Oxygen Basic

Information => Open Forum => Topic started by: JRS on October 12, 2014, 05:30:07 PM

Title: IUPGL
Post by: JRS on October 12, 2014, 05:30:07 PM
The IUP project released version 3.11.2 on Oct. 6th 2014. They seem to be taking the GL based controls seriously.

See History:

New: TITLEBACKIMAGEINACTIVE attribute for IupGLFrame and IupGLExpander.
New: BACKIMAGEINACTIVE attribute for IupGLFrame.
New: BACKIMAGE* attributes for IupGLButton, IupGLVal and IupGLProgress.
New: FRONTIMAGE* attributes for IupGLButton.
New: FITTOBACKIMAGE attribute for IupGLButton, IupGLVal and IupGLProgress.
Changed: all images in IupGLControls are now drawn using OpenGL textures instead of glDrawPixels.


IUP Project Site (http://webserver2.tecgraf.puc-rio.br/iup/)
Title: Re: IUPGL
Post by: Mike Lobanovsky on October 12, 2014, 07:27:07 PM
What about native look and feel? Sold cheap for a cheaper dev process? Lack of eddicashon? Don't know their whereabouts in mscomctl? Yes, they do? What about Cocoa? ;)

I won't give a sh*t for their claimed compatibility with vacuum cleaners or electric razors as long as they can't find their way around in a decent desktop operating system.
Title: Re: IUPGL
Post by: JRS on October 12, 2014, 07:30:59 PM
Until someone comes up with something better, IUP works for me.

Title: Re: IUPGL
Post by: Mike Lobanovsky on October 12, 2014, 08:18:39 PM
Yes, as long as you're leaving the entire Mac OSX out of your sphere of interest.
Title: Re: IUPGL
Post by: JRS on October 12, 2014, 08:44:23 PM
Quote
Yes, as long as you're leaving the entire Mac OSX out of your sphere of interest.

Hint: I have never owned an Apple product. If the IUP folks felt OS X was that important, there would be a driver for it. It's on their list. (has been for years)

Title: Re: IUPGL
Post by: Mike Lobanovsky on October 12, 2014, 09:09:29 PM
If the IUP folks were the ones who were likely to ever need to have an Apple product as an indispensable attribute of their social standing to keep up with their equals rather than being black sheep, they would have this option accomplished long before. But since they keep on ignoring it for a considerable period of time already, I'm inclined to regard them as inadequate in choosing their top priority targets for their allegedly multiplatform product.
Title: Re: IUPGL
Post by: JRS on October 12, 2014, 09:14:39 PM
Please read the history behind their efforts with Apple products. It not like they are ignoring them. They are waiting for Apple to stop changing the rules.

Title: Re: IUPGL
Post by: Mike Lobanovsky on October 12, 2014, 09:33:43 PM
In view of your words, how the wxWidgets folks manage to cope with the same problem and emit regular updates for half a dozen platforms including Mac OSX all this time, remains a mystery to me. Or are the apples different, do you think?
Title: Re: IUPGL
Post by: JRS on October 12, 2014, 09:43:33 PM
IUP has a couple options for OSX. Gtk has been available all along. There have been other forked efforts using other Apple developer tools but nothing seems to take hold. I'm sorry if my interest in Apple is biased but AIR held that post for SB in the day and now he is gone. (moved on, retired, ...)

Title: Re: IUPGL
Post by: Mike Lobanovsky on October 12, 2014, 09:52:46 PM
John,

I remember he gave me access to his Claromac repo some time ago. I'll have a look at it tomorrow (in fact, today but after some rest) to see when he registered there last. I haven't seen him anywhere since your AllBasic forum was closed down.
Title: Re: IUPGL
Post by: JRS on October 12, 2014, 10:16:00 PM
I miss Armando. He was a good friend and a major contributor to the Script BASIC project. SB wouldn't be where it is today if it wasn't for his help as I was getting up to speed with SB under the covers.

The IUP driver spec. is brief and should be easy to adapt to. At one point I was looking at creating a HTML/CSS/JavaScript IPU version. Too many other projects got in the way.

You would be a hero on multiple fronts if you can get a Apple looking GUI going with IUP.

Title: Re: IUPGL
Post by: Mike Lobanovsky on October 12, 2014, 10:52:46 PM
I'd put it more midly, John, something like "One could be a hero...".

