A REAL BEGINNER

[Wayne]

Hello all. I once wrote a point of sale program in dbase III and
IV .. then bought and learned clipper.

I have modified the program over the years with name changes and other
minor stuff, and just "cl" the program and it is all compiled again.

It is the main reason I still use windows. I can run it in a shell
window and it works fine.

I just recently began wondering if there was anything in ubuntu and
was told about harbour and wine and dosemu. Now I am wondering more
about paths, terminal code, and all kinds of stuff to get any of these
options working..... and the more I read about harbour seems to be the
way an old f..... like me wants to go. I would like my program to
finally be in windows and use a mouse.

Who may be interested in getting me started. I did download and
install harbour, but I cannot even find it. I really do not know
what to do next. My original source code is on the same computer, my
data bases are in dbf format on my windows drive and I do not know the
next step.

[Bopdji Shah]

Read this thread and get familiar.

https://mail.google.com/mail/?shva=1#label/Harbour/12d632d5fa1206f0

Decide if you want to stay at Console level semi-console level or full windows GUI.
Then post again.
It is not difficult to get into harbour or xharbour.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Harbour Users" group.
Unsubscribe: harbour-user...@googlegroups.com
Web: http://groups.google.com/group/harbour-users

[Wayne King]

THANKS, BUT THERE IS NOTHING THERE

WAYNE

[Bopdji Shah]

http://groups.google.com/group/harbour-users/browse_thread/thread/2919740b7d8f3af7

Sorry. My fault, I gave wrong URL

[Bopdji Shah]

For Harbour Binaries, read this thread
http://groups.google.com/group/harbour-users/browse_thread/thread/70b169a9894aef6c#

MiniGUI, is a windows Interface for Harbour.
The latest version for harbour is at this URL
http://hmgextended.com/files/CONTRIB/hmg95-mingw.zip

There is also a version for xHarbour, but I can't find the URL right now.

QT is good GUI for Harbour.  In the forum there are several URLs.  
there is a good one by Pritpal Bedi, and when I find it I will post the URL
There is another tutorial .....

The rev. [964] of the tutorial is available at:
http://www.gruppoeratostene.com/harbour/hbqt-tutorial.htm

[Giovanni Di Maria]

Hi
the correct link above is:
http://www.gruppoeratostene.com/harbour/harbour-tutorials.htm
Regards
Giovanni Di Maria










On 14 Apr, 03:45, Bopdji Shah <bop...@gmail.com> wrote:
> For Harbour Binaries, read this threadhttp://groups.google.com/group/harbour-users/browse_thread/thread/70b...
> <http://groups.google.com/group/harbour-users/browse_thread/thread/70b...>

>
> MiniGUI, is a windows Interface for Harbour.
> The latest version for harbour is at this URLhttp://hmgextended.com/files/CONTRIB/hmg95-mingw.zip

> <http://hmgextended.com/files/CONTRIB/hmg95-mingw.zip%20>

>
> There is also a version for xHarbour, but I can't find the URL right now.
>
> QT is good GUI for Harbour.  In the forum there are several URLs.
> there is a good one by Pritpal Bedi, and when I find it I will post the URL
> There is another tutorial .....
>

> The rev. [964] of the tutorial is available at:http://www.gruppoeratostene.com/harbour/hbqt-tutorial.htm<http://www.google.com/url?sa=D&q=http://www.gruppoeratostene.com/harb...>

>
> On 13 April 2011 21:30, Bopdji Shah <bop...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

> >http://groups.google.com/group/harbour-users/browse_thread/thread/291...

>
> > Sorry. My fault, I gave wrong URL
>

> > On 13 April 2011 20:32, Wayne King <awaynek...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> THANKS, BUT THERE IS NOTHING THERE
>
> >> WAYNE
>
> >> On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 4:50 PM, Bopdji Shah <bop...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >>> Read this thread and get familiar.
>
> >>>https://mail.google.com/mail/?shva=1#label/Harbour/12d632d5fa1206f0
>
> >>> Decide if you want to stay at Console level semi-console level or full
> >>> windows GUI.
> >>> Then post again.
> >>> It is not difficult to get into harbour or xharbour.
>

[Com1 Software]

Wayne,

Welcome aboard and good luck with your project.

Google has been restructuring it's groups and has removed the pages
and welcome messages that were part of groups. We use to have some
good links
and documents on those pages and welcome message.

One of my favourites :
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4DrhrxPZhts&feature=player_embedded

I have kept some of my notes here that might help you a bit,
I am always adding to it as I find good harbour links.
http://com1software.com/glharbour.htm

Thanks
Dave

[Qatan]

Hello,

 

    In case you find any problem to download Harbour from the sources (SVN) I prepared a download that will help you to get it to work in Windows Environment. Please visit: http://www.tribaltradingcompany.com.br/qharbour/

 

    Of course you can download the nice nightly install that has Harbour ready to go here: http://sourceforge.net/projects/harbour-project/files/binaries-windows/nightly/harbour-nightly-win.exe/download

 

    I hope it will help you.

