John Reimer wrote:
> As a GUI framework,
> however, SWT seems comprehensive and powerful.  It's just not a
> well-recognized or an easily learned solution.

The only programs using SWT that I know of are Eclipse and Azureus. They're both slower than anything I've ever seen (including most of the Swing using programs). It takes a forever to start either of them, changing tabs/perspectives is just like watching a slide show and writing text has an average lag of 1-2 seconds. Maybe it's because I'm only running a 2.x GHz AMD with 1 GB of RAM and a KDE desktop, but IMHO apps on my old PC (Pentium 100, 32 of RAM, Win98/X11+Fluxbox) are way more responsive than any SWT app on the newer box.

Am 17.10.2006, 10:56 Uhr, schrieb Bill Baxter <dnewsgroup@billbaxter.com>:

> The other option is to have something net-connected like the python easy_install stuff or the cygwin installer, or I suppose things like fink (though I've never used it), and apt-get.   Of those I think the Cygwin model makes most sense.  You get a front-end configurator to run that lets you pick which modules you want in addition to the core.  Of course that's a lot more work / infrastructure to set up.
>
> --bb

http://www.bloodshed.net/

I worked a long time with Dev-C++ and the Devpack system was really nice - with an installer which could be started directly from the IDE, afair even the help files of all packages where accessible from the ide.

-mike

-- 
Erstellt mit Operas revolutionärem E-Mail-Modul: http://www.opera.com/mail/

On Tue, 17 Oct 2006 02:09:38 -0700, Lionello Lunesu <lio@lunesu.remove.com> wrote:

> Unknown W. Brackets wrote:
>> If it can't be put in sourceforge, surely it could be put into a versioning repository (svn, cvs, etc.) of some sort.
>>  Since it seems like digitalmars.com has a fairly reasonable hosting arrangement, this might even be possible using the current server and hosting company.
>>  I think this has come up before, and Walter wasn't really interested in that.  I've really found version control systems as being a huge way to improve software quality and developer cooperation, though (even if only Walter had write access.)
>>  -[Unknown]
>
> I'd prefer sourceforge, where it will be seen by more people.
>
> dsource is nice and has certainly done a lot for D, but it makes us look like some sort of cult.
>
> L.


What?!!!

-JJR

On Tue, 17 Oct 2006 03:04:32 -0700, Jari-Matti Mäkelä <jmjmak@utu.fi.invalid> wrote:

> John Reimer wrote:
>> As a GUI framework,
>> however, SWT seems comprehensive and powerful.  It's just not a
>> well-recognized or an easily learned solution.
>
> The only programs using SWT that I know of are Eclipse and Azureus.
> They're both slower than anything I've ever seen (including most of the
> Swing using programs). It takes a forever to start either of them,
> changing tabs/perspectives is just like watching a slide show and
> writing text has an average lag of 1-2 seconds. Maybe it's because I'm
> only running a 2.x GHz AMD with 1 GB of RAM and a KDE desktop, but IMHO
> apps on my old PC (Pentium 100, 32 of RAM, Win98/X11+Fluxbox) are way
> more responsive than any SWT app on the newer box.


Perhaps... but I don't find the Win32 DWT port that way at all.  It's quite snappy. :)
And my experiences with Eclipse are quite contrary to yours as well.

-JJR

"Derek Parnell" <derek@nomail.afraid.org> wrote in message news:1adzk321qmvdc.e5gos9og4ttv.dlg@40tude.net...

> Don't bother replying. You have convinced me to have a long break from D participation. See you guys sometime after v1.0 is announced. It's time to dance to a different tune for awhile.

Well that's a real mature way to handle the situation.

Mike Parker wrote:
> Walter Bright wrote:
>>
>> I've thought about cash prizes and contests. I just had the nagging feeling that the result would be a circus rather than serious development.
> 
> What about bounties? We come up with a list of libraries we need/want and assign a $$ value to each item. They don't have to be big numbers. Anyone is free to submit an implementation of any item for your approval. If you accept the submission, you pay out the submitter and strike the item off of the list.

Personally, I don't see the point of cash rewards for contributions. People contribute because they want to, not because they desperately need twenty dollars.  And frankly, I'm not sure that the code quality of a submission purely for the money would be particularly high anyway.


Sean

Bill Baxter wrote:
> 
> The other option is to have something net-connected like the python easy_install stuff or the cygwin installer, or I suppose things like fink (though I've never used it), and apt-get.   Of those I think the Cygwin model makes most sense.  You get a front-end configurator to run that lets you pick which modules you want in addition to the core.  Of course that's a lot more work / infrastructure to set up.

Personally, I would love for D libraries to be distributed this way. Ruby Gems does this too, and implementation issues aside, the basic concept is just fantastic.


Sean

Sean Kelly wrote:
> Bill Baxter wrote:
>>
>> The other option is to have something net-connected like the python easy_install stuff or the cygwin installer, or I suppose things like fink (though I've never used it), and apt-get.   Of those I think the Cygwin model makes most sense.  You get a front-end configurator to run that lets you pick which modules you want in addition to the core.  Of course that's a lot more work / infrastructure to set up.
> 
> Personally, I would love for D libraries to be distributed this way. Ruby Gems does this too, and implementation issues aside, the basic concept is just fantastic.

The example I am familiar with is Gentoo's Portage, with the 'emerge' utility.
 I have wanted dsource,org to serve this role for a while now.  Maybe Gregor's
DSSS will do the trick?

BA

Sean Kelly wrote:
> Bill Baxter wrote:
>>
>> The other option is to have something net-connected like the python easy_install stuff or the cygwin installer, or I suppose things like fink (though I've never used it), and apt-get.   Of those I think the Cygwin model makes most sense.  You get a front-end configurator to run that lets you pick which modules you want in addition to the core.  Of course that's a lot more work / infrastructure to set up.
> 
> Personally, I would love for D libraries to be distributed this way. Ruby Gems does this too, and implementation issues aside, the basic concept is just fantastic.
> 
> 
> Sean

I have been discussing this idea pretty much since I came to D. Gregor is working on the DSSS project and he had discussed putting in some sort of 'netinstall' option.

At any rate this is something we eventually have to do, without a doubt!

Sean Kelly wrote:
> Mike Parker wrote:
>> Walter Bright wrote:
>>>
>>> I've thought about cash prizes and contests. I just had the nagging feeling that the result would be a circus rather than serious development.
>>
>> What about bounties? We come up with a list of libraries we need/want and assign a $$ value to each item. They don't have to be big numbers. Anyone is free to submit an implementation of any item for your approval. If you accept the submission, you pay out the submitter and strike the item off of the list.
> 
> Personally, I don't see the point of cash rewards for contributions. People contribute because they want to, not because they desperately need twenty dollars.  And frankly, I'm not sure that the code quality of a submission purely for the money would be particularly high anyway.
> 

I've seen a bounty system used successfully elsewhere. GarageGames used such a system to enhance the second generation of their Torque Game Engine. Community members were always willing to contribute code, and a very few did and do post small code snippets from time to time, but small cash rewards gave some of them the extra kick to really put together some complex systems rather than just think about it. It's not about desperately needing twenty dollars, but just a motivational factor. GG got several quality submissions, including the most impressive implementation of a real-time lightning effect I've ever seen.

So based on witnessing that, I think it can be an effective system. It's a bit like subcontracting without the risk. If a submission doesn't pass muster, it doesn't get accepted and the bounty isn't paid. People who might not otherwise have contributed something may very well come out of the woodwork with some useful, well-written code.