Or someone at Rent-a-Coder could simply do this job for you in exchange for a fair pay. Otherwise you risk passing away before the IUP folks do it for you for free. Like in "freedom", hehe...
Title: Re: IUPGL
Post by: JRS on October 12, 2014, 11:09:19 PM
Quote from: Mike Lobanovsky on October 12, 2014, 10:52:46 PM
I'd put it more midly, John, something like "One could be a hero...".

Or someone at Rent-a-Coder could simply do this job for you in exchange for a fair pay. Otherwise you risk passing away before the IUP folks do it for you for free. Like in "freedom", hehe...

Once again, I could give a rats ass if there was ever a OS X IUP driver. You seem to be the only one that thinks IUP is shit due to this missing piece.

Title: Re: IUPGL
Post by: Mike Lobanovsky on October 12, 2014, 11:48:32 PM
No, John, I'm not the only one. There are actually millions of software engineers and staff who design, program, market, and successfully sell within stringent deadlines SW products of much, much higher quality and complexity than a mere handful of platform specific common controls, and earn money substantially above average of their peers in other scientific and industrial domains. That said, what would you expect from yet another open-source project without firm guidance, clear targets, capable team, fixed deadlines, or equitable remuneration? Degradation and oblivion in 99.9 per cent cases, is all.

What you and me and everyone else are doing here (and over there too) is in fact sitting in the sandbox playing buskets and scoops. All this is about simply having fun, nothing more. There can be nothing of practical worthiness in such activities by definition. If this is what you mean by putting the word "shit" in my mouth, then shit it is, John.
Title: Re: IUPGL
Post by: JRS on October 12, 2014, 11:57:09 PM
For me the Script BASIC project has two sides. The open source project side which allows me to be creative and play. There is a commercial side that have specific tasks that clients are happy to pay for. With SB, ease of use trumps all. Next comes portability. Linux is the baseline and what happens on the Windows and OS X side typically come from contributions of those having that need. SB is open ended in that respect. (as should all open source projects)
Title: Re: IUPGL
Post by: Mike Lobanovsky on October 13, 2014, 07:54:07 AM
Hi John,

AIR's last commit to the Bitbucket repo is dated 2014-04-28. That's approx. when AllBasic was discontinued, so it gives us no clue really.



P.S. And he's done a fair amount of work, I should say. Almost all of the basic Mac OSX controls seem to be there, and more:

Quote from: AIR's Repo
src/widgets/button.c:
src/widgets/canvas.c:
src/widgets/checkbox.c:
src/widgets/combo.c:
src/widgets/container.c:
src/widgets/font_dialog.c:
src/widgets/frame.c:
src/widgets/image.c:
src/widgets/label.c:
src/widgets/listbox.c:
src/widgets/listview.c:
src/widgets/menu.c:
src/widgets/menubar.c:
src/widgets/opengl.c:
src/widgets/progress.c:
src/widgets/radiogroup.c:
src/widgets/radio.c:
src/widgets/scrollbar.c:
src/widgets/splitter.c:
src/widgets/statusbar.c:
src/widgets/textarea.c:
src/widgets/textbox.c:
src/widgets/toolbar.c:
src/widgets/treeview.c:
src/widgets/window.c:
src/widgets/workspace.c:
Title: Re: IUPGL
Post by: JRS on October 13, 2014, 08:03:31 AM
I have been looking at AIR's JADE project for CERN ROOT. I haven't gotten around to it since my system trashing by dislin.

I'm concerned as he hasn't returned any of my e-mail which isn't like him. Don't know what to say.

Title: Re: IUPGL
Post by: JRS on October 13, 2014, 08:14:18 AM
Quote
And he's done a fair amount of work, I should say. Almost all of the basic Mac OSX controls seem to be there, and more:

That's good news!

Have you looked at the IUP driver API yet?
Title: Re: IUPGL
Post by: Mike Lobanovsky on October 13, 2014, 09:14:29 AM
As far as the Mac is concerned, the last time I looked at IUP they were offering some sort of GTK-style interface -- functional under Mac OSX but looking totally alien to the platform. Every single bit of the original interface looks like a piece of art in itself but GTK is plainly not up to that mark. Neither is MS Windows, for that matter, e.g. with their Word for Mac, at least in its builds that are known to me.