 

    Regards,

 

 

Qatan
Support
Tribal Brasil
eFax +1 (267) 590-1490

[Wayne]

I now have hb21 installed and running. In fact, I have been able to
correct the errors in my source code and compiled in .c (I think, but
I have not found it yet). Then when I tried to compile with -platform-
=dos... it runs through every segment and then says I need open
watcom .. what is it and where do I get it?

thanks again

Wayne

On Apr 14, 9:12 am, "Qatan" <wanstad...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hello,
>
>     In case you find any problem to download Harbour from the sources (SVN) I prepared a download that will help you to get it to work in Windows Environment. Please visit:http://www.tribaltradingcompany.com.br/qharbour/
>

>     Of course you can download the nice nightly install that has Harbour ready to go here:http://sourceforge.net/projects/harbour-project/files/binaries-window...

>
>     I hope it will help you.
>
>     Regards,
>
> Qatan
> Support
> Tribal Brasil
> eFax +1 (267) 590-1490
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>   ----- Original Message -----
>   From: Bopdji Shah
>   To: harbou...@googlegroups.com
>   Sent: Wednesday, 13 de April de 2011 22:45
>   Subject: Re: [harbour-users] A REAL BEGINNER
>
>   For Harbour Binaries, read this thread

>  http://groups.google.com/group/harbour-users/browse_thread/thread/70b...

>
>   MiniGUI, is a windows Interface for Harbour.
>   The latest version for harbour is at this URL
>  http://hmgextended.com/files/CONTRIB/hmg95-mingw.zip
>
>   There is also a version for xHarbour, but I can't find the URL right now.
>
>   QT is good GUI for Harbour.  In the forum there are several URLs.  
>   there is a good one by Pritpal Bedi, and when I find it I will post the URL
>   There is another tutorial .....
>
>   The rev. [964] of the tutorial is available at:
>  http://www.gruppoeratostene.com/harbour/hbqt-tutorial.htm
>
>   On 13 April 2011 21:30, Bopdji Shah <bop...@gmail.com> wrote:
>

>    http://groups.google.com/group/harbour-users/browse_thread/thread/291...

>
>     Sorry. My fault, I gave wrong URL
>

>     On 13 April 2011 20:32, Wayne King <awaynek...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>       THANKS, BUT THERE IS NOTHING THERE
>
>       WAYNE
>
>       On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 4:50 PM, Bopdji Shah <bop...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>         Read this thread and get familiar.
>
>        https://mail.google.com/mail/?shva=1#label/Harbour/12d632d5fa1206f0
>
>         Decide if you want to stay at Console level semi-console level or full windows GUI.
>         Then post again.
>         It is not difficult to get into harbour or xharbour.
>

[Qatan]

Hello Wayne,

Are you running in DOS or in Windows?
-platform=DOS is only in case you want to build for a computer that has
DOS ONLY (no Windows). I dont know anyone that uses that way...
In case you have Windows your application will work on the DOS console
(but under Windows). I am not sure I am clear but you should use that
flag -platform... just leave without that and harbour (or hbmk2) will
compile it for you.
The .C files are created on a TEMP folder. To see you shoud
use -workdir=C:\whatever...

[Wayne]

I have used Dos to write this program and compile it in clipper for
dos... but I now run it in a window within xp.

I shall try later tonight to compile for windows, and I shall use the -
workdir to place the file, but what is this "Open Watcom" it is asking
for?

Wayne

[Qatan]

Hello Wayne,

Open Watcom is the C compiler for DOS.
Are you using MingW or Borland C 5.5?

Qatan

[Wayne]

I am only still here trying to answer this because the hail storm has
made a tarp too heavy to lift right now... but I am beginning to
think that I have to study something before I ask any more. I only
know that I typed in " c:\lb21\bin\hbmk2 MYPROGRAM while I was in the
folder with my code. I do not know how to answer your question and
shall finish my process at work with the tarp and go home

Thanks

Wayne

On Apr 14, 6:07 pm, "Qatan" <wanstad...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hello Wayne,
>

[Bruno Luciani]

Why not try to compile without this flag ?

You are using DOS  ? o windowsxp DOS ?

Bruno

2011/4/14 Wayne <awayn...@gmail.com>

[Wayne King]

Thanks... it was not as difficult as I thought.  It did compile but .. now I would like to know if there is a list of errors and meanings.

I tried to run and was told error 9012 can't locate the starting procedure 'MAIN'  So this is my next stumble.

Wayne

[Qatan]

Hello Wayne,

 

 

    Nice you could build...

 

    Your program needs to have a MAIN() procedure (or function). It is where your program should start. In other words, it is where it should start.

 

    Please save following test as test.prg

 

------8<------

PROCEDURE Main()

   SetMode( 25, 80 )

    CLS

    WAIT 'Hello World!'

RETURN

------>8------

 

    Your environment only needs to have two things to configure:

1. The Harbour PATH (BIN Folder)
2. The C Compiler PATH (BIN Folder)

    An example of it could be:

• SET PATH=%PATH%;c:\hb21\bin;c:\hb21\comp\mingw\bin (FOR MingW)
• SET PATH=%PATH%;c:\hb21\bin;c:\Borland\BCC55\Bin (FOR Borland C 5.5)

    Note that it is pretty easy to know what is the compiler in your system. You just need to see in your system if you have one of the above PATHs.

 

    Doing it you will be able to compile your test program anywhere... Just type:

 

    hbmk2 test -run

 

    You should see "Hello World!" on your screen.

 

    I hope it will help you.

