Hello David,
Maybe I should have specified any input except
trollish input.
WideStudio was designed to work on the T-Engine.
Okay i looked at the t-engine.org website and read
http://www.t-engine.org/maker/T-EngineFAQ.txt
But this does not answer any questings about the WxStudio widget set
or the project.
Why did the WxStudio project die when there are so many companies
behind the T-Engine. I mean the T-Engine Forum looks like a "Who is
Who in the IT Industry". This is one of the most important questions
if you want to revive any project ! And this is not a trollish
question.
···
--
Best regards, emailto: scholz at scriptolutions dot com
Lothar Scholz http://www.ruby-ide.com
CTO Scriptolutions Ruby, PHP, Python IDE 's
I think you've got a poor understanding of the (L)GPL, buddy. You can
make any changes at all to a (L)GPL application without having to
submit it back to the project owner. The only stipulation the GPL
makes is that if you release your project to the public, there has to
be a way for someone to get the code.
Maybe you'd understand it a little better if you didn't spend so much
time calling people trolls because they have an opinion contrary to
yours.
Bill
David Ross <drossruby@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:<20040801181613.79686.qmail@web21527.mail.yahoo.com>...
···
lothar_troll was complaining, not me. I always fix
things on my own and submit. This is one of the
reasons I like the BSD license, I can submit only the
changes I want. Which when I have a piece of code that
is a bad hack that I do not want to submit, I don't
have to. --David Ross
> David Ross wrote:
>
> > Send patches
> > Send patches.
> > Send patches
> > send patches or shut up.
>
> Please don't do this. Just because a project is
> open-source does not
> mean people have to try to fix it themselves before
> complaining about
> how broken it is.
>
>
> --
> Rando Christensen
> <eyez@illuzionz.org>
>
>
-----------------------------------------
Brought to you by the #1 IRC asshole
trolls deserve to be slammed
good people deserve respect
dross [at] yahoo .{d0t} c0m
_______________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Express yourself with Y! Messenger! Free. Download now.
http://messenger.yahoo.com
Lothar Scholz wrote:
The problem is different, it's not only an API question.
You simply can't generate a cross-platform GUI intensive application.
Point. Thats it. Thats what you must accept. It is possible with
Windows <-> Linux just because the Linux toolkits look much like the
windows Styleguide and where born more or less as with windows in
mind.
I'm quite familiar with apple's HIG and the differences between it and the way applications look and feel in Linux and Windows. However, I think you're a bit off in calling it impossible. It would require a toolkit that made you know and account for the quirks of different operating systems, but it's far from impossible.
However, speaking on a more practical level, A lot of people would just be happy with being able to write code that looks decent and doesn't require too much work to set up on any individual target platform.
It's possible. Hell, hop on a mac and download the neat Gimp package that exists. Yes, it's GTK, and yes, it even requires X11 to be installed. However, it comes in an OSX .app bundle, comes pre-packaged with it's own copy of gtk+ in there with it's own theme, and even knows how to launch X11 on it's own when it launches. It's nowhere close to fully native, but it's good enough not to scare people away.
It'd be a bit of work to write a toolkit that could create something like that, either through using native widgets or whatever, but it is possible, and it's something I wish we'd see come up.
···
--
Rando Christensen
<eyez@illuzionz.org>
Hello David,
(I believe QT is actually an exception to this, and
they now provide a
fully native OSX Framework. Are there ruby bindings
for QT?)
Yes, Thank you to Lypanov.
http://raa.ruby-lang.org/project/qtruby/
This is an updated qtruby binding. It is very good. It
has the signal and slots system handled. Unfortunately
Qt is GPL'ed. So, I won't be using it unless there is
a OpenSource app I am hacking on.
You know that Qt is also available with a commerical license.
And i must say i don't understand your attitude, you are fighting
against other commercial projects but always tell us that you write
your own commerical programs/widgets. Do you really think that this
fits together.
···
--
Best regards, emailto: scholz at scriptolutions dot com
Lothar Scholz http://www.ruby-ide.com
CTO Scriptolutions Ruby, PHP, Python IDE 's
Lothar Scholz wrote:
Hello Rando,
> Reinder Verlinde wrote:
"it works pretty well", combined with "it runs under apple's X11" really
means that it is not a Mac application at all, and Mac users will in all
likelihood not find it a suitable solution.
