digitalmars.D - Re: Stupid little iota of an idea
- bearophile <bearophileHUGS lycos.com> Feb 13 2011
- Nick_B <nick.NOSPAMbarbalich gmail.com> Feb 13 2011
- retard <re tard.com.invalid> Feb 13 2011
- Caligo <iteronvexor gmail.com> Feb 13 2011
- "Nick Sabalausky" <a a.a> Feb 13 2011
- Jonathan M Davis <jmdavisProg gmx.com> Feb 13 2011
Andrej Mitrovic:I'm getting more and more convinced to join the iota camp. The new syntax barely saves any characters, and is potentially confusing.
Simen kjaeraas:This is also an interesting point. If a..b were to be a separate type, opSlice would no longer need to exist, it could be a simple overload of opIndex.
See the last part, about __getitem__ and slice() of Python: http://www.digitalmars.com/webnews/newsgroups.php?art_group=digitalmars.D&article_id=129228 Bye, bearophile
Feb 13 2011
Here is a comment by Jeff_S, near the bottom of the comments re Microsoft taking over Nokia. I now worry that the wonderful Qt C++ GUI library, that Nokia now owns with it's acquisition of Trolltech a few years ago, will now founder in stagnation. The optimist in me hopes that it will ported to Win Phone 7. But the realist in me says "fat chance". With this huge deal with MS, and Qt being cross platform, and MS being all about MS platforms and dev tools, Qt is now likely toast. Sad. Good thing it's open source. It will still have life as a separate open source entity, but without the paid developers at Nokia working on it, it's progress will slow dramatically. There is only so much slack the community is capable of taking up. I'm also scratching my head on this, in terms of what Nokia gets out of this. They are essentially trading a larger, more successful, more established, platform and ecosystem (Symbian) and large developer mind share, for a much smaller, much less successful, much less developer mind share platform and ecosystem (Win Phone 7 and Silverlight). original URL here see: http://www.betanews.com/joewilcox/article/Nokia-swaps-one-burning-platform-for-another-in-Microsofts-silent-takeover-of-the-Finnish-phone-maker/1297438206?awesm=betane.ws_yJ&utm_content=api&utm_medium=betane.ws-twitter&utm_source=twitter.com cheers Nick
Feb 13 2011
retard <re tard.com.invalid> Mon, 14 Feb 2011 13:03:42 +1300, Nick_B wrote:I'm also scratching my head on this, in terms of what Nokia gets out of this. They are essentially trading a larger, more successful, more established, platform and ecosystem (Symbian) and large developer mind share, for a much smaller, much less successful, much less developer mind share platform and ecosystem (Win Phone 7 and Silverlight).
Money? http://www.istockanalyst.com/article/viewiStockNews/ articleid/4886090
Feb 13 2011
--002354435cf043788f049c347123 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 On Sun, Feb 13, 2011 at 6:03 PM, Nick_B <nick.NOSPAMbarbalich gmail.com>wrote:Here is a comment by Jeff_S, near the bottom of the comments re Microsoft taking over Nokia. I now worry that the wonderful Qt C++ GUI library, that Nokia now owns with it's acquisition of Trolltech a few years ago, will now founder in stagnation. The optimist in me hopes that it will ported to Win Phone 7. But the realist in me says "fat chance". With this huge deal with MS, and Qt being cross platform, and MS being all about MS platforms and dev tools, Qt is now likely toast. Sad. Good thing it's open source. It will still have life as a separate open source entity, but without the paid developers at Nokia working on it, it's progress will slow dramatically. There is only so much slack the community is capable of taking up. I'm also scratching my head on this, in terms of what Nokia gets out of this. They are essentially trading a larger, more successful, more established, platform and ecosystem (Symbian) and large developer mind share, for a much smaller, much less successful, much less developer mind share platform and ecosystem (Win Phone 7 and Silverlight). original URL here see: http://www.betanews.com/joewilcox/article/Nokia-swaps-one-burning-platform-for-another-in-Microsofts-silent-takeover-of-the-Finnish-phone-maker/1297438206?awesm=betane.ws_yJ&utm_content=api&utm_medium=betane.ws-twitter&utm_source=twitter.com cheers Nick
