101–110 of 347 posts
Next step, WinForms
I would recommend something like Eto.Forms (https://github.com/picoe/Eto) which is an abstraction over native GUI toolkits (WPF, WinForms, GTK+, Cocoa)
Works really well and mature.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Presumably because it's not worth the memory hit to store the hash.
That was my assumption, too. They do memoize the length, but I'm sure those bytes add up, having run into OutOfMemoryExceptions building huge amounts of strings before.
http://blogs.msdn.com/b/ericlippert/archive/2011/07/19/strin...
This lets them interoperate with OLE Automation.
It's actually Free Software, not just open source. MIT license.
"Free software" has a narrower meaning in the context of the four freedoms . https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_software#Definition
Earlier quoted context omitted.
ASP.NET already runs on .NET with Mono, but not always the latest versions of things. Having it all open source could bridge that compatibility gap and let us fully enjoy the ecosystem, instead of having to be careful with taking dependencies all over.
ASP.NET support on Mono is very shaky, with random things missing. I tried to develop a Mono ASP.NET MVC app on it recently and I had to switch to Windows due to the number of issues.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Who is going to support 20 million lines of code other than Microsoft employees as amateurs bungle their way through thirty years of patches for backward compatibility wrapped around stupid and clever things OEM's and third party developers did to get their code to work? It's not like Linux because there isn't a team of experienced volunteers already working on the code base and the Windows code base contains a lot f…
No one "supports" it. People will improve the bits that bother them. In the aggregate, these activities amount to more than you could ever pay to have done. The beauty of open source model is it gives the desperately motivated the means to fix their problems in a way that benefits everyone.
It's actually Free Software, not just open source. MIT license.
But in this context you seem to imply that there are practical differences i.e: Not all Open Source licences are considered Free Software in the practical sense.
If that is the case, could you provide an example?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
As a practical matter, I doubt that they can. There's probably quite a lot of third-party code intertwined with Windows itself (especially in the device drivers that ship with it) that's subject to strict redistribution and publication restrictions.
Device drivers can be divorced from the core os.
It's a completely different matters.
I would be curious to see the effects of completely open-sourcing Windows. Businesses would continue to use it, because it's Microsoft and they want enterprise support. I think it would get even more love than it already does from the development community. Piracy of Windows is already rampant, so they're not really in a worse position from that (plus I think that most people who can pay for Windows do so already). F…
Who is going to support 20 million lines of code other than Microsoft employees as amateurs bungle their way through thirty years of patches for backward compatibility wrapped around stupid and clever things OEM's and third party developers did to get their code to work? It's not like Linux because there isn't a team of experienced volunteers already working on the code base and the Windows code base contains a lot f…
But this is strictly imaginary because I doubt that 20 million lines of code are all under the unilateral control of Microsoft.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
WinForms is a pretty great UI toolkit. It's easy to use, fast, and requires very little system resources.
This. It might appear a bit clunky at first sight, and it might not provide the shiniest eye candy out of the box but in terms of development velocity to get something practical done - provided it is combined with the tooling in Visual Studio - it's really nice.
Any non-standard control requires GDI+ rendering, which is not very maintainable. WPF offers a far superior composition ability.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm not sure they will migrate Visual Studio. First they'd need to move WPF, which is implemented in DirectX. Second, Visual Studio and MSDN are still profitable. Third, there's the Omnisharp project that;s working on providing support for the more common IDEs on linux. In fact, there's nothing stopping people from making Eclipse and IntelliJ plugins.
>> First they'd need to move WPF, which is implemented in DirectX. What version? There is DX9 support on Linux and IIRC a partial DX10/11 implementation bit-rotting somewhere.
I have to say I managed to have it working and I got a 50% increase in FPS in Steam/Source games running under Wine.
There's the "old" DirectX -> OpenGL translation layer in Wine but it is not really efficient or performant, although it may be enough for GUI applications.