 

    You will find it to be very easy after you understand the process.

[Bopdji Shah]

Welcome to the world of real C and C++ and OOP.  You will now appreciate even more the effort that went into the creation Clipper and the compilation with it.  
You are a lucky man, if you can compile under 5 tries, so keep at it and you will be able to set up your .bat files properly soon.

[Przemysław Czerpak]

On Fri, 15 Apr 2011, Bopdji Shah wrote:

Hi,

> Welcome to the world of real C and C++ and OOP. You will now appreciate
> even more the effort that went into the creation Clipper and the compilation
> with it.
> You are a lucky man, if you can compile under 5 tries, so keep at it and you
> will be able to set up your .bat files properly soon.

I belive that he is celver enough to not touch any batch files
or set manually C compiler setting.
Harbour is not such complicated as Clipper amd you do not have to set
envvars like INCLUDE or LIB.
HBMK2 is all what user may need.

best regards,
Przemek

[Viktor Szakáts]

On Apr 15, 5:26 pm, Bopdji Shah <bop...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Welcome to the world of real C and C++ and OOP.  You will now appreciate
> even more the effort that went into the creation Clipper and the compilation
> with it.

Even more effort went into Harbour so that users don't
have to deal with much of the complication usually found
when building apps, even in Clipper. The added bonus
is that Harbour works the same on all platforms, with
the same build commands. I guess you never tried
hbmk2.

> You are a lucky man, if you can compile under 5 tries, so keep at it and you
> will be able to set up your .bat files properly soon.

No need to use _any_ .bat files when using Harbour with
hbmk2.

If someone uses the binary distro for Windows, the
included C compiler (the best one: mingw) is handled
fully transparently without having to touch PATH or
configure anything manually. Here the only thing to
do is putting hbmk2.exe in PATH, but even that is
not required, but just for user convenience.

Viktor

[Viktor Szakáts]

>     Your environment only needs to have two things to configure:

>   1.. The Harbour PATH (BIN Folder)

Not a requirement and doesn't affect quoted error.

It's useful to add it for the sake of convenience though.

>   2.. The C Compiler PATH (BIN Folder)

>     An example of it could be:

>   a.. SET PATH=%PATH%;c:\hb21\bin;c:\hb21\comp\mingw\bin (FOR MingW)
>   b.. SET PATH=%PATH%;c:\hb21\bin;c:\Borland\BCC55\Bin (FOR Borland C 5.5)

>     Note that it is pretty easy to know what is the compiler in your system. You just need to see in your system if you have one of the above PATHs.

If using win binary distro (stable 2.0 or nightly), above
is not needed and it can only mess things up so I don't
recommend it. These distros ship with mingw built-in,
and hbmk2 will automatically find and use this mingw
without any PATH or other setting. IOW it works out
of the box, as advertised in its release notes.

[ If someone absolutely wants to use BCC, your 2.b. setting is
needed (though I'd be very surprised why someone
would want to punish himself with this terrible C compiler.) ]

Viktor

[Qatan]

Hello Viktor,

> ...it works out of the box, as advertised in its release notes.

Nice to know those important details. It is true - no need to config - clean
and simple.

> ...(though I'd be very surprised why someone

would want to punish himself with this terrible C compiler.)

The only reason why I use BCC is to build my application in *dev* mode
because BCC builds faster than MingW.
When I want to build the final version I use MingW because it is superior.
Of course it is only an option and may be not necessary for most users. In
my case I need to do that because my *dev* computer is a tiny netbook with
low memory and poor processor :(

Thanks for explaining.
Harbour is really easy to use with HBMK2 (BTW Very nice tool!)

atan

[Massimo Belgrano]

Can in harbour  without parameter show:

Harbour 2.1.0rc2 (Rev. ZZZZ)
Copyright (c) 1999-2011, http://harbour-project.org/
We suggest use hbmk2.exe for direct create executable

Syntax:  harbour <file[s][.prg]|@file> [options]


2011/4/15 Qatan <wanst...@gmail.com>:

> Hello Viktor,
>
>> ...it works out of the box, as advertised in its release notes.
>
> Nice to know those important details. It is true - no need to config - clean
> and simple.
>
>

--
Massimo Belgrano

[Viktor Szakáts]

Hi Qatan,

On Apr 15, 7:02 pm, "Qatan" <wanstad...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > ...it works out of the box, as advertised in its release notes.
>
> Nice to know those important details. It is true - no need to config - clean
> and simple.
>
> > ...(though I'd be very surprised why someone
>
> would want to punish himself with this terrible C compiler.)
>
> The only reason why I use BCC is to build my application in *dev* mode
> because BCC builds faster than MingW.
> When I want to build the final version I use MingW because it is superior.
> Of course it is only an option and may be not necessary for most users. In
> my case I need to do that because my *dev* computer is a tiny netbook with
> low memory and poor processor  :(

Yes, that might probably the only scenario to
have any use of it.

I used to do that earlier, but it was just too "costly"
to keep around a BCC build of everything just to
have this option. The other problem is that BCC
build is not possible to create anymore because it's
not supported by more and more dependencies of
my apps. Third problem is that it's difficult to create
final .c code under BCC because it's too forgiving
for sloppy code. If your goal is portability the best
option is mingw/gcc, because you will use the same
compiler on all other platforms.

