ... then they would probably run faster, have less bugs, have a better code base, be more extensible etc

Are you for real? What, you've never seen a badly designed and coded C++ application? Do you really believe it's the language and not the developer? Are you kidding me?

Anyone who suggests that it is good for mission critical or large projects should go and look at Java, Delphi, C++ or practically any other language out there.

You know what they say: all generalizations are stupid.

Re:VB with source

[oliverthered]

'Your experience must not be all that considerable then.'
or yours.

'Nope, in VB it's easy to write crappy code'

bollocks, as one very obvious example that anyone who has ever used VB cannot fail to miss VB's object model so poor you often have to hack around VB to do a good design.

VB also encourages the development of slow runtime bound objects via activeX/OLE when faster runtime bound objects via DLL's are available in other languages.

Try doing MAPI development (not simple MAPI) in VB, it's not quite impossible but your going to be writing a serious hack.

And try doing any data manipulation.

In Delphi and Java all these examples far easier ,neater, faster.

'Ha, ha. Desktop apps you mean?'

No, accounting applications, that used MAPI as a transport to send data to other copies of Excell etc....

'Are you for real? What, you've never seen a badly designed and coded C++ application? Do you really believe it's the language and not the developer? Are you kidding me?'

Yes I've seen badly designed C++ applications, hey look how bad my Grammar is, but far less Japanese have problems with Grammar than English speakers, so is it just my fault or is the language also to blame?

'You know what they say: all generalizations are stupid.'

Ok then more than 95% of the time, and statisticly I can generalise. (that's why a quart of milk only has to be 95% of a quart). I still think that most people who suggest VB projects are very short sighted since Delphi and Java are just as easy(and have been for a very long time) and better. I think their doing a 'no one ever got sacked for buying IBM' and copping out so that if the project fails no one will question their desision.

Re:VB with source

[Foolhardy]

bollocks, as one very obvious example that anyone who has ever used VB cannot fail to miss VB's object model so poor you often have to hack around VB to do a good design.

VB's object model is based on COM. When programming in certain other object-oriented imperative languages (like .NET or Java) I miss the everything-is-an-interface so anybody can implement it model that VB has. VB doesn't have inheritance so you have to write wrappers, but it isn't any worse than all the wrappers commonly needed for a sizable .NET project. I usually end up writing a mess of them to redirect stupidly placed events (click events on the container, not the item??) and working around single-only inheritance.
Here's an article about implementing traditional inheritance in VB6.

VB also encourages the development of slow runtime bound objects via activeX/OLE when faster runtime bound objects via DLL's are available in other languages.

COM interface function calls are implemented using a vtable, just like Java functions, overridable .NET functions and C++ virtual functions are. A vtable adds at most 1 indirection to a function call.
DLLs? Just what do you think COM and ActiveX libaries are? Besides, VB has no problem using dynamicly loaded functions from a DLL.

Try doing MAPI development (not simple MAPI) in VB, it's not quite impossible but your going to be writing a serious hack.

Do you have a good VB library for MAPI? If not, let's see you do MAPI without a library from Java. If you do have a library, it sounds like it isn't too great.

And try doing any data manipulation.

ADO seems to work nicely.

No, accounting applications, that used MAPI as a transport to send data to other copies of Excell etc....

You might try DCOM, the standard network transport for COM objects like the ones that VB and Excel provide.

Ok then more than 95% of the time, and statisticly I can generalise.

Oh, you have real statistical evidence to support your position? Let's have it!

Maybe the reason you are having so many problems with VB is that when it comes to that language, you don't know what you are doing and would rather blame the tools?

Can't even create the project...

[WWWWolf]

Okay, I installed 1.0 off Debian. I can't even create a new project, because the directory browser window in that step makes it very unclear what directory I'm trying to pick right now as the project directory. And, it won't even work otherwise: either it tells me to pick a valid directory (umm, I suppose I did?), won't let me pick a valid directory (I can choose it all right, but clicking on Next won't do anything!) or randomly picks "/" as the project directory, and it obviously fails because it can't create project there...

And on top of that, when I just started it up, tried to create a new directory in home directory, it actually created "New directory", then said it couldn't use that. Clicking on directories almost randomly didn't make things show up.

Then I had a bright idea: There were examples. I copied one off to a directory of my own. Tried opening it. It couldn't find the project from this directory at all.

At which project dpkg -r mysteriously nuked the whole thing and I just got back waiting for 1.0.2 or 1.1 or something.

I really hate to say this, but this experience sucked. This sort of lack of usability is completely inexcusable. The directory browing window was one of those horrible excuses of directory browsers stolen from Motif and nightmares.

I'm pretty certain the project looks good, and there's definitely a need for a good Basic-based RAD tool, but based on this horror story of mine, there's still some way to go before I can even try it.

Re:Can't even create the project...

[Cactus]

FYI, I'm experiencing similar problems in dcgui-qt's directory selector in Debian, maybe the QT library in Debian is just FUBAR ATM.

Re:Can't even create the project...

[codepunk]

Possible since it works perfectly under fedora for me...

Re:if you want VB on Linux why not just use REALBa

[anagama]

• Consider that already REALBasic 5.5 is loads ahead of this project in that much of the syntax is VB like, yet you can release one app simulataneously on Mac OS 9, OS X, Windows and Linux. ... sure it's not free software but it works DAMN well.

You're right it ain't free - It's $600 for the version that will work for all three OSes, or a grand if you want a 12 month subscription. Kind of steep for those of us who just fool around with computers for fun rather than work.

This should have been python

[Anonymous Coward]

When I switched to linux, I started writing in python because it works across platforms. Python was supposed to be simple, quick and effective. Every time I write something in python it seems like I find another 'issue' to deal with. Granted, I am doing stuff with python that I couldn't with vb but still it is a pain. If these guys produce something simple and robust and useful then more power to them.

BS

[brunes69]

Loads of top-level tool windows is a usability nightmare. It os not intuitive at all, and a new user has a hell of a time figuring out what things are in what window.

There is a reason both the Gnome and KDE projects have HCI guidelines. And this app doesn't follow either of them.

Re:BS

[mysticwhiskey]

Yep I have always hated this form of application window layout... it LOOKS too messy and tends to be too hard too use (think of someone shuffling papers on their desk... "I know it's got to be here somewhere...").
I prefer an "all-enclosed" approach, within one parent window. The help app is useful if it is spawned in a different window, though.

Re:BS

[oliverthered]

'Loads of top-level tool windows is a usability nightmare.'

Proof please, some people work better with a more 'cluttered' desktop, look up time and motion studies comparing dyslexics with non-dyslexics.

If you don't have proof I'm writing some applications to test exactly how usable things are.

Did you know that for a largish (say 1 inch) area the time it takes you to click it is in direct relation to how far away from the mouse it is. when ever anyone says 'the corners and edges are easiest to click' their talking crap for anything that's larger than a few pixels (and who could see something that small anyway!)

