On Sat, 18 Oct 2014 23:38:35 +0000 Joakim via Digitalmars-d-learn <[email protected]> wrote:
don't you think that we are going in circles now? not that i'm tired of this conversation, but i see that we get each other's POVs, and have no more arguments to convince each other. ;-) i respect your opinions but just don't agree with them. ;-) besides, it's increasingly hard for me to answer, 'cause my English writing skill is awful. i can understand you but can't clearly express myself. > >> I don't read books anymore > > even technical ones? ;-) > I think the only technical book I've read in the last decade is > Andrei's TDPL, which I bought in print and got about halfway > through. I've probably read bits and pieces of maybe five other > non-technical books here and there in the same timespan, which > were all given to me as gifts. I've never read an ebook, yet I > read extensively online. Books are an outdated form, now that we > have blogs. i believe that blog posts and textbooks compliments each other. i prefer textbook for learning new language, for example, and read blogs to learn some interesting/funny/hidden features. > I don't know much about Oberon, but that gadgets UI sounds like > it's still a GUI. sure, it's GUI, but with some "consolish" pieces dropped in. you can connect components and you can write some textual commands/scripts to modify component behavior. best from both worlds! ;-) > I actually agree with you that some sort of component system like > that is likely the future, even if it's only ultimately used to > make developers' lives easier and largely unconfigured by users > themselves it's simple enough for users to modify. changing layouts by dragging components, embedding components into components and so on. this things are mostly "visual" and easy. people love to customize their working environment if it's easy enough. ;-) > though I haven't looked much into the complex > historical reasons why it hasn't happened yet. 'cause so-called "software industry" is not ready to die yet. ;-) with proper component system there will be no much sense in selling "applications". and selling components is much harder: how many people will buy "e-mail data source component"? it's not even visual! and selling "e-mail reader" is worthless, 'cause people will deconstruct it to basic parts and build their own "application", and will not buy "shiny new version with improved interface". they will not even buy the "full package" if they only need one part of it, like "faster e-mail data source component". so the only way to keep "software bussines" (as we know it) running is turning component system back to non-component one. take, for example, COM technology (which is badly done, but still usable component system). how much software uses COM to decouple application in reusable parts? even microsoft realised that this will be disaster and turned COM to "advancing scripting interface" instead of truly component system. > > have you ever seen BlackBox Component Builder? it's written in > > Component Pascal, but the basic principles are > > language-independent. > > i'm dreaming about BCB with D as base language... > No, never heard of it, sounds interesting. try it, it's fun and free! ;-) you'll see "component programming system" in action. it's not "component OS", but it's great programming environment nevertheless. D is almost capable of powering such system. if only i had more free time and motivation... creating something BCB-like can be that "killer app" D needs.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