Reinder
> You're probably right; but then again, there aren't ANY toolkits that do
> any better than that for cross-platform with OSX. wxwidgets technically
> works on OSX, but it's kind of a pain. I got it to compile once, but
> then I couldn't get python's wxPython to work with it and gave up. (I
> was trying to get the bittorrent wxPython stuff working.)
> Any others that exist (Including the local ruby favorite fox) only work
> under X11 anyway.
> (I believe QT is actually an exception to this, and they now provide a
> fully native OSX Framework. Are there ruby bindings for QT?)
The problem is different, it's not only an API question.
You simply can't generate a cross-platform GUI intensive application.
Point. Thats it. Thats what you must accept. It is possible with
Windows <-> Linux just because the Linux toolkits look much like the
windows Styleguide and where born more or less as with windows in
mind.
FireFox and Thunderbird are pretty damn good. There are differences ofcourse to make it more mac-like. Shortcuts using symbols, based on command instead of control or alt. Changed menu structure (preferences and quit under the application menu, instead of file and edit). The usage of sheets instead of modal dialogs. Things could be better, but none would require a massive rewrite, or needs the use of another toolkit. So, yes, you need different versions for mac/linux/win to make a decent gui app, but the differences aren't that major that you need to rewrite your entire application.
Allot of Java apps also integrate nicely. (for example Jedit). You need changes, you need to follow the mac hig to give a nice experience, but you don't need to rewrite it in either cocoa/carbon. It is easier to get things right if you use cocoa instead of something else, but it is not absolutely necessary for a nicely integrated mac application.
business tatics to deal out low blows. He has no valid
statement on other IDEs since he is developing his
own, of course his will seem better to him(besides the
money).
Just to inject a measure of sanity into this, isn't Lothar developing
his IDE in Eiffel? I don't see how that would bias his opinion of a ruby
toolkit.
martin
···
David Ross <drossruby@yahoo.com> wrote:
Hello David,
Yes. Well, it is not my fault people have to post lies
about other software and assume something is too
diificult when it is not in either case. Lies is what
makes people not want to use other software. Also, it
seems to me that l-troll uses it as a guerilla
business tatics to deal out low blows. He has no valid
statement on other IDEs since he is developing his
own, of course his will seem better to him(besides the
money).
Bullshit. You should learn to read and write more carefull.
I just responded twice. And you both time started your fucking troll
thread.
One was your request for comment about the WideStudio GUI toolkit.
I told you my impression that i don't like the GUI toolkit for a
number of reasons i mentionend
(you never replied about the problems, just "send patches").
http://groups.google.com/groups?dq=&hl=de&lr=&ie=UTF-8&threadm=200408032245.44309.sander%40knology.net&prev=/groups%3Fdq%3D%26num%3D25%26hl%3Dde%26lr%3D%26ie%3DUTF-8%26group%3Dcomp.lang.ruby%26start%3D75
I didn't write any sentence about the IDE, just one about the GUI
Builder which i don't like and don't find very comfortable to work.
The other posting was a reply to your message about KDevelop in the
Editor Thread:
http://groups.google.com/groups?dq=&hl=de&lr=&ie=UTF-8&threadm=200408032245.44309.sander%40knology.net&prev=/groups%3Fdq%3D%26num%3D25%26hl%3Dde%26lr%3D%26ie%3DUTF-8%26group%3Dcomp.lang.ruby%26start%3D75
Where you recommended KDevelop as a good ruby editor and mentioning
that it supports Code completition and other things that are working
only with C++. I said that KDevelop is a very bad recommendation for
someone asking for a ruby editor. This was the point. You simple
didn't understand the posting.
Yes i will still post critical statements about software and
programming here.
Newsgroups are for discussion: We can stop discussing things and
just come together smoke some dope and tell each other how wonderful
the world is.
···
--
Best regards, emailto: scholz at scriptolutions dot com
Lothar Scholz http://www.ruby-ide.com
CTO Scriptolutions Ruby, PHP, Python IDE 's
Mike Hall wrote:
Tcl/Tk Aqua for OS X?
Okay, that one is native, but from what I've used of it (Given, this was only for one project and I don't remember which. It was a while ago), it looks horrible, and feels even less like a cocoa application than Gtk+ under X.
···
--
Rando Christensen
<eyez@illuzionz.org>
Ruby Script <nospam@nospamnospamnospam.com> wrote in message news:<C1ZRc.2268$Y94.704@newssvr33.news.prodigy.com>...
