And now the news from VODC Germany
in [Visual Objects]
|
Prev: Vo 2.7 Garbage Collector
Next: CRC32
From: Jamal on 14 Nov 2006 00:32 Geoff, Let us assume there is no Transporter at all, the VO compatiblity and syntax that Vulcan has is enough for me! Of course there a whole lots more features added to the language (the .NET way). The transporter is designed to do its best to handle forms and tranport various codes elements to Vulcan. This will drastically reduce migration time and increase productivity. Do not forget that Vulcan developers will have to learn the VS IDE to untilize the new control in .NET and VS that are not available to VO developers. There is also VIDE by Chris Pyrgas which was written in Vulcan. What's the alterntaive, C#, VB.NET? Some will say yes. Okay Microsoft stands behind their products and there tons of samples out there, but has anyone asked what happend to FoxPro? I can tell you. There is no .NET version of FoxPro. Has Microsoft addressed the conversion needs of those developers? Here what the roadmap of FoxPro says: "As indicated in prior public statements, Microsoft does not plan to merge Visual FoxPro into Visual Studio .NET, nor are there plans to create a new Visual FoxPro .NET programming language. Visual FoxPro will remain stand-alone Win32 based, and will run on 64-bit Windows in 32-bit compatibility mode." Only a complete fool <g> can expect a complete 100% conversion of VO to Vulcan. I never expected it even before Vulcan started, just like I do not expect it to happen if use C# or VB.NET or what have you! We are a community of developers that should and must help each other! Barking and taking bites at Grafx and Vulcan will waste time and create hard feelings! Be Thankful to Grafx that it has not abandoned VO developers and be thankful that you were not using FoxPro! Jamal "Geoff" <geoff(a)soft_objectives.com.au> wrote in message news:4558ef29$1(a)dnews.tpgi.com.au... > 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 >> > >> > >
From: GSchaller on 14 Nov 2006 01:03 Jamal. The criticisms are relevant and valid because GrafX asks us to take it seriously. Have you seen the VODC website? Promising the Indian sum to end all summers and the 'possible' world wide launch of Vulcan. Such pathetic announcements do more damage to VO than anything in this forum. > Let us assume there is no Transporter at all, the VO compatiblity and syntax > that Vulcan has is enough for me! And that is a valid position to take. I don't think anybody is criticising you for this so you don't have to justify your choice to us. > Of course there a whole lots more features added to the language (the .NET Well no, it is not being added to the language at all and this is misinformation. It is Dot Net syntax and only available in the Dot Net world. That has to be learned and it immediately takes your VO code away from any backward compatibility with VO. This will be an OK thing for some but not for others. > way). The transporter is designed to do its best to handle forms and > tranport various codes elements to Vulcan. This will drastically reduce > migration time and increase productivity. Do not forget that Vulcan Rubbish. This is yet to be proven and the time taken to release a useable version of this to even VOPS folks is obviously what is holding up Vulcan's release. > What's the alterntaive, C#, VB.NET? Some will say yes. Okay Microsoft stands > behind their products and there tons of samples out there, but has anyone > asked what happend to FoxPro? I can tell you. There is no .NET version of > FoxPro. Has Microsoft addressed the conversion needs of those developers? > Here what the roadmap of FoxPro says: I'm sorry, I don't see what FoxPro has to do with any of this. Aren't we talking about VO? > Only a complete fool <g> can expect a complete 100% conversion of VO to > Vulcan. I never expected it even before Vulcan started, just like I do not > expect it to happen if use C# or VB.NET or what have you! Absolutely. So there is a third way. Integration. No conversion necessary. I can use Vulcan or C# without problem and until Vulcan is released, C# will be my preference. I will evaluate Vulcan when it is released but the longer it takes, the less incentive I have to take it seriously. > We are a community of developers that should and must help each other! Last I looked, this is what happens in this forum. > Be Thankful to Grafx that it has not abandoned VO developers and be thankful > that you were not using FoxPro! FoxPro has nothing to do with things - that is a spurious comment. If VO had not been there I probably would have gone Delphi. And I am not entirely sure that GrafX hasn't abandoned VO. It seems to be overly concentrating on the very late Vulcan. Geoff
From: Rob on 14 Nov 2006 01:37 Geoff, sorry, but I don't think that there is any need for abusive comments like: > You've really got no idea, have you. > > Perhaps it would have been better not to respond. I know, I know - it's only a bit of winding up and not abusive etc. etc. but I found it quite offensive, and has demeaned you in my eyes... What happened to the 'new sensitive Aussie male'? Rob Grattan R&D Software
From: Sherlock on 14 Nov 2006 01:45 Geoff, snip[ If VO had not been there I probably would have gone Delphi. ] I bet the Delphi guys are very happy you went VO.... and I heard they passed the hat around as well. <bg> Phil ----
From: Paul D B on 14 Nov 2006 02:37
Jamal wrote: > Geoff, > > BTW, Ginny has been very nice to you but you have been very abusive. > You're just pushing you luck because you will end up in a lot of > people's ignore list! > he is already, and he is on mine since a few months now and since then this NG has become an oasis of calm and peace. Now and then he tries changing his mail address but it takes just two clicks to get rid of them as well. Maybe he could use a special email account for his rare "technical" answers (they still interest me).. -- Paul |