'There is a reason both the Gnome and KDE projects have HCI guidelines. And this app doesn't follow either of them.'

Have you read the KDE guidelines? most KDE apps don't follow them.

I would prefer that the toolkit separated the layout of the application from it's function so that the interface could be tailored to the user.

Cluttered IDE

[Quixadhal]

I have to agree. I abhorr interfaces like the Gimp (which is a fine program, shackled with a not so fine UI), and find it far too easy to lose the various toolbars under other things. It might not be so bad if clicking on any one UI element would bring the entire thing to the top...

--off topic--

This just reminds me that Linux peope STILL can't develop their own breakthroughs. We STILL feel compelled to try and mimic whatever comes out of Redmond, or those fruity mac people (*grin*, my Mom has one so I feel justified in that jab).

What's the number one complaint people have with Microsoft's GUI? Inconsistancy. What's the one thing Linux (or any Open Source movement for that matter) will never really have? Consistancy. Yeah, call me a doomsayer, but as long as everyone clings to the adage of allowing everyone to code whatever they like, there will never BE a consistant standard interface on the Linux desktop.

Shoot, X is almost (more than?) 20 years old now and we still can't get a single consistant cut-and-paste buffer that works across every X application!

Sorry for the rant, but I'm just horrified that the desktop movement has made so little progress since I started using Linux back in 1994. Back then, an X11R5 desktop on a 486/66 with 16M of ram using TVTWM as a window manager would run circles around the equivalent win95 box. Now, every time I pull up X with KDE and type "free", I cringe seeing how much memory it sucks up. I use linux for my servers, and love it... but I use that other OS for my desktop as I don't have to fight with it every day.

http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org

[DigitalTechnic]

Need I say more? Maybe Kylix( yes somewhat dead but the Open Edition is still free ) along with FreeCLX.

Re:http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org

[marcovje]

Free Pascal release a 2.0RC1 on new year!

Lazarus binaries have been rebuilt. Check it out.

ugly Tk widgets...

[green pizza]

...TK-Apps that are ugly as hell...

Am I the only one who likes the Tk widgets? They're not ugly, they're clean and simple. They're just as nice or perhaps even better than the Win32 widgets.

I think NeXTSTEP had the coolest widgets for its time, and these days there are some pretty nice GTK themes. But yeesh, why bash the Tk and Motif widget sets? Do you really find them that ugly? My only complaints about the look and feel of some Tk and Motif apps is when the designer has no concept of layout and makes for an ugly mess of buttons, or worse yet, has a complex layout in a small window that requires the user to resize or scroll just to see all of the UI. Then there's the colorblind Motif user that uses the default blue theme! Yikes!

But ugly??

I guess I'm just old.

Re:ugly Tk widgets...

[arkanes]

You're probably not the only one but you're in the vast minority. I don't have any special claim to aesthetic sensibilities but I think Tk is ugly as hell and I won't use it except under duress.

Of course I really find them ugly. So do lots of other people, that's why they say it so often. Did you think everyone was just making it up so they could be part of the "It's cool to say Tk is ugly" club?

Re:ugly Tk widgets...

[Joe Tie.]

Do you really find them that ugly?

In my case, yes. I don't usually think of myself as a person to put appearence over functionality, but in the case of Tk that's my rule. I'd rather port an application to use another system than use it with tk.

this gambas thing smells...

[C0vardeAn0nim0]

really. gambas is purtuguese for skunks...

ok, bad joke, but i just lost my job, so now i'll just burry myself. bye.

Re:this gambas thing smells...

[Anonymous Coward]

Not portuguese, brazilian portuguese.
and it's gambás! Gambas in portuguese means big shrimp! :)

Re:this gambas thing smells...

[Anonymous Coward]

ok, bad joke, but i just lost my job, so now i'll just burry myself. bye.

Hey, I'm the guy that replaced you.

Um, before you bury yourself, could you tell me where you left those TPS reports?

Admirable effort, however...

[ewanrg]

I certainly agree that there is a need for an "easy entry" development environment both for truly new users, and for folks who are new to Linux but have some programming experience. And this tool appears to be a decent answer to that.

However, I don't see the "upgrade" path. One of the strong points of Visual Studio is that you can move from Basic to C to C++ to C# within a familiar IDE and with the same supporting toolset. I don't see a plugin or other strategy for dealing with that here.

As for Eclipse (which I saw mentioned earlier in this discussion), I think it supports the upgrade path, but has serious issues with integration - some way of keeping incompatible plugins from being plugged in would be nice - and the IDE is still rough at best.

Perhaps there's an opportunity for the teams to work together on this?

---

Blah, Blah, Blog ;-)

Re:if you want VB on Linux why not just use REALBa

[green pizza]

You're right it ain't free - It's $600 for the version that will work for all three OSes, or a grand if you want a 12 month subscription.

That's peanuts and pocket change compared to what many corporations used to pay (and in some cases, still pay) for X-Designer and BX Pro to drag-and-drop design GUIs for their in-house Motif apps.

Many still use these expensive apps now that most support native MFC and Motif-in-MFC.

Why Qt?

[shimen]

No really why Qt?

My wishlist is:

Support for other widgets like GTK+

this is not ment to be flamebait

Re:Why Qt?

[PitaBred]

Because he's seen GTK's new default file selector and realized that it sucks?

VBRUN300.dll Not found?

[geminidomino]

For anyone who's never seen the error message above: can Gambas programs be compiled and distributed without being packed solid with loads of seperate controls and libraries? Or would the user have to download and install gambas him/herself?

Re:VBRUN300.dll Not found?

[Blakey Rat]

Use RealBasic. Programs developed with RealBasic are just one single application file, no .dll or .shlibs or .whatever required. And it's been around for years, and it's already at version 5.5, and their website doesn't have juvenile 'burning Windows logo' images on it.

Re:VBRUN300.dll Not found?

[Bandman]

because it would suck to judge a piece of software based on it's merits instead of a couple of screenshots (which are designed to garner interest, not necessarily display professionalism), right?

Re:VBRUN300.dll Not found?

[Blakey Rat]

It's hard enough to convince corporations to buy RB considering the game-related built-in classes they refuse to hide/remove. Imagine trying to convince them to use a piece of software with such juvenile jokes in it.

Re:VBRUN300.dll Not found?

[Bandman]

hopefully when you pitch the idea to them, you leave out the part about the burning MS logo. Or the game libraries. or the built in flight simulator (in Excel, from a "reputable" software dealer).

Re:VBRUN300.dll Not found?

[kosmosik]

I think you can do anything you whish :) you have full source code access so you probably can compile a one static lib with everything in it...

Re:VBRUN300.dll Not found?

[raindog2]

I think what fans of RealBasic don't understand is that sooner or later, Gambas (or another free IDE for quickly writing GUI programs, in a high level language, without ever touching a command line) is going to be included in most desktop Linux distributions. RealBasic, being proprietary, will therefore never be "standard equipment" even after they ship an IDE for Linux.