Other screenshots of FLTK apps which make me think it isn't ugly:
Easy Software Products
Wow... That's ugly! You might not want to include this example. 
It's obviously a poor imitation of the Mac OS X look, which itself is
IMHO quite beautiful. This example, OTOH, is an abomination.
I personally think they were redesigning the GUI
toolkit and making it better on the embedded
platforms. Take a look at the differences between far
back release and this release. Ex. the scrollbars look
exactly like Xt on the old version, the new ones are
redesigned. Also, the scrollbars have this neat
feature I like, when you click, it goes all the way
down to the bottom of the screen.*which is good for
embedded devices, maybe even useful on desktop* I am
not 100% sure why, but code was changed and added. Big
improvements were made on it.
Its obviously a good toolkit to use for portability,
good UTF8 support, and ease of use(dispite the little
tiny things).
The license is a big issue, LGPL and GPL make it
extremely difficult to use in proprietary
applications. MIT or free equivalent is better. That
way you do not have to say in documentation that you
are using it(unless you want to). I dislike being
forced to do things, I will however tell that I use
Widestudio because it doesn't hold a knife to my neck
if I do not.
The fact that it is for embedded systems made me most
interested. Other toolkits are based just on the
desktop and are very unstable on embedded systems,
WideStudio nor its toolkit has given me any trouble.
--David Ross
--David Ross
--- Lothar Scholz <mailinglists@scriptolutions.com>
wrote:
···
Hello David,
> Maybe I should have specified any input except
> trollish input.
> WideStudio was designed to work on the T-Engine.
Okay i looked at the t-engine.org website and read
www.t-engine.org has moved
But this does not answer any questings about the
WxStudio widget set
or the project.
Why did the WxStudio project die when there are so
many companies
behind the T-Engine. I mean the T-Engine Forum looks
like a "Who is
Who in the IT Industry". This is one of the most
important questions
if you want to revive any project ! And this is not
a trollish
question.
--
Best regards, emailto:
scholz at scriptolutions dot com
Lothar Scholz
http://www.ruby-ide.com
CTO Scriptolutions Ruby, PHP,
Python IDE 's
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
Rando Christensen wrote:
This was my point. Lothar has no obligation to fix bugs in this software just because he wants to complain about them. A lot of open source zealots love to pull this card, saying "stop complaining or fix it yourself and send the author a patch", and it's pretty annoying.
While I sort of tend to CTBW (code talks, bullshit walks), I agree.
I've worked in more than one place where management had an interesting way to delegate responsibility. If you saw a problem, or thought of a way to maybe improve things, and actually spoke up, you were "rewarded" by being put in charge of making the change, or researching the details, or some other task that amounted to more work but no more money.
You can imagine how effective that turned out to be.
James
I think you've got a poor understanding of the
(L)GPL, buddy. You can
make any changes at all to a (L)GPL application
without having to
submit it back to the project owner. The only
stipulation the GPL
makes is that if you release your project to the
public, there has to
be a way for someone to get the code.
Umm, no. Also, read the other email I just sent to the
other thread about the reverse engineering. I like
having at least some protection from software
crackers. Please understand that some people protect
thier code. Its not a bastardous way, just a
protective one.
actually the (L)GPL makes you submit changes to the
libraries. As stated in the other GUI Thread. Please
read more.
I choose WideStudio so I wouldn't have to even touch
LGPL and so I could throw in all my anti-disassembly
code. I was pretty sure I made this clear on IRC
before, you just missed the conversation about it.
Thank you for your constructive input.
--David Ross
···
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
I'm quite familiar with apple's HIG and the
differences between it and
the way applications look and feel in Linux and
Windows. However, I
think you're a bit off in calling it impossible. It
would require a
toolkit that made you know and account for the
quirks of different
operating systems, but it's far from impossible.
It is not impossible. It just takes a good
knowledgable programmer. Thats all. Other people don't
know what they are talking about. Period.
However, speaking on a more practical level, A lot
of people would just
be happy with being able to write code that looks
decent and doesn't
require too much work to set up on any individual
target platform.
It's possible. Hell, hop on a mac and download the
neat Gimp package
that exists. Yes, it's GTK, and yes, it even
requires X11 to be
installed. However, it comes in an OSX .app bundle,
comes pre-packaged
with it's own copy of gtk+ in there with it's own
theme, and even knows
how to launch X11 on it's own when it launches. It's
nowhere close to
fully native, but it's good enough not to scare
people away.
