"Walter" <newshound@digitalmars.com> wrote in message news:d7go89$ll5$1@digitaldaemon.com...
>
> "Andrew Fedoniouk" <news@terrainformatica.com> wrote in message news:d7gnec$kc0$1@digitaldaemon.com...
>> I trust you Walter. If it would be possible to port some Java packages
>> then why not? They will be not D packages though, but who cares -
>> the main thing is to get job done.
>
> Think of it like C++ initially living off of C code. It was many years before C++ did its own libraries and left C behind - but those early bootstrapping years were very important.

Yep.  But D has already C interface. And you can mix D/C<-C++ code. This just perfect and enough in most cases as all worth looking libraries already has C API. Java ones as rule too specific - rely on Java *platform* - running environment.

>
>> Are you going to have string constants castable to String, BTW? Or any other class? That would be nice...
>
> What advantage does java.lang.String have? Why does string need to be a class?

Please see new posting : Java String vs wchar[] Was: Re: inner classes

In article <d7ekq0$1iq6$1@digitaldaemon.com>, Walter says...
>
>
>"Andrew Fedoniouk" <news@terrainformatica.com> wrote in message news:d7ds35$nvf$1@digitaldaemon.com...
[...]
>> I would also ask: there are just three of them (in Java world):
>> AWT(Sun) ,SWING(Sun), SWT(IBM public license).
>> Latter one is almost done in D. First two are not free to port.
>
>If their licenses do not permit porting and free redistribution for any purpose, then they are a total non-starter. I don't recommend that anyone waste their time trying to convert such code. SWT, however, seems to have a license that will work for us.

Wait, there is a free version of Swing, that is part of GNU Classpath (www.classpath.org). No Sun code used, completely rewritten from scratch, uses a slightly modified GPL.

Please consider that 99% of Java developers use Swing. SWT is used only by Eclipse and its plugins.

Ciao

"Andrew Fedoniouk" <news@terrainformatica.com> wrote in message news:d7gs4c$pd0$1@digitaldaemon.com...
>
> "Walter" <newshound@digitalmars.com> wrote in message news:d7go89$ll5$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> >
> > "Andrew Fedoniouk" <news@terrainformatica.com> wrote in message news:d7gnec$kc0$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> >> I trust you Walter. If it would be possible to port some Java packages
> >> then why not? They will be not D packages though, but who cares -
> >> the main thing is to get job done.
> >
> > Think of it like C++ initially living off of C code. It was many years before C++ did its own libraries and left C behind - but those early bootstrapping years were very important.
>
> Yep.  But D has already C interface.

But it's not good enough these days, because people need a GUI and the interesting GUIs are not written in C.

"Roberto Mariottini" <Roberto_member@pathlink.com> wrote in message news:d7h1bt$u4g$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> Wait, there is a free version of Swing, that is part of GNU Classpath (www.classpath.org). No Sun code used, completely rewritten from scratch,
uses a
> slightly modified GPL.
>
> Please consider that 99% of Java developers use Swing. SWT is used only by Eclipse and its plugins.

I don't know which is better, SWT or Swing. But D needs the best GUI we can get, not necessarilly the most popular one <g>.

"Walter" <newshound@digitalmars.com> wrote in message news:d7h48j$12fi$1@digitaldaemon.com...
>
> "Andrew Fedoniouk" <news@terrainformatica.com> wrote in message news:d7gs4c$pd0$1@digitaldaemon.com...
>>
>> "Walter" <newshound@digitalmars.com> wrote in message news:d7go89$ll5$1@digitaldaemon.com...
>> >
>> > "Andrew Fedoniouk" <news@terrainformatica.com> wrote in message news:d7gnec$kc0$1@digitaldaemon.com...
>> >> I trust you Walter. If it would be possible to port some Java packages
>> >> then why not? They will be not D packages though, but who cares -
>> >> the main thing is to get job done.
>> >
>> > Think of it like C++ initially living off of C code. It was many years before C++ did its own libraries and left C behind - but those early bootstrapping years were very important.
>>
>> Yep.  But D has already C interface.
>
> But it's not good enough these days, because people need a GUI and the interesting GUIs are not written in C.
>
>

Probably.

"Interesting" here means interesting for porting into D
or really interesting?

Andrew.