SuSE and Mandrake have already been shipping pre-1.0 versions of Gambas for months now, and it's been in Lindows' "Click'n'Run" forever. People who get Gambas as part of their Linux distro are never going to have to see the 'burning Windows logo', whatever that is.

I was glad to hear of RealBasic's announcement of Linux as a compiler target, and I look forward to their IDE, but Gambas could be more of a return to the days when many people, not just programmers by trade, wrote code because BASIC was "just there". You can cluck at their bad code all you want but they'll still be writing it.

Re:VBRUN300.dll Not found?

[geminidomino]

Wow, what a profoundly useless answer... I ask a question about the technical capabilities of one project, and the answer is an advertisement for a proprietary competetor...

Re:VBRUN300.dll Not found?

[Anonymous Coward]

> I think what fans of RealBasic don't understand is that sooner or later, Gambas (or another free IDE for quickly writing GUI programs, in a high level language, without ever touching a command line) is going to be included in most desktop Linux distributions.

So fucking what? I can install ghc with the same ease (single command) as Gambas, and I don't see Haskell taking over the world. Or do you mean to presume that every major Linux distro is going to start writing its admin scripts with it and therefore bundle it? Fat chance.

KMDI?

[garlicbready]

I've found gambas to be pretty useful for prototyping something quickly, especially with the auto completion. If you want the interface to be an MDI I'd imagine that it should be fairly easy to do this as I believe the IDE for gambas is actually written in gambas. I think one of the problems at the moment is that the gambas component that allows access to the QT Workspace control is a bit buggy Although if someone could write a gambas component for KMDI http://web.tiscali.it/andreabergia/kmditutorial.ht ml this would allow the use of an interface similar to that of kdevelop

Little behind the times?

[thegrommit]

> looks promising as GNU/Linux's answer to Visual Basic

The problem is that the MS world has largely moved onto .NET and C#

Re:Little behind the times?

[LnxAddct]

http://www.go-mono.com/mbas.html
Regards,
Steve

Why not Mono basic?

[StrawberryFrog]

"Mono basic (mbas) is a CIL compiler for the VisualBasic.NET language, an extended version of Visual Basic. It's based on the MCS compiler and still in heavy development, though many language features are already supported."

Mono basic will be based on VB.NET, not awful old VB.
Mono basic will actually be rather compatible with MS VB.NET in language and class library.
Mono basic will be able to take advantage of code written in or for Mono/C#, and any other languages that get ported to the mono platform.

So what does this project have going for it over mono basic?
OK, so right now it's a bit further down the road than mono basic, but will it really maintain that lead? I think Mono has more weight behind it. e.g. novell.

Re:Why not Mono basic?

[nberardi]

I agree, they said in this article that this would crush VB, well I beleive VB.Net has already done that. This is the clasic example of one of the major problems with many OSS projects. "Too little, too late." This would have been a good alternative to Windows, first if it worked on Windows, and second if it was pre-2002. But since neither is true, this is just somebody's attempt at saying "look we have finally cought up to Microsoft.".

Too bad it does basic

[Anonymous Coward]

Because there are better open source scripting languages out there; I mean, it would only take a source-code editing window addition to glade and you could edit your perl event handlers and watch them run on the fly. Heaven !

So why Basic ? Why not javascript, or perl, or python ? As I said, it isn't even the easiest language out there anymore (it is, in fact, more like a distant nightmare to me). And although the Basic in there could (of course) be made to do things like string indexing, passing and returning of anything more complex than a basic type to functions, and FCOL, have an integer type composed of more than two bytes (!), but still it would be Basic, you know.. single line statements.. if then else end if.. no assignment as an expression.. no bitwise operators.. -shudder-

Re:if you want VB on Linux why not just use REALBa

[seguso]

I don't see the advantage here... sure it's not free software

As if that were of little importance...

Just one guy

[spectrokid]

I think it is amazing such a big project can be done by just one guy working on it part-time (read his personals). If he can do such a thing on his own, then how comes we haven't had super-duper RAD tools with IDE in Linux for years?

Re:Just one guy

[Anonymous Coward]

Didn't you read the comments? People are just interested in Perl/Console based environments.

That's why Microsof$ always wins: free software developers uses to write programs with emacs and debug it with gdb in console mode...

so sad!

Re:Just one guy

[Anonymous Coward]

I debug in emacs mode :)

Re:Just one guy

[Ilan Volow]

A heroin-like addiction to emacs and vi.

.Net IDE makes it obsolete

[Anonymous Coward]

Well as I know my VB 6.0 rather well I'll definitely be giving this a go but I can't help thinking it's rather late. After all I doubt it'll even be comparable to the Visual Studio .Net IDE.

If there's one thing that'll keep my place of employment using an MS operating system it's that damned fine .Net IDE. Sorry but I've never used any other tool that even remotely compares to it (and I've used quite a few over the years)

Whilst Sharpdevelop, Monodevelop, Eclipse and probably Gambas etc. etc. are good in their own way they just don't compare to using the .Net IDE. Trying to develop code in anything else makes me feel like I've gone back to the early '80s, writing COBOL with a plain text editor (hey I needed the work and that's what was paying).

On another note I wholeheartedly agree with several other posters. The screenshot with a burning Windows logo simply makes the project look utterly childish and unfit for professional use. And for gods sake, the GIMP style "fling stuff all over the screen" IDE sucks, sucks, SUCKS. No wonder our project managers call Linux a toy operating system. It may be based on the soundest computer engineering principles on the planet but the GUIs look like they've been designed by spiders on LSD.

Don't even get me started on the comical lack of a consistent cut & paste. Sorry it's 2005 that's wholy unacceptable.

But having said all this if Gambas let's me knock up some cheap and cheerful apps on my home PCs I'm all for it - See, I do actually use Linux it's just that I'm objective enough to realise how superior Windows is in some areas.

I liked the wallpaper (and here's a link)

[Anonymous Coward]

For others who share my tastes, here's a link to the wallpaper image.

Standard

[gnalle]

There are many IDE's for Linux, but most of them only supports a few languages. Has there been any efforts to agree on a standard grammar for parsers and lexers and syntax highlighting? Which possibilities are available? (Sorry if I am asking a stupid question here, I am not a computer scientist)

I am referring to something like semantic for emacs http://cedet.sourceforge.net/semantic.shtml.

Re:Standard

[Anonymous Coward]

You should look at the Eclipse project at eclipse.org. It's primarily a Java IDE, but it has a rich plugin interface; already there is a C/C++ IDE plugin that makes use of gcc. It has autocomplete and everything. Very nice, especially for Java development. Oh, and it's open source, of course.

I so really want those wallpapers!!!!!

[zanderredux]

Do someone know where we can get'em???

Re:I so really want those wallpapers!!!!!

[iwbcman]

You are *not* alone !

Surely someone knows where to get them-karma points for the poster who posts a URL pointing to that wallpaper.

please, pretty please, pretty pretty please ;)

Re:I so really want those wallpapers!!!!!