Anyhow, pure mingw usage is not big problem now,
because with hbmk2 incremental builds a build cycle
after modifications is very quick, plus I almost never
do forced rebuild anymore because everything is
managed well by hbmk2 in incremental mode.

> Thanks for explaining.
> Harbour is really easy to use with HBMK2 (BTW Very nice tool!)

Thanks and no problem, I hope more and users
will be able to experience its usefulness.

Viktor

[Viktor Szakáts]

On Apr 15, 7:15 pm, Massimo Belgrano <mbelgr...@deltain.it> wrote:
> Can in harbour  without parameter show:
>
> Harbour 2.1.0rc2 (Rev. ZZZZ)
> Copyright (c) 1999-2011,http://harbour-project.org/

> *We suggest use hbmk2.exe for direct create executable*

If anything, I'd rather opt to just not ship harbour.exe with
distro.

Maybe some users still need harbour.exe, so maybe this
is too early, hard to tell, but it's a valid option. You should
raise this on dev list to get more feedback.

Viktor

[Bopdji Shah]

If it was that clean and simple, why is there a large file explaining how to use HBMK2.
I found that that file was necessary, and i still look it up often.  I think it is a very nice how to use file too by none other than Viktor Szakáts.

Now that the Gurus are agreed on MinGW (I have no quarrel with it) will they also recognize that 90% of people need and want GUI.  Is there any agreement, any set methodology, any set manual and command set, or we going to go on in 5 different directions.

The OOP changes occurring, mostly in the GUI world and some also in the "lower level" world, running round in circles between Minigui (I think, two versions), Visual xharbour and flirting with Microsoft's C++ 2005, wxWidgets, and QT Designer,  the more sophisticated programmers (mostly the developer gurus) have alternatives and the ordinary programmer is completely lost!  The ordinary programmer does NOT want 1000 GUI features - he only need 60-80 agreed upon functions, which unfortunately do NOT exist as an agreed GUI.  In widgets and QT, etc., why can't the gurus selectively use the GUI part and set aside the non GUI which already exists at the console level in Harbour?

I don't know what it is like in South America or in India, but in UK and North America, people can buy a used Pentium 3 or even 4 for $70 with a 100-150GB drive and additional 1 TB drive is available for $59.   Yet I see preoccupation in many areas and by many of the Gurus. with Windows 98, Ansi, Code pages, instead of going whole heartedly with two byte character set of 16 bit LE used by Microsoft's XP and Win 7.   The most fundamental fact has not sunk in, that if everything is at 2 byte or even 4 byte level, it is easy to come down to 1 byte level when required.

[Pritpal Bedi]

Hello Bopdji Shah

> If it was that clean and simple, why is there a large file explaining how to
> use HBMK2.
> I found that that file was necessary, and i still look it up often.  I think
> it is a very nice how to use file too by none other than Viktor Szakáts.

I am still trying to get what you want to ask
or disagree ? What do you find what you could not
grasp in usung hbMK2 ?

Believe me group will be more than willing to
clear your concerns ?

> Now that the Gurus are agreed on MinGW (I have no quarrel with it) will they

> also recognize that *90% of people need and want GUI*.  Is there any

> agreement, any set methodology, any set manual and command set, or we going
> to go on in 5 different directions.

Do you read the devel-list ?
If not, I suggest you do. Also examine ChangeLog
periodically to update yourself. And if above is what
you know about Harbour and GUI then probably
you are miles behind what is happening.

"set manual and command set"
Do you have any idea about what hbQT is ?
What is hbXBP ? Why these are being developed ?
What is their core capabilities ? And what you can
achieve ? I highly encourage you to update yourself.

> The OOP changes occurring, mostly in the GUI world and some also in the
> "lower level" world, running round in circles between Minigui (I think, two
> versions), Visual xharbour and flirting with Microsoft's C++ 2005,
> wxWidgets, and QT Designer,  the more sophisticated programmers (mostly the

> developer gurus) have alternatives and *the ordinary programmer is
> completely lost*!  The ordinary programmer does NOT want 1000 GUI features -

> he only need 60-80 agreed upon functions, which unfortunately do NOT exist
> as an agreed GUI.  In widgets and QT, etc., why can't the gurus selectively
> use the GUI part and set aside the non GUI which already exists at the
> console level in Harbour?

Read as above.

> I don't know what it is like in South America or in India, but in UK and
> North America, people can buy a used Pentium 3 or even 4 for $70 with a
> 100-150GB drive and additional 1 TB drive is available for $59.   Yet I see
> preoccupation in many areas and by many of the Gurus. with Windows 98, Ansi,
> Code pages, instead of going whole heartedly with two byte character set of
> 16 bit LE used by Microsoft's XP and Win 7.   The most fundamental fact has
> not sunk in, that if everything is at 2 byte or even 4 byte level, it is
> easy to come down to 1 byte level when required.

This is totally __irrelevant__ matter to your above
concerns, and even most of us could not grasp
what do you want to ask _or_ say.