Never tried Gimp on Mac yet. I'm hooked on photoshop
It'd be a bit of work to write a toolkit that could
create something
like that, either through using native widgets or
whatever, but it is
possible, and it's something I wish we'd see come
up.
You could always help port WideStudio code. Just
because its MIT licensed and doesnt have strings
attached. 8)
low-level programming is something I find easy. I can
even program well in Xlib without doing the crazy
number others perform. (*pulling thier hair out,
yelling at big code, etc)
--
Rando Christensen
<eyez@illuzionz.org>
--David Ross
(drossruby)(at)(yahoo.com)
···
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
Hello Rando,
Lothar Scholz wrote:
The problem is different, it's not only an API question.
You simply can't generate a cross-platform GUI intensive application.
Point. Thats it. Thats what you must accept. It is possible with
Windows <-> Linux just because the Linux toolkits look much like the
windows Styleguide and where born more or less as with windows in
mind.
I'm quite familiar with apple's HIG and the differences between it and
the way applications look and feel in Linux and Windows. However, I
think you're a bit off in calling it impossible. It would require a
toolkit that made you know and account for the quirks of different
operating systems, but it's far from impossible.
Right it would be possible to support this at least on a specialiased
application level (in a huge program the GUI Toolkit is only a very
minor part of the program) but very hard to do so in general. And
its not a write once schema which is what most programmers expect today.
However, speaking on a more practical level, A lot of people would just
be happy with being able to write code that looks decent and doesn't
require too much work to set up on any individual target platform.
It's possible. Hell, hop on a mac and download the neat Gimp package
that exists. Yes, it's GTK, and yes, it even requires X11 to be
installed. However, it comes in an OSX .app bundle, comes pre-packaged
with it's own copy of gtk+ in there with it's own theme, and even knows
how to launch X11 on it's own when it launches. It's nowhere close to
fully native, but it's good enough not to scare people away.
But this is not a task for the toolkit. This is up to you as an
individuell developer. Everybody can create an .app bundle that works
good and installs easily even with FOX.
You just gave me a task for the next week. I will look at the setup
code of GIMP.
It'd be a bit of work to write a toolkit that could create something
like that, either through using native widgets or whatever, but it is
possible, and it's something I wish we'd see come up.
Yes. I just spend 50% of my time last week to examine how much work
needs to be done to port my Arachno products to Aqua/Carbon. I already
have an abstraction layer above FOX but i found it very hard
(about 6 month full time) to do this and it would require a lot of
refactoring of existing code. It may not be so difficult if a person
starts a project and designs the application from scratch to fit the goal
of runnable on Unix/Windows/Apple.
And as i said before, at the moment i don't think that a general
purpose toolkit is the way to go, at least for larger applications.
···
--
Best regards, emailto: scholz at scriptolutions dot com
Lothar Scholz http://www.ruby-ide.com
CTO Scriptolutions Ruby, PHP, Python IDE 's
You know that Qt is also available with a commerical
license.
Yes Lothar, I am *very* aware. Have been for years.
The licenses cost 1500USD each platform, discounts if
you buy more than one at a time. I am very good at Qt
programming. Unfortunately, I have also found that I
can do just as much by contributing a bit of my time
to reengineer free toolkits like wide studio.
And i must say i don't understand your attitude, you
are fighting
against other commercial projects but always tell us
that you write
your own commerical programs/widgets. Do you really
think that this
fits together.
yes, the reason for it is that is becuase there are
infinite possibilities of "me"
--David
···
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
Hello Jan,
FireFox and Thunderbird are pretty damn good. There are differences
ofcourse to make it more mac-like. Shortcuts using symbols, based on
command instead of control or alt. Changed menu structure (preferences
and quit under the application menu, instead of file and edit). The
usage of sheets instead of modal dialogs. Things could be better, but
none would require a massive rewrite, or needs the use of another
toolkit. So, yes, you need different versions for mac/linux/win to make
a decent gui app, but the differences aren't that major that you need to
rewrite your entire application.
Yes they are pretty good. But this is exactly what i said. For example
you can find in the "mozilla/widget/src/mac" folder 85 files with 961
KB source code which is most of the mac GUI abstraction layer. I know that some
other programs (Komodo for example) uses the Mozilla framework, but it is
still developed around the needs of the Browser application. If they need
new features they will change the toolkit and they will do it at the
same time for each toolkit. This is different from the idea
of porting from one system to another with the help of a general
purpose toolkit and without #ifdef clauses.