[Anonymous Coward]

funny wallpapers

http://www.kde-look.org/content/show.php?content=1 0434
http://www.kde-look.org/content/show.php?content=8 586
http://www.kde-look.org/content/show.php?content=7 858
http://www.kde-look.org/content/show.php?content=9 087
http://www.kde-look.org/content/show.php?content=6 22

Re:I so really want those wallpapers!!!!!

[Anonymous Coward]

http://www.kuznetsov.uklinux.net/gallery-4-linux-g o.php

why bother porting it to windows?

[museumpeace]

...Now, if it ran in Windows too...
I admit I am not a typical PC user [who is?]

1. I get by fine with Open Office
2. I use VB but lately find NetBeans IDE also handy for knocking out little apps...vb for apps others might use, NetBeans to please myself

Perhaps because my intentions are not primarily commercial, and I am not hung up on strict compatibility with everyone else's productivity apps, I see making tools that run on proprietary/monopolistic OSes as supporting the evil wizard only because he has so many thralls. If instead, the Gambas developers devoted some of of their energies to adding development features that address, for instance, the security and search weaknesses [leverage that DB integration] which plague users and features that help develop apps which can work with Open Office documents, more of the thralls will wake up and come over to the good side.
In other words: Don't give your good ideas to Microsoft...they will copy them soon enough. Rather, copy theirs!

Re:why bother porting it to windows?

[drfreak]

Because by having open source software that can replace an existing MS app, pretty soon MS will be down to the point that nobody wants to buy their software because the free alternatives are just as good. Then as people start to learn there is even a free OS that can replace it, there will be no reason to keep running Windows.

Here's a link to the wallpaper

[Anonymous Coward]

The image of tux shooting down a windows icon can be found here.

Re:Here's a link to the wallpaper

[Oliver_Etchebarne]

I made a remake of that wallpaper. You can donwload it right here (or under the "Tamanos para bajarlo" title on the former link).

Re:Here's a link to the wallpaper

[Anonymous Coward]

Nice work, thanks! :)

This is the dumbest thing slashdot has ever said

[Anonymous Coward]

Just because slashdot hates M$, to actually state that a first generation basic language could 'crush' a seventh generation oop language. Simply idiotic.

drawbacks of some OSS, indeed

[N3wsByt3]

Well, not that it's entirely an only-OSS problem, of course.

But I completely agree with you on many aspects. I first tried the GIMP years ago, and I was dissapointed majorily. Ok, it was free, and the concept of OSS appeals to me, but ultimately, you want something that is easy to use. It was not as much the lack of features (which, btw, is almost gone; projects like OpenOffice, Linux and GIMP have catched up and have almost all the features of whatever proprietary thingy), but more the way it is presented.

The 'spread-out' windows are SO f- annoying, and I always wonder why it is so popular with OSS. When I compare that to PSP, and the relative ease by which you can do things, then the GIMP is seriously user-unfriendly. I wish, by god, they got rid of it, it's SUCH annoying crap. Like yourself, I just want one central window with the options available within that window, NOT a myriad of floating windows where you have to search through like in a labyrinth.

Why is it so difficult to see that one central place is better then a whole bunch of stupid and confusing little windows?

Luckily, this slowly gets through even thick skulls, and I'm rather pleased to see that GIMP2 has already a much more central-orientated look.

Hopefully, others will follow.

Re:drawbacks of some OSS, indeed

[Anonymous Coward]

This is probably because the day you want to mix windows from Photoshop and another application, you can't do it but you can always use a specific desktop for the Gimp if you you want to emulate Photoshop behaviour. More power to you with the Gimp

Dearie, dearie me...

[TractorBarry]

"Now, if it ran in Windows too, it would truly crush VB for database applications"

Oh dear. Why does anything Linux related have to "crush/smash/destroy" something Windows related ? Why not just aim to make a better tool ? Computers are after all only a tool to get a job done.

And in case the author missed it the Microsoft world went .Net a while back so VB 6.0 is now officially "legacy code".

Re:Dearie, dearie me...

[drfreak]

Because after years of watching Microsoft dominate and constrain our choices in software, it is nice to finally see somthing that makes progress in "crushing" that monopoly. Sure, a lot of people are using VB.NET now. But there is still a lot of legacy VB code out there which will easily port over to gambas. Besides, I do not think there is an equivalent yet for VB.NET in Linux.

No, I do not hate Microsoft, but it is always nice to see an egomaniacal business have it's bubble burst by the commoners. Obviously losing the antitrust lawsuits did not make them much better.

Re:Dearie, dearie me...

[Anonymous Coward]

You're out of your tiny fucking mind!

How is gambas going to 'crush' MS by offering a (partial and unproven) migration path for apps built using a legacy development system (VB6)?

VB.NET offers a much better path (hell, even C# does, and worth the pain in the long term).

Kudos for the developer of gambas for a technically interesting and worthy effort, but it isn't going to crush a grape, let alone MS.

Re:if you want VB on Linux why not just use REALBa

[fireboy1919]

Heck, if you're going there, why not just buy something that actually produces cross compatible code (i.e. will run on anything, not just platforms three platforms). There are a handful of RAD GUIs for wxWidgets.

Be a professional, use the right tool for the job

[Morgaine]

But what if I don't want OO?

If you are a professional engineer then you will always use the right tool for the job. This is why a professional knows numerous languages, and only some of those are OO.

In addition to his object-oriented tools, he'll also know his way around procedural, purely functional, dataflow and logic-oriented languages as well, to cover the major paradigms in computing. And orthogonal to that, he'll also know some languages at each of the various levels of abstraction, from low-level assemblers through generic scripting languages to the highest-level business or AI domain-oriented languages.

You may notice that the above bears no relationship whatsoever with the typical "OO-everything" attitude on Slashdot. That's not really surprising, when you consider that not many of the posters here seem to be professional engineers. Languages and paradigms are treated more akin to religions than to tools on this forum.

To answer your question then, I'd recommend that first you fill-in some of your missed education by taking a short course in a safe scripted OO language --- Python is one of the better candidates. Then, armed with procedural and objective tools (at the very least), you select which is most appropriate based on the job you're about to tackle. Some will be naturally objective, some won't.

And just ignore the Slashdot noobs as they so fervently whack in their screws with a hammer. :-)

An alternative approach: PyQt

[InodoroPereyra]

First of all, my warmest regards to the gamba team. And I wish them all the success.

But I thought I should point out that there is a beautifull platfrom for cross-platftorm RAD. This is PyQt, used in conjunction with Qt Designer. It combines the power of Qt as a GUI dev platform, with the power, extendability and simplicity of Python. I think that gambas aims at a simpler approach though, so I am not saying that it is useless. What I am saying is, if you need a very powerfull yet simple RAD with graphical capabilities, maybe you would like to consider QtDesinger + PyQt. It also has the advantage that is a really mature platform.

Cheers !