Pritpal Bedi

[Wayne]

I JUST HAVE TO TELL ALL OF YOU THAT HAVE HELPED.... I JUST COMPILED MY
127 FILES AT 11 MEGS INTO THE SAME CLIPPER PROGRAM I HAVE USED. NOW
ALL I HAVE TO DO IS MODIFY SOME OF THE MINOR DIFFERENCES I SAW IN THE
WAY IT DISPLAYS SCREENS. THIS HAS BEEN EXCITING

THANKS SO FAR

WAYNE

On Apr 15, 3:08 pm, Bopdji Shah <bop...@gmail.com> wrote:
> If it was that clean and simple, why is there a large file explaining how to
> use HBMK2.
> I found that that file was necessary, and i still look it up often.  I think
> it is a very nice how to use file too by none other than Viktor Szakáts.
>
> Now that the Gurus are agreed on MinGW (I have no quarrel with it) will they

> also recognize that *90% of people need and want GUI*.  Is there any

> agreement, any set methodology, any set manual and command set, or we going
> to go on in 5 different directions.
>
> The OOP changes occurring, mostly in the GUI world and some also in the
> "lower level" world, running round in circles between Minigui (I think, two
> versions), Visual xharbour and flirting with Microsoft's C++ 2005,
> wxWidgets, and QT Designer,  the more sophisticated programmers (mostly the

> developer gurus) have alternatives and *the ordinary programmer is

> completely lost*!  The ordinary programmer does NOT want 1000 GUI features -

> he only need 60-80 agreed upon functions, which unfortunately do NOT exist
> as an agreed GUI.  In widgets and QT, etc., why can't the gurus selectively
> use the GUI part and set aside the non GUI which already exists at the
> console level in Harbour?
>
> I don't know what it is like in South America or in India, but in UK and
> North America, people can buy a used Pentium 3 or even 4 for $70 with a
> 100-150GB drive and additional 1 TB drive is available for $59.   Yet I see
> preoccupation in many areas and by many of the Gurus. with Windows 98, Ansi,
> Code pages, instead of going whole heartedly with two byte character set of
> 16 bit LE used by Microsoft's XP and Win 7.   The most fundamental fact has
> not sunk in, that if everything is at 2 byte or even 4 byte level, it is
> easy to come down to 1 byte level when required.
>

[Bopdji Shah]

"And if above is what you know about Harbour and GUI then probably
you are miles behind what is happening."

I think, I am more like miles ahead of you with GUI.  I have successfully used GUI from xbasic  on Harbour long before any one was available.  Download the xbasic Html manual, and see how well written it is and perhaps you might discover that it has something you can learn from.
While you are at it, you might want to look at GUI integrated into Purebasic and Realbasic, and partly integrated into BCX and Freebasic, and separate three GUIs for Euphoria.   I am sure it will be all educational to you.
Look at GUI4Cli and it will give you some ideas.  I have tried with Harbour, but had to leave before completing my project because of family problems.
One of the best ones based on wxwidgets is a PHP one and for somebody working parttime only this one might be the best one to take and use it with a wrapper for (x)Harbour. I also looked at LiveCode, but is is paid tiem, not suitable for finished products to distribute.
The one I am playing around most with these days is the GUI with AutoIT and some integration with AutoHotKey.  These offer the best upward path for me as my intention is to migrate fully to a 65K character PROPER Unicode.  Do you have any idea what AutoHotKey is? I highly encourage you to update yourself.

"Do you have any idea about what hbQT is ?"

I looked at your start up efforts at hbQT, and was NOT impressed with your presentation.   Since then there has been a better license but, on the whole, because of Commercial aspects of it, you will come to a dead end.   The QT implementation and tutorial from
http://www.gruppoeratostene.com/harbour/ht.htm  is excellent.

"and even most of us could not grasp what do you want to ask _or_ say."

What I am saying is that compared to many other software project there are many weaknesses in Harbour.  Instead of looking inwardly, go and look at what others are doing, come out with a clear cut manual, an integrated GUI, which is easy to use, and forget the ANSI, Codepages, and concentrate on 16 bit or 32 Unicode as THE only internal storage.   While Viktor and you and many others ARE doing a good job you are not focused on a path towards a straightforward programmer's tool, to go and create (one step up) another competition to Talend and Ironspeed (look those up too).   WE DON;T NEED WINDOWS 98 TOYS AND HALF-HEARTED solutions -  There are plenty of those around.

--

[Viktor Szakáts]

On Apr 16, 12:08 am, Bopdji Shah <bop...@gmail.com> wrote:
> If it was that clean and simple, why is there a large file explaining how to
> use HBMK2.

Which large file are you talking about?

RELNOTES describes basic usage in a few simple sample lines
(one line for each platform), which is enough to have a quick start,
f.e.: 'hbmk2 hello'. If this is complicated for you, probably you
need
to look after a different profession.

[ let me stick here that Harbour being a programming language
and a development platform, all Harbour docs assume basic generic
IT knowledge and it's not a goal to serve as teaching course about
issuing commands, modifying PATH or plugging your computer to the
AC plug. ]

Then there is a short section dedicated to hbmk2 in INSTALL doc,
named
'11. QUICK START TO BUILD YOUR OWN HARBOUR APPLICATIONS'
which describes some more basic usage scenarios, which should be
enough for majority of users, and all _new_ users. There is also the
short
help of hbmk2 options displayed by 'hbmk2' (with no parameters)
command,
which also covers basic options.

