>> I wouldn't spend much time on rewriting classic utilities in D. There's
>> plenty to be done anew. One category of tools to be written in D are
>> utilities aimed at D itself (parsers, analyzers, Thrift bindings,
>> protocol buffers bindings, code for DB interface, etc.)
>>
>> Andrei
>
> Indeed.
>
> It could be reasonable to convert existing C or C++ code to D if you're going to
> be heavily changing it, but converting pre-existing applications which are
> currently in C or C++, and which you don't need to maintain, seems like a waste
> of time. It _could_ be an interesting exercise in how to do things in D and
> could very well show shortcomings in D, dmd's current implementation, and/or
> shortcomings in Phobos, but then so would new applications.
>
> At this point, if I can choose what language I'm going to write something in,
> I'm almost certainly going to choose D (though obviously stuff like GUI apps may
> not really be properly feasible in D yet, and some things are just gonig to work
> better in other languages), but I have enough to do (and not enough time to do
> it) without spending the time to rewrite entire, working applications in D.
>
> - Jonathan M Davis

All true.  I just figured that it's 1) a nice benchmark to show that yes, D can replace C/C++ and 2) a way to review the existing utils and potentially make them work a bit better.  I also have a sneaking suspicion that there may a few hidden bugs that could be prevented by good D programming.

Casey

"Robert Clipsham" <robert@octarineparrot.com> wrote in message news:i8it3t$26f5$1@digitalmars.com...
> On 06/10/10 23:03, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
>>> Ok, for me GTK is native because I use Linux and a GTK based desktop.
>>> I know that there's a native GTK port for OSX/Quartz and I thought GTK
>>> had
>>> themes to look native on Windows?
>>>
>>
>> It does make a vague attempt to look native on Windows, and is FAR better
>> in
>> that regard than, say, Swing, Winamp, Iron/Chrome, or pretty much
>> anything
>> from Apple. But there's still rather noticable differences in both look
>> (the
>> chunkiness I mentioned, just as one example) and in feel (particulary if
>> you're using GIMP). It's kinda like gluing a picture of some wings
>> overtop
>> the logo on a Ferrari and saying "See, it's an Aston Martin!"
>
> Platform wise, GTK looks appalling on OS X, acceptable, if non-native on Windows (I think there's a GTK theme that fixes this, not sure), and, well, you use it on linux.

Unless you're a KDE (or Xfce) user. Which actually brings up another thing: It's my understanding that wxWidgets can use other things than just GTK on Linux. And AIUI, Qt and KDE are tied togther in the same way as GTK and GNOME, so does that mean Qt won't use GTK for Linux users running GNOME?

Nick Sabalausky schrieb:
> "Robert Clipsham" <robert@octarineparrot.com> wrote in message news:i8it3t$26f5$1@digitalmars.com...
>> On 06/10/10 23:03, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
>>>> Ok, for me GTK is native because I use Linux and a GTK based desktop.
>>>> I know that there's a native GTK port for OSX/Quartz and I thought GTK had
>>>> themes to look native on Windows?
>>>>
>>> It does make a vague attempt to look native on Windows, and is FAR better in
>>> that regard than, say, Swing, Winamp, Iron/Chrome, or pretty much anything
>>> from Apple. But there's still rather noticable differences in both look (the
>>> chunkiness I mentioned, just as one example) and in feel (particulary if
>>> you're using GIMP). It's kinda like gluing a picture of some wings overtop
>>> the logo on a Ferrari and saying "See, it's an Aston Martin!"
>> Platform wise, GTK looks appalling on OS X, acceptable, if non-native on Windows (I think there's a GTK theme that fixes this, not sure), and, well, you use it on linux.
> 
> Unless you're a KDE (or Xfce) user. Which actually brings up another thing: It's my understanding that wxWidgets can use other things than just GTK on Linux. And AIUI, Qt and KDE are tied togther in the same way as GTK and GNOME, so does that mean Qt won't use GTK for Linux users running GNOME? 
> 

Lots of Qt applications don't use kdelibs and lots of GTK applications don't use gnomes libs so I wouldn't say they're tied together.
Newer Qt versions can use GTK themes and even GTKs filepicker, so they feel native for non-kde-users. (Getting this to work can however be a bit tricky, at least when using xfce the correct theme isn't detected out of the box)

On Wednesday, October 06, 2010 16:28:49 Nick Sabalausky wrote:
> "Robert Clipsham" <robert@octarineparrot.com> wrote in message news:i8it3t$26f5$1@digitalmars.com...
> 
> > On 06/10/10 23:03, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
> >>> Ok, for me GTK is native because I use Linux and a GTK based desktop.
> >>> I know that there's a native GTK port for OSX/Quartz and I thought GTK
> >>> had
> >>> themes to look native on Windows?
> >> 
> >> It does make a vague attempt to look native on Windows, and is FAR
> >> better in
> >> that regard than, say, Swing, Winamp, Iron/Chrome, or pretty much
> >> anything
> >> from Apple. But there's still rather noticable differences in both look
> >> (the
> >> chunkiness I mentioned, just as one example) and in feel (particulary if
> >> you're using GIMP). It's kinda like gluing a picture of some wings
> >> overtop
> >> the logo on a Ferrari and saying "See, it's an Aston Martin!"
> > 
> > Platform wise, GTK looks appalling on OS X, acceptable, if non-native on Windows (I think there's a GTK theme that fixes this, not sure), and, well, you use it on linux.
> 
> Unless you're a KDE (or Xfce) user. Which actually brings up another thing: It's my understanding that wxWidgets can use other things than just GTK on Linux.