Re:An alternative approach: PyQt

[codepunk]

Dude I love python as much as the next python coder but QT designer does not actually support python natively does it? Last time I used it I could build a interface with it then I had to write a bunch of code to load the screens, set event handlers and a bunch of other crap. This gambas thing is one language but it is all integrated not a afterthought hack.

Re:An alternative approach: PyQt

[InodoroPereyra]

but QT designer does not actually support python natively does it?

Well, if you install pyqt, you will be using pyuic, which converts the designer output into python code. From the pyqt page:

PyQt includes pyuic which takes the same designs that uic converts to C++, but converts them to the equivalent Python code. This makes PyQt particularly useful as a rapid prototyping environment for applications that will eventually be implemented in C++.

Give it a shot, it is a pleasure to use !

Re:An alternative approach: PyQt

[drfreak]

This makes PyQt particularly useful as a rapid prototyping environment for applications that will eventually be implemented in C++.

Oh. And I just love to script up a nice application in Bash/Kommander as well before I go and write it for real in C++. Come on, we are talking about a cross-platform self-hosted IDE here. Not a prototyping platform.

To all the cry babies

[codepunk]

I actually downloaded the source a few days ago and compiled and installed it. I find that it is a extremely well done VB like environement for linux. Any day I can get a decent programming ide complete with the source and licensed under the GPL it is a wonderful day.

1. The app uses multiple windows but guess what if you don't like that then make it a single window interface. The ide is written in gambus so a little refactoring and you can have a single window interface.

2. It is extremely complete for a 1.0 release and the design of the interpreter, debugger, libraries are all rather complete.

3. I can build a gui front end to a my sql table with barely a dozen lines of code.

4. The language is not actually VB it is improved and corrected VB.

5. It had a project packager that is extremely well done.

6. The forms designer is fairly top notch and easy to work with.

Ok when all you cry babies get done writing your own interpreter, compiler, ide and make it work even half as well come back and talk to me, till then shut up. No I have no involvment in the project other than using it a little but I applaud the developer for his efforts.

It is a gift people, treat it as such...

Re:To all the cry babies

[Anonymous Coward]

I've used it as well.

For being pretty much a one-man-show, Gambas rocks. If you can't appreciate his efforts, you have no business using free software, IMO.

Re:To all the cry babies

[Daimaou]

It is a gift people, treat it as such...

That small sentence is probably the wisest thing I've ever read on Slashdot.

I can't count the number of stories I've read where someone has created a program that the whole world can download and use for free and half the people posting on Slashdot whinge about it (too many choices; can't compete with Microsoft; Y.A.L.D., hard to install; too many windows; blah, blah, blah).

People don't compare the open source or free software gift presented to them with the nothing they would have had otherwise, but rather pick it apart as if somehow they were entitled to the donor's labor as if they had paid the developer and he/she failed to meet their expectations and ran away with their money. I'd hate to have to buy Christmas or birthday presents for these people.

What happened to showing a little gratitude for a gift, even if it wasn't exactly what you wanted?

Re:To all the cry babies

[Ilan Volow]

When end-users with justified complaints are called whiners and told to stop criticizing gifts, especially when talking about usability issues, it becomes enormously apparent why Open Source and Free Software are still getting their ass kicked in the end-user desktop arena.

I've also noticed that many of the "it's just a gift" people, when you turn your back, are start advocating for their software to be pushed into areas like businesses and governments where the users won't have any choice in what they run and will be forced to use the software. In my opinion, when something is forced on someone, it stops being "just a gift" and the person who made it stops being "merely a volunteer".

Re:To all the cry babies

[codepunk]

No idiot I am not saying one should not be critical of the quality of it. What I am saying is that I thank him for the many long hours he has spent and if the ui was a problem, I WOULD FIX IT MY DAMN SELF. For another thing when some idiot plops some MS crap on my desk and I don't have one hell of alot of choice in fixing it now do I?

Re:To all the cry babies

[Daimaou]

I don't recall reading where this guy was forcing his software on anybody. Also, just because you create something and give it away doesn't make you an indentured servant, which is what a lot of the "it's not good enough" whiners seem to think.

It's one thing to go directly to the developer and offer constructive criticism. I have no problems with that. It is quite another to bitch and moan on Slashdot.

Finally, in my opinion the main reason open source software hasn't killed its proprietary counterparts already is that people just aren't interested in really using their computers to their fullest. It takes knowledge and effort to do so and most people just aren't interested in putting forth the effort. That's okay though. Isn't it nice that we all have a choice?

Re:Be a professional, use the right tool for the j

[Peter La Casse]

If you are a professional engineer then you will always use the right tool for the job. This is why a professional knows numerous languages, and only some of those are OO.

In addition to his object-oriented tools, he'll also know his way around procedural, purely functional, dataflow and logic-oriented languages as well, to cover the major paradigms in computing. And orthogonal to that, he'll also know some languages at each of the various levels of abstraction, from low-level assemblers through generic scripting languages to the highest-level business or AI domain-oriented languages.

That sounds more like an ideal than a reality. In my experience, many professional engineers are just as susceptible to the "if your only tool is a hammer, everything looks like a nail" syndrome as the hacks.

The ideal is certainly more, well, ideal, so I encourage anybody reading this to branch out whenever possible. Playing with a new language every couple months can certainly be fun, in addition to broadening your horizons.

The ideal seems to be realized more in geeks who program on their own time for fun, in addition to whatever they do at work. When it's on work time, I write what they pay me to write, which is often not flexible in terms of language or development environment; when it's after hours and I'm writing something for myself, I have the freedom to use whatever language I feel like.

enlightening...but for me I'm confused

[jago25_98]

I'll have to have another try with gimp.

I had 4 iceWM virtual desktops, usually with IRC, browser, file manager, term, root term, downloading program.

I also have:
F12 = maximise window
F11 = tile windows
alt-c = close window
alt-x = run program
alt left/right - change desktops

I found gimp a royal pain because I have to take my hand off the mouse to switch between desktops... just to change tool. It's alright but not for quick editing. I'd rather have the main window present all the time and that's hard to do when the main gimp window (open when first loaded) is awkward to resize; you can't just have it at the bottom of the screen like a toolbar.

Never the less I'll try what you suggest - wish I'd known about it earlier! :D

It gets worse for me though.

I now use a Windows box in the bedroom with an Xserver on it and keep the noise linux server box in another room. I use this silent windows box in my bedroom to connect through and run linux progs while also able to play games. Now when I use gimp I'll have to figure out how to do virtual desktops - use nvidia's virtual desktop thing or run icewm over remote X. Thing is I can only use icewm's hotkeys if it is in focus! Guess I'll have to look into 3rd party explorer replacements.

It gets better... ;)

I also run VNC because I need some graphical programs running all the time...
then the whole thing goes out the window!

Now all the sloppy coders will migrate to Linux!