"Walter" <newshound@digitalmars.com> wrote in message news:d7h48k$12fi$2@digitaldaemon.com...
>
> "Roberto Mariottini" <Roberto_member@pathlink.com> wrote in message news:d7h1bt$u4g$1@digitaldaemon.com...
>> Wait, there is a free version of Swing, that is part of GNU Classpath (www.classpath.org). No Sun code used, completely rewritten from scratch,
> uses a
>> slightly modified GPL.
>>
>> Please consider that 99% of Java developers use Swing. SWT is used only
>> by
>> Eclipse and its plugins.
>
> I don't know which is better, SWT or Swing. But D needs the best GUI we
> can
> get, not necessarilly the most popular one <g>.
>
>

Walter, for D sake, do not look into Java for "the best GUI".... There are too many of them out there and for many different purposes. Java ones famous only by their weight :(

Start VS and start Eclipse and compare time.
And this not about bytecode - JavaVM these days
is loosing 30% from C++. It is about architecture and
memory management.

Walter wrote:
> "Roberto Mariottini" <Roberto_member@pathlink.com> wrote in message
> news:d7h1bt$u4g$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> 
>>Wait, there is a free version of Swing, that is part of GNU Classpath
>>(www.classpath.org). No Sun code used, completely rewritten from scratch,
> 
> uses a
> 
>>slightly modified GPL.
>>
>>Please consider that 99% of Java developers use Swing. SWT is used only by
>>Eclipse and its plugins.
> 
> 
> I don't know which is better, SWT or Swing. But D needs the best GUI we can
> get, not necessarilly the most popular one <g>.
> 
> 

Swing vs SWT...

Now where is that interesting piece of propoganda Kris had us reading at dsource? ;)

Oh... here it is:

http://www.mail-archive.com/jug-discussion@tucson-jug.org/msg00355.html

Really, it was a good read.  I don't know how true it is, but it definitely gives credence to the fact that things aren't always what they appear.

-JJR

Andrew Fedoniouk wrote:
> 
> Walter, for D sake, do not look into Java for "the best GUI"....
> There are too many of them out there and for many different purposes.
> Java ones famous only by their weight :(

According to whom? How can you "discuss" such things rationally with such a bigoted point of view? Should we suppose Harmonia would be the best GUI? Great! We'll have lots of wonderful choices!

As I see it, Walter is simply opening more doors for D; for rather limited cost. You, on the other hand, seem bent on maintaining the status-quo :-)


> Start VS and start Eclipse and compare time.
> And this not about bytecode - JavaVM these days
> is loosing 30% from C++. It is about architecture and
> memory management.

Now that is one misleading set of statements. You're apparently compounding wibbly assertion upon dodgy premise <g>

All that aside; would you like to find out whether the same might be true of D, or would you rather just sit and speculate idly/wildly?

C'mon Andrew. Why don't you help out instead?

Walter wrote:
<snip>
> I've looked at doing a hand translation of C++ gui libraries. No dice, the
> sheer volume of code makes it completely impractical.

You did tell us in the overview that D isn't for legacy apps.  I suppose it isn't really for legacy libs either.  Leave GUI support in D to those of us who are writing native D GUI libs....

<snip>
> So, the result is that Kris has convinced me to support inner classes in D.
> This is a heads up that such change is coming. It shouldn't affect any
> existing code, unless that code uses nested classes. To prepare for the
> future, declare these nested classes as "static class ...", and they'll
> continue to work in the future as they do currently. I don't have a schedule
> for this change yet, as it is not a simple "drop in" into the compiler. A
> fair amount of engineering needs to be done.

So people can write their GUIs in a D port of Java AWT?

> No analogous "inner struct" support is planned.

Better watch the confusion - I've seen some use "inner struct" to mean "anonymous struct".

Stewart.

-- 
My e-mail is valid but not my primary mailbox.  Please keep replies on the 'group where everyone may benefit.

"Andrew Fedoniouk" <news@terrainformatica.com> wrote in message news:d7h4ns$12um$1@digitaldaemon.com...
>
> "Walter" <newshound@digitalmars.com> wrote in message
> > But it's not good enough these days, because people need a GUI and the interesting GUIs are not written in C.
>
> Probably.
>
> "Interesting" here means interesting for porting into D
> or really interesting?

"Interesting" as in D programmers would want to use it to develop modern, useful GUI apps.