Allot of Java apps also integrate nicely. (for example Jedit). You need
changes, you need to follow the mac hig to give a nice experience, but
you don't need to rewrite it in either cocoa/carbon. It is easier to get
things right if you use cocoa instead of something else, but it is not
absolutely necessary for a nicely integrated mac application.
Sure you can do quite well. But thats not the point i'm talking about.
I talking about apps here that will have a chance to get accept at
http://store.apple.com/1-800-MY-APPLE/WebObjects/AppleStore.woa/72204/wo/YzEQh8W4R5XN2Y5vpb71EuWEVpK/0.0.9.1.0.6.13.0.4.1.3.0.7.0.1.1.0
This is not easy because recommended software must confirm to the interface
guideslines (at least a few years ago they where very strict at this
point) - and of course you must pay a lot of money.
···
--
Best regards, emailto: scholz at scriptolutions dot com
Lothar Scholz http://www.ruby-ide.com
CTO Scriptolutions Ruby, PHP, Python IDE 's
Lothar Scholz wrote:
Hello Rando,
> Reinder Verlinde wrote:
"it works pretty well", combined with "it runs under apple's X11" really
means that it is not a Mac application at all, and Mac users will in all
likelihood not find it a suitable solution.
Reinder
> You're probably right; but then again, there aren't ANY toolkits that do
> any better than that for cross-platform with OSX. wxwidgets technically
> works on OSX, but it's kind of a pain. I got it to compile once, but
> then I couldn't get python's wxPython to work with it and gave up. (I
> was trying to get the bittorrent wxPython stuff working.)
> Any others that exist (Including the local ruby favorite fox) only work
> under X11 anyway.
> (I believe QT is actually an exception to this, and they now provide a
> fully native OSX Framework. Are there ruby bindings for QT?)
The problem is different, it's not only an API question.
You simply can't generate a cross-platform GUI intensive application.
Point. Thats it. Thats what you must accept. It is possible with
Windows <-> Linux just because the Linux toolkits look much like the
windows Styleguide and where born more or less as with windows in
mind.
FireFox and Thunderbird are pretty damn good. There are differences ofcourse to make it more mac-like. Shortcuts using symbols, based on command instead of control or alt. Changed menu structure (preferences and quit under the application menu, instead of file and edit). The usage of sheets instead of modal dialogs. Things could be better, but none would require a massive rewrite, or needs the use of another toolkit. So, yes, you need different versions for mac/linux/win to make a decent gui app, but the differences aren't that major that you need to rewrite your entire application.
I think I speak for more users than myself when I say that FireFox and Thunderbird are *not* Mac apps. Yes, they do pretty good, but they need to go a a bit further before they will be able to compete with the other mac web browsers, IMHO. My main gripe is that, even after the major changes they made to make it more mac-like, they still behave strangely. There a only a couple places left where there are major deviations from the usual mac app, but there are many items that behave almost, but not quite, like what you would expect. I think that this is especially a problem for more advanced users, since they are more likely to notice the differences.
Allot of Java apps also integrate nicely. (for example Jedit). You need changes, you need to follow the mac hig to give a nice experience, but you don't need to rewrite it in either cocoa/carbon. It is easier to get things right if you use cocoa instead of something else, but it is not absolutely necessary for a nicely integrated mac application.
Apple has been working to take java apps more and more towards being first class applications on macosx. With the ObjC <=> Java bridge, you can use all the cocoa classes in java apps, making porting a java program to cocoa rather simple. Also, they did a fairly good job of making the java Aqua theme fit in well.
cheers,
Mark
···
On Aug 8, 2004, at 5:04 PM, Jan Sabbe wrote:
One was your request for comment about the
WideStudio GUI toolkit.
I was requesting useful comments, not troll comments.
I told you my impression that i don't like the GUI
toolkit for a
number of reasons i mentionend
(you never replied about the problems, just "send
patches").
The reason for that is you just troll troll troll all
over issues. Its not even constructive criticism. You
comments are 1) untrue - you don't even try them, 2)
you dont care about them - only your precious arachno
matters 3) business warfare - hit them hard with
mudslinging and untrue trolling.
"Send Patches" := you are a uberl33t programmer who
likes saying everything else sucks, you fix it then
mr. 31337.
http://groups.google.com/groups?dq=&hl=de&lr=&ie=UTF-8&threadm=200408032245.44309.sander%40knology.net&prev=/groups%3Fdq%3D%26num%3D25%26hl%3Dde%26lr%3D%26ie%3DUTF-8%26group%3Dcomp.lang.ruby%26start%3D75
I didn't write any sentence about the IDE, just one
about the GUI
Builder which i don't like and don't find very
comfortable to work.