[Anonymous Coward]

I hate VB. All the program logic tends to get stuffed into all the event handlers and then a lot of (thick) glue has to be poured over everything to tie it all together. I know that's not really the language's fault, but I haven't read many programs in VB that do it differently so it must just be the type of programmers who use VB that are the problem.

Gambas 1.0 - a free gift

[UglyMike]

God, you people can be such bastards....
Here is a guy, single handedly building a full, self-hosted, VB-like development environment on Linux as a gift to the community and all you people do is shit all over his project.
Why Basic? Why QT? Why MDI? Why funny pictures on the main page? Why not .NET?
Python is better! Realbasic is better! Mono is better!
It's open source for crying out loud!! Don't like MDI? Change it! (after all it is self hosting) Think REALBasic is better? Fine, go buy that then! Prefer Mono's VB? OK, sit around and wait a bit longer. Don't like the site's informal look? Where is your mockup of a better one then?
Let's face it. The only reason you're all bitching (most of you anyways..) is that you're too THICK to change any of it! I'm reading the developer forum and I see no patches coming in from any of you offering SDI, GTK+, .NET compatibility, Python plug-ins etc.
Bunch of ingrates....

Re:Gambas 1.0 - a free gift

[Quattro Vezina]

Don't like the site's informal look? Where is your mockup of a better one then?

I swear, every time you people say something like that, my blood pressure skyrockets. Do people demand that movie critics make their own movies? Do people demand that restaurant reviewers cook their own food? Of course not. You're just making yourself look stupid, so shut the fuck up.

Oh, and this is coming from someone who likes the Gambas site's layout. Well, I can't stand that damn blink tag, but everything else is fine.

Re:Gambas 1.0 - a free gift

[WinterSolstice]

No, big difference.
Movie critics are complaining about a multi-million dollar production they PAID to see.
Food critics are complaining about a meal they PAID to eat.

These idiots are like the bitch who goes to a potluck without anything to share, and just complains about all the food.

You don't have to like this stuff, you don't have to use this stuff, but you don't have to be a jerk about it.

Hell, I hate the layout of the SAPNet system, I hate the layout of the MSKB. But I pay to access them all the same. This guy? His stuff is at least free.

Personally, I like Gambas, and I like the site. I don't do BASIC much anymore, but I might actually try it out. After all, anything so many slashdotters compain about has to be good.

-WS

Re:Gambas 1.0 - a free gift

[SenorChuck]

Another difference.

Critics aren't spouting out petty complaints about something unless it's complete and utter crap. They offer critiques (read: useful suggestions) regarding what they felt could be better about what they have just experienced.

Although, some critics are just people with loud opinions who think they could do what you did even better, but lack the skillset to do so.

Re:if you want VB on Linux why not just use REALBa

[raindog2]

Sure, if you want to do your development on a Windows or Mac box and crosscompile for Linux, and don't mind spending a lot of money, RealBasic is great. Believe it or not, though, there are some pretty sizable shops out there who don't have Macs and whose in-house developers use Linux.

Re:Cluttered IDE - Dual screens

[Anonymous Coward]

A lot of us use dual screens and then floating toolbars are great.

Uh? BASIC is 'COBOL-like' ?

[Anonymous Coward]

Clearly you know nothing of either BASIC or COBOL.

Nevermind, this is slashdot, where the opinions of uninformed gimps like you count for everything!

remember what the "B" in Basic stands for...

[willCode4Beer.com]

Ok, I know that I'm a trollin today but, really, let us not forgetwhat the "B" stands for.

"B"eginners
"A"ll purpose
"S"ymbolic
"I"nstruction
"C"ode

Regardless of the proposed merits of the language. Do "you" as a professional want to tell the world that your best programming skills are for a language developed specifically for "BEGINNERS".

Where is the programmer ego in all this?
Where is I write code in machine language with a hex editor, all other are weak, in this?

for those who'd rather Gtk than Qt

[raindog2]

A Gtk+ component has been released for the 1.1 development series, and is making rapid progress. The goal is to make the Gtk and Qt components as code-compatible as possible...

Ironic

[Saeed al-Sahaf]

Isn't it a bit ironic that we are looking for a GNU/Linux answer to VB, when there is virtually nothing good said about VB in the GNU/Linux community? It's sort of like "Man, oh man! VisualBasic SUCKS! Let's make a GNU/Linux version!" I don't get it.

HCI

[hummassa]

There is more to it... in KDevelop, eg, you can train your muscular memory to the buttons of such or such panel. I am working in Delphi (custom systems maintenance) for almost 3 years now and I had to train the weird F11/F12 combo (rotate code/form-design/widget-props) so I can be really productive.

Re:if you want VB on Linux why not just use REALBa

[hogger]

The downloadable standard version (single OS) is only $99. The downloadable pro version (multi OS) is $399.

$99 isn't too out of line when compared with the alternatives.

What's bad about realbasic is that they don't have an IDE for linux. The only thing linux about realbasic is that the mac or windows development IDE can create linux executables. This makes it somewhat incomparable to gambas.

1994 called...

[Anonymous Coward]

and want's its VB runtime back?

VBRUN300.DLL was VB version *3* FFS!

Go with the flow.

[Doc Ruby]

Where's the flowchart editor that compiles into UML?

;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) and ;-)

[Daltorak]

I'm automatically wary of any man which winks at me repeatedly while pitching his product to me.

Really?

[jotaeleemeese]

-Mozilla: pop-up blockers, tabed browsing, bayesian spam filtering.

-Imagemagick: scripted batch processing of images.

-OpenSSH: secure communication through ssh tunnels (ok, not origianl, but by no measen copied from Redmond or Appleland).

-gcc, same as above.

-Xfree, X11: multiheaded workstations.

and lets not forget than neither Apple or MS had TCP/IP until very late in the 90s...

and so on and so forth.

Visual Basic survives...

[diamondsw]

...not because of it's syntax (perish the thought!) or even because of its RAD capabilities (many development environments have caught up there now). No, it survives and flourishes because thousands of third party developers write add-ons for it. You can go into a project knowing that pretty much any damn thing you need, whether it's interface, backend, etc, has already been written. Furthermore, VB is able to easily interact with other applications, making it great for automation and data extraction/processing.

Gambas does look like a great IDE, but it has no chance of displacing VB.

Wrong.

[Spy der Mann]

The release of gambas IS great news, however, simply 'cause now we can reply to the endless "there is no simple RAD solution under linux" rants with "then use gambas, you fool!"

BZZZZZZZZT. Wrong!

The rant was "there is no simple cross-platform RAD solution".

Try again.

Re:Wrong.

[RenatoRam]

I'm sorry?

Never heard of that.

The rant was from microserfs and vb-addicts whining because there was not VisualBasic on linux.

Your average windows developer does not even know what cross-platform means.

Agreed

[g_bit]

Where will all the components for Gambas come from? Is the database access as full featured as ADO? In VB we have access to so many nice commercial code and GUI components, I won't be switching anytime soon.

That's the problem with the Linux KDE/Gnome/etc. environment...they are so fragmented that nobody can make components that will work on all Linux systems.