Since apparently you don't use hbmk2 (nor Harbour as I might guess),
you probably have a fairly limited overview on how many different
build scenarios may exist when developing applications, many of them
also true for Harbour. hbmk2 covers a very wide variety of these,
and you can find related options displayed by 'hbmk2 -help' command,
which is longer text. Notice however that most regular users don't
need
to dive into it, and never new users.

Please note that building application can be complicated, so probably
even I could write a few books about it, starting from basics, going
through platform specific considerations, portability issues, Clipper
related issues, C interfacing, static libs, dynamic libraries, hrb
files,
i18n, automation, integration into IDEs, handling project tree,
resources,
GUI, CLI, daemons/services, icons, OS integration, package creation,
distribution, etc. Pretty much unlimited topic.

So you have three options: 1) Ignore these and go with basics 2)
accept
that things may get complicated, 3) hire someone to solve these for
you, if it's too much for you to handle.

I can assure you that it's not Harbour or hbmk2 the limitation here,
and the proof is that you're the only user I ever heard complaining
like
a kid since you appeared here. You have the option to unsubscribe
if you don't like it, but maybe you have some different agenda with
your destructive attitude.

> I found that that file was necessary, and i still look it up often.  I think
> it is a very nice how to use file too by none other than Viktor Szakáts.

It's the first time I hear someone complaining about _having to
read_ a documentation. If something is not clear for you, pls
refer to it specifically and ask a question. I haven't seen any
of these from you. If it's too hard to _read_, hire a professional.

> Now that the Gurus are agreed on MinGW (I have no quarrel with it) will they

> also recognize that *90% of people need and want GUI*.  Is there any

> agreement, any set methodology, any set manual and command set, or we going
> to go on in 5 different directions.

There is no "we". You have to make your own choice what to follow.

> The OOP changes occurring, mostly in the GUI world and some also in the
> "lower level" world, running round in circles between Minigui (I think, two
> versions), Visual xharbour and flirting with Microsoft's C++ 2005,
> wxWidgets, and QT Designer,  the more sophisticated programmers (mostly the

> developer gurus) have alternatives and *the ordinary programmer is

> completely lost*!  The ordinary programmer does NOT want 1000 GUI features -

> he only need 60-80 agreed upon functions, which unfortunately do NOT exist
> as an agreed GUI.  In widgets and QT, etc., why can't the gurus selectively
> use the GUI part and set aside the non GUI which already exists at the
> console level in Harbour?

You probably haven't realized how free open source projects work.
They are driven by volunteer contributors donating large amounts
of their free time to the public. Every contributor does what he's
interested in. MINIGUI developers develop MINIGUI, other developers
develop HBQT. Each has its advantages and disadvantages.

If options are a problem for you, go to a software shop and buy
a boxed commercial software, then you will have a clearly
defined framework you will have to settle with.

> I don't know what it is like in South America or in India, but in UK and
> North America, people can buy a used Pentium 3 or even 4 for $70 with a
> 100-150GB drive and additional 1 TB drive is available for $59.   Yet I see
> preoccupation in many areas and by many of the Gurus. with Windows 98, Ansi,
> Code pages, instead of going whole heartedly with two byte character set of
> 16 bit LE used by Microsoft's XP and Win 7.   The most fundamental fact has
> not sunk in, that if everything is at 2 byte or even 4 byte level, it is
> easy to come down to 1 byte level when required.

This makes no sense.

Viktor

[Przemysław Czerpak]

On Fri, 15 Apr 2011, Bopdji Shah wrote:

Hi,

> I don't know what it is like in South America or in India, but in UK and

> North America, people can buy a used Pentium 3 or even 4 for $70 with a
> 100-150GB drive and additional 1 TB drive is available for $59. Yet I see
> preoccupation in many areas and by many of the Gurus. with Windows 98, Ansi,
> Code pages, instead of going whole heartedly with two byte character set of
> 16 bit LE used by Microsoft's XP and Win 7. The most fundamental fact has
> not sunk in, that if everything is at 2 byte or even 4 byte level, it is
> easy to come down to 1 byte level when required.

Why you are suggesting things which introduce new limits?
Is it too hard for you to think about sth really innovating instead
of repeating old ideas from last century?
Good interface is the one which hides details of internal implementation
so internal data structures are fully separated and it's possible to chose
the most optimal ones for given situation and external code does not have
to be updated to follow modifications in code code.
BTW character representation in HVM is completely unimportant minor detail
of implementation not worth to invest time even to write this few words.
Many people can easy change it. AFAIK such Harbour versions were created
in the past. You can try make it yourself in some spare weekend if you like
this idea.
Real problems are different and such modification does not resolve them
at all so there is no sense to force such modification in core code just
only to show that it can be easy done and force all 3-rd party code updating.

best regards,
Przemek

[Viktor Szakáts]

Bopdij,

On Apr 16, 3:27 am, Bopdji Shah <bop...@gmail.com> wrote:
> "And if above is what you know about Harbour and GUI then probably
> you are miles behind what is happening."
> I think, I am more like miles ahead of you with GUI.  I have successfully

That's certainly not how it seems from where I'm sitting.

By addressing this to Pritpal, it's an extreme sure and
quick way to discredit yourself in from of most of this
list's members.