Qt is not an open source project. Qt is Free software (GPL/LGPL) which is also dual licensed (commercial license) for development of proprietary and commercial software. Even if Microsoft was the copyright holder of Qt, nothing would stop anyone from modifying the source code and continuing its development. Besides, Qt is a source of income for Nokia because many large companies use it for their projects. --002354435cf043788f049c347123 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable <br><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On Sun, Feb 13, 2011 at 6:03 PM, Nick_B = <span dir=3D"ltr"><<a href=3D"mailto:nick.NOSPAMbarbalich gmail.com">nic= k.NOSPAMbarbalich gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class=3D"g= mail_quote" style=3D"margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(= 204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;"> Here is a comment by Jeff_S, near the bottom of the comments re Microsoft t= aking over Nokia.<br> <br> I now worry that the wonderful Qt C++ GUI library, that Nokia now owns with= it's acquisition of Trolltech a few years ago, will now founder in sta= gnation.<br> <br> The optimist in me hopes that it will ported to Win Phone 7. But the realis= t in me says "fat chance". With this huge deal with MS, and Qt be= ing cross platform, and MS being all about MS platforms and dev tools, Qt i= s now likely toast. Sad.<br> <br> Good thing it's open source. It will still have life as a separate open= source entity, but without the paid developers at Nokia working on it, it&= #39;s progress will slow dramatically. There is only so much slack the comm= unity is capable of taking up.<br> <br> I'm also scratching my head on this, in terms of what Nokia gets out of= this. They are essentially trading a larger, more successful, more establi= shed, platform and ecosystem (Symbian) and large developer mind share, for = a much smaller, much less successful, much less developer mind share platfo= rm and ecosystem (Win Phone 7 and Silverlight).<br> <br> original URL here<br> see: <a href=3D"http://www.betanews.com/joewilcox/article/Nokia-swaps-one-b= urning-platform-for-another-in-Microsofts-silent-takeover-of-the-Finnish-ph= one-maker/1297438206?awesm=3Dbetane.ws_yJ&utm_content=3Dapi&utm_med= ium=3Dbetane.ws-twitter&utm_source=3Dtwitter.com" target=3D"_blank">htt= p://www.betanews.com/joewilcox/article/Nokia-swaps-one-burning-platform-for= -another-in-Microsofts-silent-takeover-of-the-Finnish-phone-maker/129743820= 6?awesm=3Dbetane.ws_yJ&utm_content=3Dapi&utm_medium=3Dbetane.ws-twi= tter&utm_source=3Dtwitter.com</a><br> <br> cheers<br><font color=3D"#888888"> Nick<br> <br> <br> </font></blockquote></div><br>Stop spreading FUD.<br><br>Qt is not an open = source project.=A0 Qt is Free software (GPL/LGPL) which is also dual licens= ed (commercial license) for development of proprietary and commercial softw= are.=A0 Even if Microsoft was the copyright holder of Qt, nothing would sto= p anyone from modifying the source code and continuing its development.=A0 = Besides, Qt is a source of income for Nokia because many large companies us= e it for their projects.<br> <br><br> --002354435cf043788f049c347123--
Feb 13 2011
"Caligo" <iteronvexor gmail.com> wrote in message news:mailman.1613.1297648969.4748.digitalmars-d puremagic.com...Qt is not an open source project. Qt is Free software (GPL/LGPL) which is also dual licensed (commercial license) for development of proprietary and commercial software. Even if Microsoft was the copyright holder of Qt, nothing would stop anyone from modifying the source code and continuing its development. Besides, Qt is a source of income for Nokia because many large companies use it for their projects.
[/me gets up on soapbox] Distinctions between "open source" and "free software", and the assosiated FSF/Stallman vs. OSI geek-off/slapping-fight, make me want to claw my ears out and run screaming towards 100% closed/proprietary everything. [/me steps back down]
Feb 13 2011
On Sunday 13 February 2011 22:51:02 Nick Sabalausky wrote:"Caligo" <iteronvexor gmail.com> wrote in message news:mailman.1613.1297648969.4748.digitalmars-d puremagic.com...Qt is not an open source project. Qt is Free software (GPL/LGPL) which is also dual licensed (commercial license) for development of proprietary and commercial software. Even if Microsoft was the copyright holder of Qt, nothing would stop anyone from modifying the source code and continuing its development. Besides, Qt is a source of income for Nokia because many large companies use it for their projects.
[/me gets up on soapbox] Distinctions between "open source" and "free software", and the assosiated FSF/Stallman vs. OSI geek-off/slapping-fight, make me want to claw my ears out and run screaming towards 100% closed/proprietary everything. [/me steps back down]
LOL. On the whole, software is neither Free Software or Open Source. It may have a license that allows you to follow either of those philosophies, but Free Software and Open Source are really ideologies of the the people writing or using code, not the code itself. Most people just use the term open source, I believe, and most people don't care about the distinction. For some people, it seems to be a matter of life and death though. I suppose that you can just use the term FOSS if you want to be politically correct. - Jonathan M Davis
Feb 13 2011