Suckers.

The systems are preventing overlapping windows

[spitzak]

MDI style interfaces are crap. We had "tiled" in about 1982 (check out the Andrew window system) and it was rejected for overlapping windows for very good reasons.

Overlapping windows allow the windows to have arbitrary sizes. This is an incredible huge advantage, so large that it makes it almost incredible that anybody would consider anything else.

Unfortunatley modern systems are incredibly broken so that trying to get overlapping windows to work is almost impossible. This leads to compromises such as "put a tiled window manager inside a window" or even horrid things such as MDI, which is really "put an overlapping window manager inside a tiled one and put it inside a window". (note that real MDI has been pretty much rejected, most people when they say MDI mean the tiled-in-a-window api)

It also leads to huge numbers of people believing the problem is overlapping windows, not that the system prevents them from working properly.

What does the system need? Here it is:

Absolutely #1 priority: STOP RAISING THE F**KING WINDOWS ON CLICK!!!!! Hey, you idiots, my program is perfectly capable of calling window->raise() on click. My program is incapable of magically stopping that behavior. PLEASE, at least on Linux, get a CLUE! And don't tell me "it can be turned off in metacity" because I need a GUARANTEE that it is off.

Number 2 priority: when the user tries to raise a window by clicking on the title bar, just tell me, so I can raise other windows as well. Again I am quite capable of raising the window myself. Of course I can somewhat simulate the behavior I want with "child" or "transient-for" windows but it is a nightmare, with this simple change I can ignore all that, and do things like have multiple "main" windows with all the tools remaining above them.

Less important but nice:

3. Let me create the icon/taskbar entries myself, completely independent of any windows. I should be able to create one of these, and when I create any window say "this window belongs to this taskbar entry". Tell me when the user clicks on it, and I will pick what to show. Currently you are also forced to use "child" windows to avoid extra taskbar entries. (on X there is a "window group" interface, but I have never seen a window manager pay attention to this).

4. If the user tries to iconize a window, don't do anything except tell me (but perhaps turn on the icon/taskbar entry if you have some old WM design where they are missing when the window is not iconized). I can hide the window (and all the others) myself. Currently you can fake this by watching for show/hide but it is ugly.

Currently the only solution is to use "child" windows. This at least somewhat mitigates the goddamm "click to top". However you cannot make any structure other than a branch-less stack work correctly. You certainly cannot have more than one "bottom" window (such as two different paintings in photoshop). You also can't have more than one child because click-to-top still happens between them, making overlapping them useless.

These limitations have pretty much forced the "tiled window" interface. And they have also forced people into the mistaken notion that only tiled interfaces can work. This is a very bad state of affairs.

Re:VB with source (totally OT, but needs said)

[Anonymous Coward]

*multi-tier
*but
*foundation
*(horrible grammar throughout)
Do people who write like this realize how stupid it makes you sound? That people will automatically assume that you're a mouth-breathing troglodyte simply because of your lack of linguistic skills?
The prototypical response: "You understood me, what's the problem?" The problem is that I also understand when a gorilla is mad at me. It's not a huge leap of cognition. But it takes me more work to understand you, and you still look like a gorilla. Have pride in all of your work, learn correct grammar and spelling.

Re:if you want VB on Linux why not just use REALBa

[DuckofDeath87]

Well, I would have to say that the reason Gambas is a big deal is that it is Open. However, being cross platform is very nice. Hopfully Gambas will add that functionality soon.

What's the point of the Microsoft-style MDI?

[WebCowboy]

Perhaps it's my Windows background, but I want a single window with toolboxes and sidebars inside that window (see Visual Studio or KDevelop).

I use Visual Studio all the time and while I think overall it is an excellent product, I find the "single window with toolboxes and sidebars INSIDE" MDI setup completely pointless and annoying. When I use Visual Studio's IDE I find it is almost useless unless the main window is maximised anyways--all the toolboxes and menubars and frames and everything must be jammed into the parent window and when that window is too small the actual area showing my code gets too small. Therefore, what is the point of making that one big window in the first place?

Why not just put all that stuff right on the desktop so you can move and size it wherever you want on the screen? The only reason I can see for the MDI in most cases is that it is a workaround for the limited capabilities of the Windows desktop (which does not allow you to switch between multiple screens/workspaces out-of-the-box).

Anyways it seems that when I use Windows apps that are presented in an MDI almost without exception I maximise that parent window (Visual Studio and Paintshop Pro being the two that stand out in my mind). As such, I think that while the GAMBAS IDE might need some polish it is taking the right approach. That's just my observation...YMMV.

I tend to prefer MacOS and GNOME-like interfaces over Windows and KDE-style. Perhaps the MDI would be a better choice for consistency's sake if an app is targeted towards Windows and KDE much more heavily than MacOD and GNOME. Other than that, it seems to me creating an extra window just to contain other windows is a waste of resources.

Re:Typical Slashdot BS

[Anonymous Coward]

erm, Steve Jobs is the reason Apple is profitable right now.

Before he came back, they were on the verge of bankruptcy. They had gone through inept CEO after inept CEO who didn't know what they were doing in the business.

Steve Jobs comes back and guess what he does? Gets rid of the clones and has Apple create the iMac.

Now almost every year (every annual MacWorld) there is something new that Apple puts out to get it closer to the masses.

The rest of your ranting made a good deal of sense, but on that point, I'm afraid your opinion is lacking in reality.

Re:if you want VB on Linux why not just use REALBa

[Anonymous Coward]

I believe that the next major release of REALbasic will include an IDE that runs on Linux.

Can Gambas be used to produce DB front-end apps?

[Anonymous Coward]

Maybe I should check the website more carefully, but can Gambas be used to write the GUI front-end to a MySQL database? I currently have a 4D-based music library DB that I whipped up a few moons ago and that I would like to port to MySQL (it would then be easy to do quick checks for how many of this, how many of that, how many LP copies of...). What stopped me was that I had no way of quickly whipping up a graphical / programmed front-end to that DB, so... If Gambas lets me do that, count me in!

w00t!

[zanderredux]

Thanks a lot, AC!!!!

Re:VB with source (totally OT, but needs said)

[oliverthered]

I would and have tried on a number of occasions but probably have dyslexia. Look at how bad my grammar and spelling is, that's how bad everyone elses' looks to me.

I am sorry that you base the intelligence of a gorilla on it's lack of communication skills.

Sorry you got modded flamebait

[Anonymous Coward]

You made some interesting points there (if rather abrasively put).

Like you, I think I wanted to see Linux (or something similar) succeed as an alternative to Windows as a commonplace, free desktop OS.

I like Linux as a backroom server OS and all, but I don't think the community will ever get it's shit together, or agree for long enough without spliting into hostile factions, to ever see Linux get anywhere near Windows in mind/market share.

Like it or not, it takes the focus, drive and discipline of a "for-profit" business like MS or Apple to deliver something that really fits the needs of real people.