> While you are at it, you might want to look at GUI integrated into Purebasic
> and Realbasic, and partly integrated into BCX and Freebasic, and separate
> three GUIs for Euphoria.   I am sure it will be all educational to you.
> Look at GUI4Cli and it will give you some ideas.  I have tried with Harbour,
> but had to leave before completing my project because of family problems.
> One of the best ones based on wxwidgets is a PHP one and for somebody
> working parttime only this one might be the best one to take and use it with
> a wrapper for (x)Harbour. I also looked at LiveCode, but is is paid tiem,
> not suitable for finished products to distribute.

> *The one I am playing around most with these days is the GUI with AutoIT and

> some integration with AutoHotKey.  These offer the best upward path for me

> as my intention is to migrate fully to a 65K character PROPER Unicode.*  *Do

> you have any idea what AutoHotKey is? I highly encourage you to update

> yourself.*

You definitely earned the "clown of the year" badge from me
after this, which is quite a feat, as I can only remember two
previous folks how earned this in the last 10 years. And I'm
sorry to make an exception and going personal, but I just could
not help it. Please don't stop, it's starting to be fun.

> "Do you have any idea about what hbQT is ?"
> I looked at your start up efforts at hbQT, and was NOT impressed with your
> presentation.   Since then there has been a better license but, on the
> whole, because of Commercial aspects of it, you will come to a dead end.
> The QT implementation and tutorial fromhttp://www.gruppoeratostene.com/harbour/ht.htm

> <http://www.gruppoeratostene.com/harbour/ht.htm%20>is excellent.

Presentation, license, dead end? Then you prove it with a _dead link_.
All this after citing a dozen products nobody has ever heard of, well
done.

> "and even most of us could not grasp what do you want to ask _or_ say."
>
> What I am saying is that compared to many other software project there are
> many weaknesses in Harbour.  Instead of looking inwardly, go and look at
> what others are doing, come out with a clear cut manual, an integrated GUI,
> which is easy to use, and forget the ANSI, Codepages, and concentrate on 16
> bit or 32 Unicode as THE only internal storage.   While Viktor and you and
> many others ARE doing a good job you are not focused on a path towards a
> straightforward programmer's tool, to go and create (one step up) another
> competition to Talend and Ironspeed (look those up too).   WE DON;T NEED
> WINDOWS 98 TOYS AND HALF-HEARTED solutions -  There are plenty of those
> around.

God... Harbour as being a win98 toy, "half-hearted", and citing me
in the same sentence. It could have even hurt, if any of the rest of
your paragraph would make a single sense, but it does not. You're
throwing up unrelated technical terms in random order, some of
these you don't like, some you do for some reason.

BTW why don't use use Ironspeed or Talend? Did they also made
the mistakes of taking 'codepages' into consideration? Or they
use '8-bit'? Why makes you stay here?

Viktor

[Bopdji Shah]

Victor,

 

You said, "You definitely earned the "clown of the year" badge from me"
I am too seasoned a person to hurl abuses at anybody because they hurl abuses at me and too much at peace with myself to take notice of minor behaviour problems in others.

“That's certainly not how it seems from where I'm sitting.

By addressing this to Pritpal, it's an extreme sure and
quick way to discredit yourself in from of most of this

list's members.”

It is not my fault that I knew about GUI before Pritpal Bedi.  I have read in his own words in his own site “Vouch.com” as to when he learnt about Clipper and Harbour, i.e. DOS version.  Obviously, I had to make him aware that BEFORE he even thought of having GUI for Harbour, I was USING XBasic GUI with Harbour.  Look at the dates on XBasic, and you will understand.

If you think that this forum  is a scratch-my-back-and-I-will-scratch-yours society, forget it.  There are intelligent people on this forum who have been to other sites and have seen GUI in a lot of lower level languages.

The previous generation like me, who started with machine language on a 16K computers, and graduated upwards, know to look for changes and keep up with the changes, and we were aware of Win APIs and paid for and bought books to learn this new thing, and were are very capable of using APIs – raw as they come without the benefit (at times doubltful benefit) of “wrappers.”  We used MASM comfortably and knew how to hook on to the “new “ “C language” .  We knew and know how to use assembler with Quickbasic and later how to do the opposite using HLA to make cdecl calls.

I have earned the right to criticize simply by not being a back-scratcher.  I did not come to this forum to do back-scratching.

“> Now that the Gurus are agreed on MinGW (I have no quarrel with it) will they  also recognize that *90% of people need and want GUI*.  Is there any  agreement, any set methodology, any set manual and command set, or we going to go on in 5 different directions.

There is no "we". You have to make your own choice what to follow.”

You did not answer the question.  The fact is that you are one Guru.  Anybody who has been to the Minigui site, know that they are giving (as late as last week with version 1-9-95), the following:

Harbour MiniGUI comprises these main components:

 

      - Harbour MiniGUI Extended Library

      - Harbour MiniGUI IDE

      - Harbour Compiler

      - Borland C++ Compiler and command-line tools at

      http://www.borland.com/bcppbuilder/freecompiler

They are using Borland compiler and .bat files – not specifically recommending HBMK2.

So YOU have to tell us what direction you are going to lead us to, and why different from them.

I looked at xharbour and Patrick Mast’s thrust for visual xHarbour and use of visual C with wxWidgets, and Pelles

So YOU have to tell us what direction you are going to lead us to, and why different from them.