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=de&lr=&ie=UTF-8&safe=off&threadm=1067360515.20040801142810%40scriptolutions.com&rnum=1&prev=/groups%3Fhl%3Dde%26lr%3D%26ie%3DUTF-8%26safe%3Doff%26selm%3D1067360515.20040801142810%2540scriptolutions.com%26rnum%3D1
Right.. that email must not exist. Saying that it is
good a project is dead is one of the *best* trollish
comments ever.
There are others if you really want me to post all of
them.
The other posting was a reply to your message about
KDevelop in the
Editor Thread:
http://groups.google.com/groups?dq=&hl=de&lr=&ie=UTF-8&threadm=200408032245.44309.sander%40knology.net&prev=/groups%3Fdq%3D%26num%3D25%26hl%3Dde%26lr%3D%26ie%3DUTF-8%26group%3Dcomp.lang.ruby%26start%3D75
Where you recommended KDevelop as a good ruby editor
and mentioning
that it supports Code completition and other things
that are working
only with C++. I said that KDevelop is a very bad
recommendation for
someone asking for a ruby editor. This was the
point. You simple
didn't understand the posting.
Yes, a point to manipulate people in to thinking that
the IDE does not perform well for ruby code. The fact
that you didn't read or ask how to set it up properly
so it would made me mad. Do you always make idiot
comments about software without using them?
Yes i will still post critical statements about
software and
programming here.
Don't post lies then, Thanks.
Newsgroups are for discussion: We can stop
discussing things and
just come together smoke some dope and tell each
other how wonderful
the world is.
Instead of saying everything sucks, maybe you can help
I'm prove existing code. Isn't that one of the points
of Open Source Software? Yes it is. Thanks for
wasting 3 minutes of my time. --David
···
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
Well put.
I for one appreciate your insight and well-balanced comments and would feel poorer if you didn't keep them up.
Nick
Lothar Scholz wrote:
···
Hello David,
Yes. Well, it is not my fault people have to post lies
about other software and assume something is too
diificult when it is not in either case. Lies is what
makes people not want to use other software. Also, it
seems to me that l-troll uses it as a guerilla
business tatics to deal out low blows. He has no valid
statement on other IDEs since he is developing his
own, of course his will seem better to him(besides the
money).
Bullshit. You should learn to read and write more carefull.
I just responded twice. And you both time started your fucking troll
thread.
One was your request for comment about the WideStudio GUI toolkit.
I told you my impression that i don't like the GUI toolkit for a
number of reasons i mentionend
(you never replied about the problems, just "send patches").
http://groups.google.com/groups?dq=&hl=de&lr=&ie=UTF-8&threadm=200408032245.44309.sander%40knology.net&prev=/groups%3Fdq%3D%26num%3D25%26hl%3Dde%26lr%3D%26ie%3DUTF-8%26group%3Dcomp.lang.ruby%26start%3D75
I didn't write any sentence about the IDE, just one about the GUI
Builder which i don't like and don't find very comfortable to work.
The other posting was a reply to your message about KDevelop in the
Editor Thread:
http://groups.google.com/groups?dq=&hl=de&lr=&ie=UTF-8&threadm=200408032245.44309.sander%40knology.net&prev=/groups%3Fdq%3D%26num%3D25%26hl%3Dde%26lr%3D%26ie%3DUTF-8%26group%3Dcomp.lang.ruby%26start%3D75
Where you recommended KDevelop as a good ruby editor and mentioning
that it supports Code completition and other things that are working
only with C++. I said that KDevelop is a very bad recommendation for
someone asking for a ruby editor. This was the point. You simple
didn't understand the posting.
Yes i will still post critical statements about software and
programming here.
Newsgroups are for discussion: We can stop discussing things and
just come together smoke some dope and tell each other how wonderful
the world is.
David Ross wrote:
actually the (L)GPL makes you submit changes to the
libraries. As stated in the other GUI Thread. Please
read more.
No. (L)GPL requires that you provide any modified source to whoever you distribute the binaries to, not to the original author. If you're not redistributing it (for example, if you're using it internally in your company), this is not required.
···
--
Rando Christensen
<eyez@illuzionz.org>