May 30, 2005
Okay, in a previous discussion I noticed that a lot of people feel that having basic GUI functionality
built into a language is simply too much to ask for.  Perhaps it is, and perhaps it's not.  In the case of
the D language, I guess Walter would be the one to decide, but I'm rather sure that he won't even
consider it unless he sees a significant amount of intertest, so if you are interested... here's your chance to show it.

If it were POSSIBLE, would anyone here besides me "like to see" basic GUI functionality built into the D language so Graphical User Interface type or Form type objects would be as easy to put into a program as functions are now?

PLEASE give at least a short affirmation if you would like to see this happen, even if you think it can't be done! (More detailed descriptions of how or why you would like to see it happen are strongly encouraged.)

TZ


May 30, 2005
TechnoZeus wrote:

> If it were POSSIBLE, would anyone here besides me "like to see" basic GUI functionality
> built into the D language so Graphical User Interface type or Form type objects would be
> as easy to put into a program as functions are now?

Maybe I'm not following, but did you want GUI in the language - or in the standard libraries ? (Walter has said that it won't be in Phobos)

Or are we talking some new types or such changes that are needed ?
For some reason I got an image of this giant turtle in my head...

--anders
May 30, 2005
On Mon, 30 May 2005 16:18:05 -0500, TechnoZeus wrote:

> Okay, in a previous discussion I noticed that a lot of people feel that having basic GUI functionality
> built into a language is simply too much to ask for.  Perhaps it is, and perhaps it's not.  In the case of
> the D language, I guess Walter would be the one to decide, but I'm rather sure that he won't even
> consider it unless he sees a significant amount of intertest, so if you are interested... here's your chance to show it.
> 
> If it were POSSIBLE, would anyone here besides me "like to see" basic GUI functionality built into the D language so Graphical User Interface type or Form type objects would be as easy to put into a program as functions are now?

In order to achieve this, the language would need to be extended with new
keywords and/or programming constructs that are specific to the programming
task.

> PLEASE give at least a short affirmation if you would like to see this happen, even if you think it can't be done! (More detailed descriptions of how or why you would like to see it happen are strongly encouraged.)

NO! I do not want the "D Programming Language" to contain any keywords or constructs that are specific to User Interface programming.

This is a form of 'hard coding' that causes restrictions for future coders. Such abilities are best served by libraries. The library code can be written in 'low level' (read: 'standard'), generic D language.

High level functionality in general is much more flexible, and cost-effective, if contained in libraries rather than built into the syntax of a language. Because of the inherent complexity and scope of high-level functionality, it tends to need continuous improvements over time. If these ideas were embedded into the syntax of a language, it makes it extremely difficult to add new concepts to it and to remove outdated ones.

Imagine if C had keywords in it that dealt with teletype machines, punched cards and paper tape. These would be useless at some stage, but who could decide exactly when and how? The use of libraries has made this much more cost-effective to handle because it can cope with generic concepts rather than 'hard coded' ones.

-- 
Derek Parnell
Melbourne, Australia
31/05/2005 7:43:42 AM
May 30, 2005
My vote:

Please do not build a GUI into the language ever.  no no no  The adaptability of an accepted language is too restricted to include things we know will change, be done better, and follow fads.

Please help develop a GUI library if you need one.  A standard one would be a great thing, short of that a good commonly usable wrapper for any open platform GUI would suffice to get things moving.  But don't expect either the standard or GUI niceties in general to stay fixed in place - its a moving target.

Lots of things are useful but don't belong in the language even though they should be available to programmers using them.  They belong as add-ons available competitively for both efficiency and freedom of change reasons.

No matter that I love to use them, I'm not even sure associative arrays should have a fixed hidden implementation - for simple uses sure, so I like them, but other implementations for larger, more specific purposes should/will be available later in a library, I hope.  Why not built-in linked lists?  Because its a job for a template or class library, not the core language when so many implementations (class or struct) may be appropriate.


May 30, 2005
> Please do not build a GUI into the language ever.  no no no  The
> adaptability of
> an accepted language is too restricted to include things we know will
> change, be
> done better, and follow fads.

Presicly. With built-in GUI we would not have neither the excellent DFL or the amazing Harmonia. GUI is cutthroat competition and must follow the latest fashion!



You don't use sun-glasses from last year do you?