BSD Port ?

[nurb432]

It appears that .99 versions wouldnt build properly.. Was this fixed in 1.0 perhaps?

Re:Typical Slashdot BS

[Anonymous Coward]

Agreed.

I don't much care for Jobs as a person, but he understands Apples unique place in the market and maximizes every bit of it.

Jobs knows that Apple has a 'cool' factor and plays well to the creative sector. He spends money on top-class industrial designers and hardware engineers and marketeers - and it all works very well.

Jobs is a bit of a fascist really, but look how the Mac crowd bow down to him and his products.

Genius I call it!

Not plug and play on my FC2 system

[Anonymous Coward]

[root@K7VTA3b root]# yum install gambas
Gathering header information file(s) from server(s)
Server: Fedora Core 2 - i386 - Base
Server: Dag RPM Repository for Fedora Core
Server: Fedora Linux 2 - i386 - freshrpms
Server: Fedora Core 2 - i386 - Released Updates
Finding updated packages
Downloading needed headers
Resolving dependencies ....Unable to satisfy dependencies
Package gambas needs XFree86, this is not available.

Re:Should I plunge my cockerspaniel into her bum?

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes come on :-D

my vb rant

[slapout]

I think many people here bashing vb (6) are missing the point. VB 6 is a Rapid Application Development tool. The idea is to be able to create a program quickly and easily. I have several (admittedly) small applications on my desktop that I wrote in vb. I use them on a weekly basis. It would have taken me a long time to write them in another language. Now, I don't disagree that larger programs are hard to maintain. And I admit that it has its problems. But I've always (well, usually) enjoyed working with it. I think it deserves consideration as a rad tool.

RE:Lameness filter encountered. Post aborted!

[Anonymous Coward]

Give him a break, he's French. Maybe he's overcompensating.

Re: Y2K: Hoax, Or Averted Disaster?

[mattOzan]

Apparently there is a Y2K bug in Slashcode that puts comments on Y2K subjects into the wrong discussion threads.

Re:You're a dork

[Anonymous Coward]

Oh, I see. You work at LowerMyBills.com now doing Oracle and Linux "Stuff".

Have you ever built a desktop application in your life or do you spend most of your time building (snicker) web "applications"?

Because it's so good

[Halcyon-X]

Because Gambas is such a high quality release that seems viable, usable, and competitive, everyone is automatically comparing it to commercial alternatives. This is but a testament to the quality of Gambas itself. Great job on the project, we should hope that every open source project would be of such high quality, and releasing an equally high quality IDE developed in Gambas along with it. Simply amazing.

Better colours

[Anonymous Coward]

http://shit.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/01/05/0 134206

On related news...

[Spy der Mann]

Cross-platform (non-RAD... yet) C++ IDE "codeblocks" (developed by a former Dev-C++ developer) version 1.0b4 was released yesterday.

This is quite amazing.

[ccalvert]

The following is the text of a review, sans screenshots, that I have posted on codefez.com.

Gambas is a free, open source, Visual Basic like development environment for Linux. It has a built in visual designer, a built in debugger, components, a properties window (object inspector), and code insight. You can currently access MySQL and PostgreSQL databases from Gambas programs.

Gambas is not source compatible with Visual Basic. Instead, it contains an improved, rearchitected version of the Basic language. There is definitely a good deal of C++ code in the project, but it is rumored that the IDE itself was written in Gambas, just as Delphi was written in Delphi.

The Gambas IDE has free floating windows like the original Delphi, and unlike Visual Studio. There is a green run button just like in Delphi, and you can compile the project to a Linux executable in one step.

Gambas is fast and responsive. On my aging 1700 MHZ Fedora 2 system, I would estimate that response time in the IDE is roughly equivalent with Delphi 1 or 2. There is a barely perceptible lag between the time I push the green run button and the time when the compiled program first appears, but it is well under a second. If I put a break point on the first line of code in a button response method, I can sense that there is a lag before I hit the break point, but it is not a humanly measurable period of time. It is not quite instant, but it is a small enough period of time that I am not able to measure it.

A color coded version of CodeInsight appears instantly when you need it. If I type in a variable, such as ListBox1, then type a period, the list of methods on the object appears as quickly as my machine can redraw. CodeInsight picks up on new methods that I add to my main class instantly, without me having to recompile the code. For instance, if I add a method called Foo to my main class, then Gambas sees it immediately when I type the period after the word me. (me plays the same role in Basic as the words this or self do in Java, C++ and Delphi. It is a way of referencing the current object.)

Gambas has an event model very similar to the Delphi or VB 6. You can access the list of built in events for a component by right clicking on it. For instance, if you right click on a button, you can choose Events from the popup menu, and then select one of 16 events to automatically create the wrapper code for your event. Selecting the DblClk event creates the following code:

PUBLIC SUB Button1_DblClick()

END;

Other events you can create on a button include: Click, Drag, DragMove, Drop, Enter, GotFocus, KeyPress, KeyRelease, Leave, LostFocus, Menu, MouseDown, MouseMove, MouseUp and MouseWheel. You can see the popup window for creating these events in a screenshot.

Gambas has a simple toolbox, containing about 25 components, as shown in Figure 4. You can double click the icon for any of these components in the ToolBox to make an instance of the component appear in the upper left hand corner of the currently selected form.

Gambas comes with the following built in components: Label, Image, TextLabel, ProgressBar, Button, CheckBox, RadioButton, ToggleButton, TextBox, ComboBox, TextArea, ListBox, ListView, TreeView, IconView, GridView, ColumnView, Frame, Panel, TabStrip, ScrollView, DrawingArea, Timer, GambasEditor, LCDNumber, Dial, SpinBox, ScrollBar, Slider, TableView, Splitter, Workspace.

I did not detect any context sensitive help, but pressing F1 brought up the help file in less than one second. I was then able to search on the name of my currently selected component to get very minimal, but complete, hyperlink style help. For instance, if I typed in the word Button, I got a list of the properties, methods and events on the button. If I clicked on the name of any of the events or methods, I was taken to a short description of that event or method. The declaration for the item was also listed in the help pane.

The components in Gambas appear to be based on the QT libra

Re:if you want VB on Linux why not just use REALBa

[Anonymous Coward]

There are plenty of reasons you might want a free software program.

1. If I write an application, I don't want to have to port it just because I can no longer get licenses for the compiler (eg. VB6 -> VB.NET - it would be a major project to port VB6 code to VB.NET, even if I _wanted_ to use .NET). With C/C++ this isn't a big deal, since compilers tend to be the same except for bugs. But if I'm going to use a specialized Basic dialect, there's a good chance the vendor will change their mind sometime later.

2. If I am writing Free software, I don't want to choose development tools that few people will have access to. They won't be able to submit bugfixes, or port to a new platform.

Benoit ..

[The MESMERIC]

is a genius.

the trollers are just jealous of his success.

he is a pretty nice/humble guy too - something that scores highly in my books.