That's where the wxWidgets library has its strongest point providing the programmer with a given operating system's entire set of native controls and more with a common, platform independent set of props and methods. It is huge in its entirety but you can always recompile it in reasonably sized chunks to match the immediate needs of a given application. For example, a multi-platform GUI-capable BASIC dialect.

You have to be in love with the OS you're coding for, just as AIR is. :)
Title: Re: IUPGL
Post by: JRS on October 13, 2014, 09:22:18 AM
Both wxWidgets and Qt are C++ based which doesn't help the SB project any.

Notice

I'm going to be lurking in the background here on the O2 forum as I will be busy with the following SB related projects.


Note: Efforts to solidify the SB 2.2 release which is seriously overdue.

Testing

Code: Script BASIC
  1. ' Testing Script BASIC syntax highlighting
  2.  
  3. FOR x = 99 TO 1 STEP -1
  4.   PRINT x & " bottles of beer on the wall."
  5. NEXT
  6.  
Title: Re: IUPGL
Post by: Kuron on October 13, 2014, 11:07:02 AM
There really wasn't a need to add an OpenGL based GUI.  Generally anybody using OpenGL would write their own GUI system.  It is not a remotely complex task.  Those too lazy or unskilled can simply use a third-party GUI system like Crazy Eddies that should be able to plug into IUPs OpenGL control with minimal effort.  Personally, I would not use the included OpenGL GUI controls, I would write my own.

There is zero excuse for lack of OSX support in IUP.  I like IUP very much the times I played with it, but I need a cross-platform GUI, not one limited to just Windows and Linux.  But, the IUP developers really worry me.  That they were ever using glDrawPixels instead of textured quads to fraw the GL controls shows just how unfamiliar and incompetent they are with OpenGL.
Title: Re: IUPGL
Post by: JRS on October 13, 2014, 12:27:19 PM
Quote
There is zero excuse for lack of OSX support in IUP.

Don't care what Apple does or offers. If you feel it's important, write a IUP driver for OS X. AIR was pretty close. Good luck with that...

Title: Re: IUPGL
Post by: JRS on October 13, 2014, 02:53:33 PM
Just Released! Parallels Desktop 10 for Mac (http://www.parallels.com/products/desktop/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=cpc&utm_content=usretargeting&utm_campaign=MKGMediaGroup).

Solved! Now you have native IUP for the MAC.  :-*

.
Title: Re: IUPGL
Post by: Mike Lobanovsky on October 13, 2014, 04:22:21 PM
Quote from: John on October 13, 2014, 12:27:19 PM
Don't care what Apple does or offers. If you feel it's important, write a IUP driver for OS X.

Don't care what Torvalds does or offers. If you feel it's important, run it in your Wine.
Title: Re: IUPGL
Post by: JRS on October 13, 2014, 04:38:47 PM
Quote
Don't care what Torvalds does or offers.

The internet as we know it would be a very different place without Linux. (only one site, inet://microsoft)
Title: Re: IUPGL
Post by: Kuron on October 13, 2014, 07:59:43 PM
Quote from: John on October 13, 2014, 12:27:19 PM
Don't care what Apple does or offers. If you feel it's important, write a IUP driver for OS X. AIR was pretty close. Good luck with that...

You seem very confused.  Apple is not the ones who make IUP, so it is not them doing or offering anything.  Also, IUP it not my project, it is NOT my job to provide support for it or expand it.
Title: Re: IUPGL
Post by: JRS on October 13, 2014, 08:29:46 PM
I hope you guys take the time to understand what an open source project is and how to responsibly contribute.

BTW OxygenBasic is an open source project. (like IUP) Feel free to browse the source and help out where you can.
Title: Re: IUPGL
Post by: Kuron on October 13, 2014, 08:44:39 PM
Quote from: John on October 13, 2014, 04:38:47 PM
The internet as we know it would be a very different place without Linux. (only one site, inet://microsoft)

Not really.  If Linux had never appeared, most servers would be using Unix, BSD or Solaris.  Windows would NOT be a consideration for most people looking for an alternative for Windows.  You need to remember the internet predates Windows by a LONG time.  I have been online since 1980 (ironically when instant messaging first appeared).  Trust me, we were NOT using Windows and we were not using Linux.

