And now the news from VODC Germany
in [Visual Objects]
|
Prev: Vo 2.7 Garbage Collector
Next: CRC32
From: Geoff on 13 Nov 2006 16:16 Ginny, > No, I'm not really a macro sort of person. But Vulcan is just .NET and can > make use of all the .NET classes, and Vulcan includes a CodeDom provider. > I don't know the technical details, but I do understand that macros in > Vulcan use a subset of the Vulcan compiler. Strictly speaking, I don't think You've really got no idea, have you. Perhaps it would have been better not to respond. Geoff
From: Ginny Caughey on 13 Nov 2006 16:41 Gee Geoff, If you're going to go back into personal attack mode, I'll have to kill-file you again. -- Ginny "Geoff" <geoff(a)soft_objectives.com.au> wrote in message news:4558e0bd$1(a)dnews.tpgi.com.au... > Ginny, > >> No, I'm not really a macro sort of person. But Vulcan is just .NET and >> can >> make use of all the .NET classes, and Vulcan includes a CodeDom provider. > >> I don't know the technical details, but I do understand that macros in >> Vulcan use a subset of the Vulcan compiler. Strictly speaking, I don't >> think > > You've really got no idea, have you. > > Perhaps it would have been better not to respond. > > Geoff > >
From: Ginny Caughey on 13 Nov 2006 16:44 Geoff, You got kicked out of VOPS for raising concerns that were answered and yet you raised them again, and again, and again, and again, and still you don't get it. And here's what you still don't get - the VO GUI classes don't need converting to anything in Vulcan because they'll compile in Vulcan as is. That is what the Vulcan compiler is for. But as a extra step, the Transporter also allows you to convert them to Windows.Forms forms that can be used the the Windows.Forms editor if that is what you want to do instead. You are STILL WRONG. -- Ginny "Geoff" <geoff(a)soft_objectives.com.au> wrote in message news:4558e07a$1(a)dnews.tpgi.com.au... > Heiko, > >> Be I the only one who can see this fact? > > No, you are not the only one - I got kicked out of the VOPS for raising > such concerns over and over. And I raised these concerns over and over > because I was being ignored and my concerns being written off as fanatasy. > > Well now the cat is out of the bag. The Vulcan converter, which they > warmly call their warp speed transporter, cannot convert standard VO GUI > classes out of the box. So who the hell are they aiming this at? What I > have been saying all along is now substantiated truth. Converting most VO > apps to Vulcan will not be possible without substantial re-writes. > > Geoff > >
From: Geoff on 13 Nov 2006 17:15 Ginny. Well its like this. There is an important issue here to do with how macros are dealt with, textual output and then concepts surrounding the use of the codedom provider. You have quite successfully confused all this and the central concerns being raised by Heiko and Rob are not being addressed. You have said 'you don't know' to about 3 important concepts but then went on to speculate as to the real meaning of things within Vulcan. You either know or you don't. Why not get Don Caton to come in and explain exactly what the Vulcan compiler will or won't do. Your speculation is simply confusing and misleading. Geoff "Ginny Caughey" <ginny.caughey.online(a)wasteworks.com> wrote in message news:4rs75hFsd0i0U1(a)mid.individual.net: > Gee Geoff, > > If you're going to go back into personal attack mode, I'll have to kill-file > you again. > > -- > Ginny
From: Geoff on 13 Nov 2006 17:18
Ginny. My concern was that I felt that insufficient weight was being given to VO32 development (which I was and still am right about) and that Vulcan was failing to address the conversion needs of the average VOer. I am still right about that. Vulcan's 'transporter' is beaming nobody anywhere yet because the part that deals with VO and custom controls is yet to be delivered. So I am still right. Geoff "Ginny Caughey" <ginny.caughey.online(a)wasteworks.com> wrote in message news:4rs7c6Fsble9U1(a)mid.individual.net: > Geoff, > > You got kicked out of VOPS for raising concerns that were answered and yet > you raised them again, and again, and again, and again, and still you don't > get it. And here's what you still don't get - the VO GUI classes don't need > converting to anything in Vulcan because they'll compile in Vulcan as is. > That is what the Vulcan compiler is for. > > But as a extra step, the Transporter also allows you to convert them to > Windows.Forms forms that can be used the the Windows.Forms editor if that is > what you want to do instead. > > You are STILL WRONG. > > -- > Ginny > > > "Geoff" <geoff(a)soft_objectives.com.au> wrote in message > news:4558e07a$1(a)dnews.tpgi.com.au... > > > Heiko, > > > > >> Be I the only one who can see this fact? > > > > > No, you are not the only one - I got kicked out of the VOPS for raising > > such concerns over and over. And I raised these concerns over and over > > because I was being ignored and my concerns being written off as fanatasy. > > > > Well now the cat is out of the bag. The Vulcan converter, which they > > warmly call their warp speed transporter, cannot convert standard VO GUI > > classes out of the box. So who the hell are they aiming this at? What I > > have been saying all along is now substantiated truth. Converting most VO > > apps to Vulcan will not be possible without substantial re-writes. > > > > Geoff > > > > |