Android SDK - first impression

Ilya_Ehrenburg

Only with suitable platform-specific #ifdefs to get integer types which are guaranteed to be the width you want, surely?

Use stdint.h types, the platform-specific #ifs are already in the implementation (if it's halfway conforming).

blakeyrat

@pjt33 said:

Are you sure you're not just a victim of Spurgeon's law? (And note that I said Swing has better layout managers. I've no idea whether the people who wrote the apps you've encountered used them).

Yes. If you know of a Java app with a good GUI, let me know about it, I'll try it and maybe... just maybe... I'll change my mind. Usually when I make that challenge, Java fans respond with either Eclipse (which is shit) or Azureus (which is shit), so don't bother recommending either of those.

It comes down to: if Java has such great GUI tools, where are the great Java GUIs? I understand Sturgeon's Law (or... Spurgeon?), but you'd still expect 10% of Java apps to have good GUIs, right?

@pjt33 said:

Only with suitable platform-specific #ifdefs to get integer types which are guaranteed to be the width you want, surely?

Coming from a Mac Classic C programmer, the failure to specify integer widths was the great failure of the C standardization. I can't being to tell you how many thousands of "portable" C applications broke when exposed to 16-bit ints and 34-bit longs.

Scarlet_Manuka

@blakeyrat said:

I can't being to tell you how many thousands of "portable" C applications broke when exposed to 16-bit ints and 34-bit longs.

To be fair, I don't think many people foresaw 34-bit longs.

blakeyrat

@Scarlet Manuka said:

@blakeyrat said:
I can't being to tell you how many thousands of "portable" C applications broke when exposed to 16-bit ints and 34-bit longs.
To be fair, I don't think many people foresaw 34-bit longs.

How about typos? Did they forsee that? You pedantic dickweed who needs to die in a fire?

Scarlet_Manuka

@blakeyrat said:

pedantic dickweed

Exactly as the first tag on my previous post said :)@blakeyrat said:

die in a fire

Missed that one, though.

blakeyrat

@Scarlet Manuka said:

@blakeyrat said:
pedantic dickweed
Exactly as the first tag on my previous post said :)

My rage is not quelled by tags!

pjt33

@blakeyrat said:

Yes. If you know of a Java app with a good GUI, let me know about it, I'll try it and maybe... just maybe... I'll change my mind. Usually when I make that challenge, Java fans respond with either Eclipse (which is shit) or Azureus (which is shit), so don't bother recommending either of those.

It comes down to: if Java has such great GUI tools, where are the great Java GUIs? I understand Sturgeon's Law (or... Spurgeon?), but you'd still expect 10% of Java apps to have good GUIs, right?

How about Limewire? Or Pollo, an XML editor for wimps.

Oops, yes, Sturgeon.

The_Assimilator

@dhromed said:

If I build a merry programme in VS, and simply copy the resultant .dll to any random Mac, does it work, assuming the Mac has Mono installed?

If said Mono implementation interprets the IL correctly, then yes. C# IL is no different to Java bytecode in that it's inherently platform-agnostic.

@tdb said:

@Sutherlands said:
@tdb said:
C and C++ are both platform-independent languages but it's possible to program in them in a very platform-dependent way.
Wha?
Nearly every platform out there has support for programs written in the C language, and basic programs using only the standard library will work on every one of them (albeit some platforms, such as microcontrollers, may lack input/output facilities). The standard is even intentionally written in a way that makes it possible to make a conforming implementation on very unconventional and obscure platforms. Yet every platform also tends to have its own set of APIs for that same language that don't exist on any other platforms. WinAPI in is available only on Windows, and every flavour of *nix kernel has a set of system calls not available in any other flavour. Thus: platform-independent language, platform-dependent APIs.

Except that those very APIs are necessary to create programs that are actually useful. As for the compilers... when you can show me a C binary that works on both Windows and Linux, then we can talk about C being platform-independent.

blakeyrat

@pjt33 said:

How about Limewire?

You have got to be fucking kidding me. You linked me to a program that has been under an injunction since October, 2010.

I like to put some effort into mocking things, but you're making this way too fucking easy.

@pjt33 said:

Or Pollo, an XML editor for wimps.

Sourceforge.net is an automatic -10 demerit. No software hosted on Sourceforge has ever had a good UI.

2) I can't critique the Linux screenshots because I don't use Linux enough, but here's their OS X screenshot:

Are you... are you absolutely sure this is the choice you want to go with?

(And BTW "for wimps?" What does that mean? Like... it picks you last for baseball teams or something?)

The_Assimilator

I'll just leave this here.

RogerWilco

@Xyro said:

@Zylon said:
Hey, I like Minecraft's UI.
BUT IT DOESN'T USE NATIVE WIDGETS!!!! >:O >:O >:O

Exactly.

I use some Java programs as I have to use Linux, OSX and Windows systems on a daily basis. I have ran the same .jar of PCGen, Minecraft and Novell GroupWise on all three systems. I've also ran a lot of inhouse and 3rd party Java tools. So in general a given .jar file is quite portable.

But except for those that completely built their own GUI, like Minecraft, they all look bad and have GUI glitches. I also usually find them sluggish and sometimes inexplicalby unresponsive for a couple of seconds. I generally don't njoy using them, except for Minecraft ;-)

Matt_Westwood

PEBKAC. Works perfectly (except somewhat slowly) on my 64-bit machine.