Had Linus never came along and brought division and conflict to the open source community by fragmenting it into irrelevancy, non-Windows OSes would have a much larger market share than what they do today.  Linus instead, through his arrogance and naivety, resorted to the age old PsyOp tactic of divide and conquer.  Unfortunately, that is a tactic that never leads to dominance, it only leads to a Charlie Foxtrot, which is what Linux inarguably is now.  And I am saying this as somebody who likes Linux, although my main reason for using it is economical.  I simply can't afford to buy Windows anymore.  And with the way Windows has moved, I don't really like the looks of it anymore.  If I was going to BUY an OS, I would probably have to move to OSX. 
Title: Re: IUPGL
Post by: Kuron on October 13, 2014, 08:52:46 PM
Quote from: John on October 13, 2014, 08:29:46 PM
I hope you guys take the time to understand what an open source project is and how to responsibly contribute.

Sadly, open source has become taking the hard work of somebody else and trying to make a name for yourself off of the blood, sweat and tears somebody else has put into their project.
Title: Re: IUPGL
Post by: JRS on October 13, 2014, 08:54:59 PM
Quote
If I was going to BUY an OS, I would probably have to move to OSX.

Great! You have a strong interest in OS X and Mike has a VMWare copy of OS X as well. Why don't you and Mike put your talents together and help the Apple community with a popular cross platform GUI? AIR has done most of the work already. The IUP driver API is only a few calls.

Please don't take my lack of interest in Apple personal. There is a lot of things I don't use or like but I don't go on about it.

Title: Re: IUPGL
Post by: JRS on October 13, 2014, 09:00:50 PM
Quote
Sadly, open source has become taking the hard work of somebody else and trying to make a name for yourself off of the blood, sweat and tears somebody else has put into their project.

It's ignorance like the statement above that ruins open source projects. If the author didn't freely mean to share his/her work (like Charles, Peter Verhas, ...) with the hope of it becoming better, they wouldn't have released the source. PLEASE do a Google search on open source software and understand the basic principles behind it.
Title: Re: IUPGL
Post by: Kuron on October 13, 2014, 09:19:20 PM
Quote from: John on October 13, 2014, 09:00:50 PM
It's ignorance like the statement above that ruins open source projects. If the author didn't freely mean to share his/her work (like Charles, Peter Verhas, ...) with the hope of it becoming better, they wouldn't have released the source. PLEASE do a Google search on open source software and understand the basic principles behind it.

Honesty, should not be confused with ignorance unless one chooses to live in denial.

There is a difference between freely sharing your work and expecting others to do your work for you.  There is also a difference between freely sharing your work and expecting others to follow your ideology if they want to use your work.  Unfortunately, most open source licenses have some fairly hefty strings attached that make it impractical for me to use code-wise, using the open source project itself is an entirely different matter.

Title: Re: IUPGL
Post by: Mike Lobanovsky on October 13, 2014, 10:00:58 PM
@Kuron:

I back every single word of your recent messages. What was earlier confined to school classes and hobby clubs mainly and could therefore be monitored and somehow kept to within reasonable bounds so as not to meddle notoriously with other people's interests, is now spilled over the net in unbearable quantities and advocated aggressively by numerous propagandists deaf to intelligent reasoning. Go read the GNU GPL -- mein kampf broken loose.


@John:

Quote
There is a lot of things I don't use or like but I don't go on about it.
Not true. There isn't a Windows BASIC forum on the net where John Spikowski hasn't yet tried to go on about how bad MS and its Windows is, and how wonderful GNU-ed public exhibitionism is, and how everyone absolutely must give up their own ambitions and go live in the Commie barracks. Tell you what, John, early Commies had a decree by which people's wives were to be communalized for public access on first demand. Does that ring the bell?

Quote
Why don't you and Mike put your talents together and help the Apple community with a popular cross platform GUI?
Why do you think that Mike or Kuron or anybody else among your peers would ever need your advice on what their needs are and how they should go about their time and effort?