May 31, 2005
TechnoZeus wrote:
> Okay, in a previous discussion I noticed that a lot of people feel that having basic GUI functionality
> built into a language is simply too much to ask for.  Perhaps it is, and perhaps it's not.  In the case of
> the D language, I guess Walter would be the one to decide, but I'm rather sure that he won't even
> consider it unless he sees a significant amount of intertest, so if you are interested... here's your chance to show it.
> 
> If it were POSSIBLE, would anyone here besides me "like to see" basic GUI functionality
> built into the D language so Graphical User Interface type or Form type objects would be
> as easy to put into a program as functions are now?
> 
> PLEASE give at least a short affirmation if you would like to see this happen, even if you think it can't be done!
> (More detailed descriptions of how or why you would like to see it happen are strongly encouraged.)
> 
> TZ
> 
> 

Sorry, I vote no.

GUI's are not part of programming, they are implementations or applications. (I can't quite find the correct term)

GUIs are not programming constructs, and there is no one thing that "GUI" refers to.
"GUI" is such an abstract notion that there are tons of different implementations of it.

Asking for GUI as part of the language is like asking for a game engine as part of the language.
It just doesn't work with my philosophy of what programming languages are.

I mean, what the hell do you mean by building GUI into D? It's not like "GUI" is some "concrete" thing. It's a very abstract notion.
May 31, 2005
IMHO, D already has everything for successfull GUI implementations.
And I cannot recall any programming language which has UI specific features.
What are they, BTW?

Andrew.


"TechnoZeus" <TechnoZeus@PeoplePC.com> wrote in message news:d7g05c$2vsa$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> Okay, in a previous discussion I noticed that a lot of people feel that
> having basic GUI functionality
> built into a language is simply too much to ask for.  Perhaps it is, and
> perhaps it's not.  In the case of
> the D language, I guess Walter would be the one to decide, but I'm rather
> sure that he won't even
> consider it unless he sees a significant amount of intertest, so if you
> are interested... here's your chance to show it.
>
> If it were POSSIBLE, would anyone here besides me "like to see" basic GUI
> functionality
> built into the D language so Graphical User Interface type or Form type
> objects would be
> as easy to put into a program as functions are now?
>
> PLEASE give at least a short affirmation if you would like to see this
> happen, even if you think it can't be done!
> (More detailed descriptions of how or why you would like to see it happen
> are strongly encouraged.)
>
> TZ
>
> 


May 31, 2005
On Mon, 30 May 2005 20:51:11 -0700, Andrew Fedoniouk wrote:

> IMHO, D already has everything for successfull GUI implementations.
> And I cannot recall any programming language which has UI specific features.
> What are they, BTW?

Various forms of BASIC, COBOL, Logo.

-- 
Derek
Melbourne, Australia
31/05/2005 2:37:59 PM
May 31, 2005
Derek Parnell wrote:

>>And I cannot recall any programming language which has UI specific features.
>>What are they, BTW?
> 
> Various forms of BASIC, COBOL, Logo.

Here is a pretty neat idea: http://www.basic4gl.net/

And there will always be Turtle Graphics, of course.


None of them is like D.

--anders
May 31, 2005
"Anders F Björklund" <afb@algonet.se> wrote in message news:d7g1hb$312r$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> TechnoZeus wrote:
>
> > If it were POSSIBLE, would anyone here besides me "like to see" basic GUI functionality built into the D language so Graphical User Interface type or Form type objects would be as easy to put into a program as functions are now?
>
> Maybe I'm not following, but did you want GUI in the language - or in the standard libraries ? (Walter has said that it won't be in Phobos)
>
> Or are we talking some new types or such changes that are needed ? For some reason I got an image of this giant turtle in my head...
>
> --anders

I would like to se support for GUI type application development built into the language.
That can mean many things, and I'm not real picky about exactly which one is chosen, but
here's an example.
Imagine a built in menu type that can do things like:
store menu items and keyboard shortcuts, display the menu items, get a menu selection, or trigger a menu event.
Where, when, and how the menu is displayed would depend on a number of factors including whether the application is
console of GUI based, and how the menu object is used in the program...
but "some" ability to use it would be again, built into the language.

I'm not asking to have every concievable GUI related object or event covered by the core of the language... just the basics.

TZ


« First   ‹ Prev
1 2 3
Top | Discussion index | About this forum | D home