Earlier quoted context omitted.
Does this not include node as well as .net core?
Electron itself includes node. That's not a difference.
[deleted]
Electron.Net: Build cross platform desktop apps using .NET core and ASP.NET core
131–138 of 138 posts
Re: Electron.Net: Build cross platform desktop apps using .NET core and ASP.NET core
#132Can't we just make a proper, easy to use portable desktop application framework please? I really don't care what language is used so log as JS is avoidable (It can still be a compilation target so it could even be JS), and I can make a snappy desktop app that takes 10 not 100mb. I'm not even sure which one I'm hoping for at the moment. Xamarin seems to have bet fully on mobile. Avalonia looks nice but feels like it w…
those guys are making progress
https://github.com/AvaloniaUI/Avalonia
Though I wish they didn't choose xaml/wpf way which is pretty much over engineered imho. React like api would be awesome.
Re: Electron.Net: Build cross platform desktop apps using .NET core and ASP.NET core
#133Earlier quoted context omitted.
Am I missing something? Doesn't wasm still need a browser to run? What advantage are qt bindings if you still have to load webkit?
then when people use the browser they get the same experience as native, not the other way round where people expect a native app and are given a browser masquerading as an app.
But if you use qt you're already cross platform and native. Why force the user to fire up a webkit instance to parse your JavaScript when you could code in python or java?
Re: Electron.Net: Build cross platform desktop apps using .NET core and ASP.NET core
#134Earlier quoted context omitted.
I rather have a portable application that takes advantage of the best features on each platform that it runs, than the minimum common denomitor that is the web. Ergo developers taking the easy route to the expense of user's overall UI/UX. Thankfully all web based mobile OSes bombed so far.
I totally agree that html+javascript isn't a good answer to cross platform (for the reasons you mention, and because of javascript's own merits). But the ability to develop an app once and run it on multiple platforms is long overdue. And any effort in that direction is welcome. Having to learn 10 different languages and UI frameworks isn't a solution.
It is only an issue for those that are Language X Developer.
As consultant and polyglot developer, using C++ and eventually something else for the view isn't a problem at all.
And it doesn't have to be C++, there are other portable native languages to choose from.
Also web developers don't have any issue changing frameworks or languages that compile into JavaScript, almost every month.
Re: Electron.Net: Build cross platform desktop apps using .NET core and ASP.NET core
#135Can't we just make a proper, easy to use portable desktop application framework please? I really don't care what language is used so log as JS is avoidable (It can still be a compilation target so it could even be JS), and I can make a snappy desktop app that takes 10 not 100mb. I'm not even sure which one I'm hoping for at the moment. Xamarin seems to have bet fully on mobile. Avalonia looks nice but feels like it w…
those guys are making progress https://github.com/AvaloniaUI/Avalonia Though I wish they didn't choose xaml/wpf way which is pretty much over engineered imho. React like api would be awesome.
I wish they hadn’t picked GTK+. This brings huge technology stack with it, required a desktop subsystem for no reason, and is focused on the CPU rendering.
They should have used something like this instead for backend: https://github.com/memononen/nanovg
Re: Electron.Net: Build cross platform desktop apps using .NET core and ASP.NET core
#136Earlier quoted context omitted.
Regarding native cross-platform UI frameworks, isn't this what Xwt is supposed to be ( https://github.com/mono/xwt )? There's no XAML non-sense and it's an object-oriented approach to building your UI, similar to Windows.Forms. The primary benefit to it over something browser-based is start-up time. Since it's ultimately using native assemblies and there's no web server that needs to be spun up causing start-time lag…
Not XWT, but it's worth checking out Eto.Forms as it's very robust, uses native components, and you can build UIs using straight C#.
I just spent some time working with Eto.Forms (based upon your recommendation, thanks!). It looks pretty nice and seems straight-forward. I also appreciate that it officially supports F# in addition to the regular C# and VB.NET.
Unfortunately, it doesn't support .NET Core/Standard yet. The lead dev, Curtis Wensley (@cwensley), is currently working on supporting it and said that he hopes to have to completed in time for the Eto 2.4 release, per their Gitter chat (https://gitter.im/picoe/Eto?at=59d65ab4177fb9fe7e41ff9e).
Another interesting detail is that Avalonia seems to be using Eto's parser implementation. And Eto is (will?) using AvaloniaUI's (the parent of Avalonia) monomac implementation.
Re: Electron.Net: Build cross platform desktop apps using .NET core and ASP.NET core
#137Earlier quoted context omitted.
Agree. To me the solution will be webassembly. I entertain the hope that there will be a .net runtime for webassembly, in which case you will be able to write a full cross platform application without having to write a line of JavaScript. Won’t be XAML+.net but will be HTML+.net.
Even web assembly would still require a full webkit / browser instance though. UWP or WPF apps that run XAML don't have a browser instance (unless they use webview) and the memory footprint is much much lower than the equivalent electron app. I'd like to see cross platform xaml so I can build a .net core app with a GUI that will run on Mac or Linux.
It looks like there's two options for cross-platform XAML UIs:
* Prism [1], which doesn't seem to support .NET Core. It was originally created by Microsoft Patterns & Practices, but then open sourced it. It's now community maintained. It looks like it's still being actively developed as there was a merge 4 days ago.
* Avalonia [2], which supports .NET Core but is still in alpha.
[1] https://github.com/PrismLibrary/Prism [2] https://github.com/AvaloniaUI/Avalonia
Re: Electron.Net: Build cross platform desktop apps using .NET core and ASP.NET core
#138Earlier quoted context omitted.
LGPL does not allow static linking. From Qt's legal page: In case of dynamic linking, it is possible, but not mandatory, to keep application source code proprietary as long as it is “work that uses the library” – typically achieved via dynamic linking of the library. In case of static linking of the library, the application itself may no longer be “work that uses the library” and thus become subject to LGPL. It is re…
Please read the link I posted, which comes from the people who created the LGPL license: > If you statically link against an LGPL'd library, you must also provide your application in an object (not necessarily source) format, so that a user has the opportunity to modify the library and relink the application The only thing that matters from the point of view of the LGPL is that your users are able to update the LGPL…
That's quite an ambiguous area of the LGPL. Qt is a C++ app so linking it with the `.o` files from your app is going to be extremely difficult. I'm not sure it would qualify for the LGPL and anyone who says it is is frankly just guessing. The language is not clear and it has never been tested in court (and probably won't ever be).
I certainly wouldn't base a business on that risky interpretation, and the one business that I have been in that used the LGPL version of Qt dynamically linked it. It's just less risky (plus you don't need to build it yourself then).