That's definitely cool if it can, but as far as I know, I've never seen it done. wxwidget apps always seem to look like gtk in Linux (aka butt-ugly - I hate the look of gtk; I'd have to be truly desperate to even consider writing an ap that used gtk).

> And AIUI, Qt and KDE are tied togther in the same way as GTK and
> GNOME, so does that mean Qt won't use GTK for Linux users running GNOME?

There may be a gtk theme that gnome could enable (they have a qt theme for gtk in KDE, but since it only changes the look somewhat and the functionality not at all - like using a proper, Qt/KDE file dialog - the gain is minimal), but I rather doubt that Qt makes an attempt to look like gtk on its own. Regardless, since I'm a diehard KDE user, I wouldn't know. The whole idea of "native" gets a bit funny on Linux anyway, since there really isn't such thing as a native GUI on Linux. The closest that you'd get is whatever GUI toolkit your DE uses, but it still isn't really native like you get with Windows.

- Jonathan M Davis

 Open SSL
http://www.peereboom.us/assl/assl/html/openssl.html

Yes!  When I was trying to get D to work with HTTPS, it took me a long time
to figure out how to do it.
I ended up using GnuTLS, somehow, with someone's help.

On Wed, Oct 6, 2010 at 9:53 PM, Seth Hoenig <seth.a.hoenig@gmail.com> wrote:

>
>  Open SSL
> http://www.peereboom.us/assl/assl/html/openssl.html
>
>
>

On Wed, 06 Oct 2010 23:47:58 +0200
>>>>>> "Daniel" == Daniel Gibson wrote:

Daniel> If that isn't the case I do understand your objection.. I hate Daniel> non native GUIs as well (java swing is particularly bad).

Although I'm still hankering to see QtD, I'm just curious (not having
experience with) how does SWT (DWT) can compare in regards?


Sincerely,
Gour

-- 

Gour  | Hlapicina, Croatia  | GPG key: CDBF17CA
----------------------------------------------------------------

On Wed, 6 Oct 2010 16:40:06 -0700
>>>>>> "Jonathan" == Jonathan M Davis wrote:

Jonathan> That's definitely cool if it can, but as far as I know, I've Jonathan> never seen it done. wxwidget apps always seem to look like Jonathan> gtk in Linux (aka butt-ugly - I hate the look of gtk; I'd Jonathan> have to be truly desperate to even consider writing an ap Jonathan> that used gtk).

Well, wxQt is work in progress and when done, then wxwidgets would have a chance to work differently on Linux.


Sincerely,
Gour

-- 

Gour  | Hlapicina, Croatia  | GPG key: CDBF17CA
----------------------------------------------------------------

On 10/6/2010 7:56 PM, Jimmy Cao wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 6, 2010 at 9:53 PM, Seth Hoenig <seth.a.hoenig@gmail.com <mailto:seth.a.hoenig@gmail.com>> wrote:
> 
> 
>      Open SSL
>     http://www.peereboom.us/assl/assl/html/openssl.html
>
> Yes!  When I was trying to get D to work with HTTPS, it took me a long time to
> figure out how to do it.
> I ended up using GnuTLS, somehow, with someone's help.

If you're tempted to replace or rewrite battle hardened crypto code, you're not paranoid enough.  As much as I've hated every little bit of my work with openssl, I'm not nearly crazy enough (and I'm fairly crazy sometimes) to believe it's worth the pain to start over.  I'd LOVE to do it, but no way would it be worth it.

And thanks.. now I'm gonna have another nightmare filled night.  OpenSSL.. shudder.

Later,
Brad

"Seth Hoenig" <seth.a.hoenig@gmail.com> wrote in message news:mailman.452.1286420009.858.digitalmars-d@puremagic.com...
> Open SSL http://www.peereboom.us/assl/assl/html/openssl.html
>

Boy, that describes sooo many things I've had to deal with. Including the entire (VB6) codebase at a company I used to work for. (Let's name a function that loads a file "save"! Yea! Oh, and "ccc" is a useful variable name, isn't it? Let's use it everywhere! And let's do an NIH "else" by goto-ing over the next 400 lines starting at the end of a "then" clause! And then pretend that we're all professionals! Fuck, I still have nightmares about that shithole.)