Vulcan .Net and VO 2.8
in [Visual Objects]
|
From: Ginny Caughey on 22 Sep 2006 07:15 Geoff, It was a real question since you apparently don't understand how it works. -- Ginny "Geoff Schaller" <geoff(a)xxxsoftwareobjectives.com.au> wrote in message news:451391f3$1(a)dnews.tpgi.com.au... > Is that a rhetorical question and if so, are you seeking a rhetorical > answer? If not then I guess I don't need to respond. > > "Ginny Caughey" <ginny.caughey.online(a)wasteworks.com> wrote in message > news:4ngh8tFac0gnU1(a)individual.net: > >> Geoff, >> >> This is getting tiresome. Do you know what conditional compilation is? >> >> -- >> Ginny > >
From: Ginny Caughey on 22 Sep 2006 07:16 Geoff, I agree that rewriting a big app is very expensive, and I don't plan to do that either. But migrating an entire big app to .NET makes sense to me rather than always having legacy code and runtimes I'm dependent on. -- Ginny "Geoff Schaller" <geoff(a)xxxsoftwareobjectives.com.au> wrote in message news:45139175(a)dnews.tpgi.com.au... > We consider a re-write too expensive. And in practical terms, it will > never happen. We have 4 major platforms and each has about 200,000 unique > lines of code. Most of the functionality is stable so integration with new > stuff is my only concern and we are achieving that quite nicely. > > "Patrick Vletter (Prive)" <NoWay(a)spam.org> wrote in message > news:45131323$0$10943$e4fe514c(a)dreader30.news.xs4all.nl: > >> Hi Ginny, >> >> I know that Geoff has said that, but i would like to know HOW he plans to >> do >> this in a way that is beneficial compared to a total rewrite or any other >> VO32-> .NET conversion (like the VO->Vulcan conversion we plan). >> As long as the discussion stays away from Grafx-, Brian-, Robert-, Don-, >> VO- >> or whatever bashing I'll be happy to participate... >> Hopefully you will be too...<g> >> >> CU >> >> Patrick >
From: E?!k V!sser on 22 Sep 2006 07:22 "Graham McKechnie" <gmknospam(a)bigpond.net.au> schreef in bericht news:KuPQg.33921$rP1.1583(a)news-server.bigpond.net.au... > Erik, > >> The contents of what somebody says, gets an extra meaning if you know >> more about the person. > > That well may be the case for you Erik, but I don't believe I've ever > asked in all the time I've been coming to this forum to know any more > about a person here than what I've observed from what they have written in > their posts. You might never haver asked but that was not my point. Also for counts, that it has a total different meaning to you when I say (by example) VO sucks than when Brian would wanna express himself in those words. And if I tell you Vulcan.NET is a very promissing language and i am planning to use that in the future it has a different impact to you than when Bill Gates would say that. > >> And of course you do not agree at all with this, cause you cannot show >> you are a professional software developer with a website that shows one >> or more of your products. > So I therefore assume from your above remark, that you consider a > professional developer is not a professional developer unless the same > developer has a website that show cases their work. > I'm sorry Erik, but I find that to be one of the most flawed and ludicrous > arguments I've ever heard. By your very definition then, there was no such > thing as a professional developer until the Internet came along. I think > you would find that there would be a lot of people who would disagree with > your premise. How long has the internet been in use with the masses, about > a decade. So a lot of developers who have been in the business for over 20 > years, now find according to your definition that they are not > professionals. That is not what i am saying and of course you know that, but it is more convient for you to try to ridicule my point that answering the question. But if that is what you want, i can ask the question different. You (might) know on the internet everybody can have the identity he chooses. You can say you are a softwaredeveloper voor 40 years, but is there any easy way to prove that is correct? Or can you show you have ever contributed somethnig else than your negative moaning? Cause if you do, i could take you a little more serious in what you are trying to tel us, than i do right now. Erik
From: Marc Verkade [Marti IT] on 22 Sep 2006 09:03 As usual out of context: I am not experiencing any bug in VO right now... Note the word I am starting previous sentence with: I I I I I I I I I I I ! Grtz, Marc "Geoff Schaller" <geoff(a)xxxsoftwareobjectives.com.au> schreef in bericht news:4513b63c$1(a)dnews.tpgi.com.au... > No bugs at all in VO? > > That's quite a statement to make <g>. > > > > "Marc Verkade [Marti IT]" <marcatM(a)rtidotnl> wrote in message > news:4513b254$0$7336$58c7af7e(a)news.kabelfoon.nl: > >> Sorry, I am not experiencing any bug in VO right now! >> Grtz, Marc > >
From: Patrick Vletter (Prive) on 22 Sep 2006 13:56
"@je" <Ed_REM_(a)Software_REM_Objectives.com.au> wrote in message news:451394e8$1(a)dnews.tpgi.com.au... > > "Patrick Vletter (Prive)" <NoWay(a)spam.org> wrote in message > news:45138533$0$22610$e4fe514c(a)dreader28.news.xs4all.nl... >> But that version (I presume 2740?) still contains quiet a few nasty >> problems that are solved in the current implementation we use. > > ? Eh, but Robert said: > >>- The latest public build was from februari 2005 (2.7b build 2740) and is >>not flawed. I wasn't standing next to Robert when he wrote this, so I do not know what he was trying to point out in that sentence. You have to ask him personal. I'm pretty sure though that he wasn't trying to say that 2740 did not contain bugs. He's the one that has solved every single solved bug between 2740 and the current (much improved) release. You and I both know Robert far to well to even consider that he would be lying about stuff like this... > > I'm confused.... I know. That's what happens when you leave civilization<bg> CU Patrick... |