The mere presence of such people as Chris Boss, or Eros Olmi, or Petr Schreiber, or even your humble servant, to say nothing of many hundreds of regular albeit anonymous visitors on this site is already a very strong insentive towards the betterment of OxygenBasic as a product. And many thanks again to Charles for letting his code out in the Public Domain. But I repeat again -- it is his own voluntary and intelligent choice rather than a tribute to some questionable quality propaganda or Mao Tse-tung quote pads.
Title: Re: IUPGL
Post by: Kuron on October 14, 2014, 05:27:09 AM
@Mike

Quote
Go read the GNU GPL -- mein kampf broken loose.
Stallman makes no attempt to hide his philosophical beliefs, which sadly were one of the roots of the hippie movement.  Things do get interesting when you pull the tax records of the FSF, as Stallman is inarguably a hypocrite and quite capitalistic in nature.  The FSF also routinely sues developers who use open source software in a way it doesn't like which in itself defacto makes the license a proprietary license which the FSF is supposed to be against.

Quote
Not true. There isn't a Windows BASIC forum on the net where John Spikowski hasn't yet tried to go on about how bad MS and its Windows is
Right now, MS and Windows have no greater supporter than John.  He is diligently working Somebody else is diligently working on implementing COM support into SB.  Given that SB is cross-platform, this is detrimental to Linux as a whole.  Like .NET, COM is Windows technology and should not be ported to Linux. 

When the .NET initiative hit Windows, many of us old farts rebelled and dropped MS's programming languages because we did not follow the "bloat because you can" programming methodology that MS was moving to.  Unfortunately, after .NET had been out a while, you had an organized and deliberate attack on Linux with people trying to bring the proprietary Windows technology known as .NET to Linux in the form of Mono.  Windows developers, instead of learning how to properly develop for Linux, wanted to bring Windows technology with them and in doing so have changed Linux by bringing one of the most bloated Windows technologies to Linux.  The marketing for Mono should be "Now Linux can suck just as much as Windows". 

John also does not seem to fully believe in the open source principle as a whole.  I had an interest in John's Charles's C BASIC.  However, John intentionally closed off the support forums for it and even before it was closed off, the membership requirements were such that people interested in the product were not eligible to join anyway.  When somebody doesn't believe in their project enough to want to discuss it, support it and encourage exploration, you can't expect others to pick up the ball and want to play when you have let all the air out of the ball and put it away in the closet so nobody can play anymore.

Quote
Why do you think that Mike or Kuron or anybody else among your peers would ever need your advice on what their needs are and how they should go about their time and effort?
For me, the more disturbing aspect of this is John thinks IUP would be the right way to bring a cross-platform GUI to any platform.  I do like IUP, even though it is not as well-established and as functional as WxWidgets.  Perhaps it is just me and old age and not being able to teach an old dog new tricks, but both products are bloated beyond belief.  Most of my development over the past few years is for a system where everything has to fit into 32K, because that is the total amount of static RAM available to the CPU for program storage and workspace.  And it is eight processing cores sharing that same 32K.  So, I don't like bloat.  I look at how PureBasic has implemented its cross-platform GUI system.  No bloat, small executables on each platform.  I also look at MaxGUI which is what is used by BlitzMax.  Again, a VERY nice cross-platform GUI, no bloat, tiny executable and MaxGUI is open source.  I am NOT sure what the current license is, but it has bounced around to different open source licenses over the years and it a solid and reliable choice.  Somebody who was wanting a cross-platform GUI, would have little issue taking MaxGUI and working it into a standalone cross-platform solution.

Quote
The mere presence of such people as Chris Boss, or Eros Olmi, or Petr Schreiber, or even your humble servant, to say nothing of many hundreds of regular albeit anonymous visitors on this site is already a very strong insentive towards the betterment of OxygenBasic as a product.  And many thanks again to Charles for letting his code out in the Public Domain. But I repeat again -- it is his own voluntary and intelligent choice rather than a tribute to some questionable quality propaganda or Mao Tse-tung quote pads.
Although I got a kick in the teeth and a knife in the back for trying to help the first person in that list (who was a friend) try and bring his product to another language, I do agree with what you have said.  However, with OxygenBasic, it is still in the very early stages and I am not sure Charles has fully decided where he is going to go with it.  I have seen many changes since I have been following it and to me, it would seem highly rude to try and guide it in a direction the true author may not necessarily want to go.  The old saying too many cooks spoil the broth certainly also applies to programming.

Title: Re: IUPGL
Post by: JRS on October 14, 2014, 09:42:31 AM
OT

The server was attacked early this morning (my time) via an old CGI script that was forgotten and was misused causing exhausting of memory. (Apache died)  Everything should be back to normal.