I like QT and wanted to use QT in spite of considerable familiarity with wxWidget.   Unfortunately Pritpal's first publication of the QT version and HBIDE was not very good, and incidentally he talked about Borland too at that time.   Do I have to behave like a sheep and say yes It is great?  NO, QT is great but his rendition of QT and his tutorial leaves much out.  The release was too premature.

It is no use telling me to decide what  to follow.  It would seem to me that you do not want to discuss or make compromises or intelligent debate and they, the others, don’t (as I don’t) want to be a back-scratcher.  A take-it-or-leave-it approach can only lead to a demise of this fine product.

“You probably haven't realized how free open source projects work.”

I have been part of two and was leader of one of them.   And let me tell the reader most humbly, that to start a project or be a leader of it is absolutely easy and does not mean much.  There are at least 1000 projects left abandoned at Sourceforge, and you can start a new Open Source project any time.

“They are driven by volunteer contributors donating large amounts
of their free time to the public”

That is precisely what you are not understanding about the relative importance of where to spend your valuable time.  It is time you to come to the realistic conclusion that windows 98 is dead, and also that a used Pentium XP with a reasonable memory and HD is WITHIN THE BUDGET of many not so well off countries and developers.  I tried to tell you and Pritpal that.  In USA today, you can buy a container load  of used Pentiums @$20-$40 each.  These are ex-lease computers.  I have been involved with a charity that likes to buy these and ship to third world countries and our main concern has been the transportation costs.

What you will have to accept (without my scratching  your back) is that it is about time, a consensus is achieved as to the actual way GUI is to be implemented, the exact functions and give it to the community.  That is where you and Pritpal should be spending your time and arrive at an AGREED TO solution by all the developers in the Harbour arena .  There is no point in you two languishing with a following of a score of people and bickering with me because I criticize you complacency and smugness.

--

[Viktor Szakáts]

> You said, "You definitely earned the "clown of the year" badge from me"
> I am too seasoned a person to hurl abuses at anybody because they hurl
> abuses at me and too much at peace with myself to take notice of minor
> behaviour problems in others.

Then perhaps you noticed how you routinely belittled
the efforts going into Harbour by volunteers who
actually develop it instead of using this forum as a
mental dump like yourself do. Not to mention your
use of this forum to advertise false information, and
various products unrelated to Harbour, showing them
as superior without giving proof or even a link. Luckily
it looks obvious nonsense so not many users will take
it seriously anyhow it's offending for me to see such
attitude in nearly all of your messages posted here so far.

> “That's certainly not how it seems from where I'm sitting.
>
>  By addressing this to Pritpal, it's an extreme sure and
> quick way to discredit yourself in from of most of this
> list's members.”
>
> It is not my fault that I knew about GUI before Pritpal Bedi.  I have read
> in his own words in his own site “Vouch.com” as to when he learnt about
> Clipper and Harbour, i.e. DOS version.  Obviously, I had to make him aware
> that BEFORE he even thought of having GUI for Harbour, I was USING XBasic
> GUI with Harbour.  Look at the dates on XBasic, and you will understand.

Nobody else besides you know what "XBasic for Harbour" is.
Or maybe it's just me who missed this new wonder pet of yours,
which comes again without a link, and without any google search hits
for that matter. Maybe someone develops it in a shed with no
internet connection. All I can hope is Harbour's codepage or
Win98 support won't cripple XBasic GUI capabilities, so you
won't find some new bases to complain.

So, I'm sorry, but I don't care about "XBasic" whatever it is,
and all I can see you use this forum as a place where you
can pose in public.

> *If you think that this forum  is a scratch-my-back-and-I-will-scratch-yours
> society, forget it.** * *There are intelligent people on this forum who have
> been to other sites and have seen GUI in a lot of lower level languages.*

>
> The previous generation like me, who started with machine language on a 16K
> computers, and graduated upwards, know to look for changes and keep up with
> the changes, and we were aware of Win APIs and paid for and bought books to
> learn this new thing, and were are very capable of using APIs – raw as they
> come without the benefit (at times doubltful benefit) of “wrappers.”  We
> used MASM comfortably and knew how to hook on to the “new “ “C language” .  We
> knew and know how to use assembler with Quickbasic and later how to do the
> opposite using HLA to make cdecl calls.

I fail to see the point.

> I have earned the right to criticize simply by not being a back-scratcher.  I
> did not come to this forum to do back-scratching.

Even people with long time reputation as a contributor
didn't "earn" the right to criticize in the style you do, by
babbling random words, questioning fundamentals without
(or with fuzzy/shady) reasoning, forgetting to cite references,
facts, links (even when asked to do so) or anything which
used to back up so called constructive criticism, or healthy
discussion.

What you do is called FLAME.

> There is no "we". You have to make your own choice what to follow.”
>

> *You did not answer the question.  The fact is that you are one Guru.  Anybody

> who has been to the Minigui site, know that they are giving (as late as last

> week with version 1-9-95), the following:*

I didn't intend to answer the question. Look around, get
impressions, and make informed, intelligible questions
about your requirements and you're likely to get an answer.

To me it seems you only look for another subject to
rumble upon a bit more.

> *Harbour MiniGUI comprises these main components:*
>
> *      - Harbour MiniGUI Extended Library*
> *      - Harbour MiniGUI IDE*
> *      - Harbour Compiler*
> *      - Borland C++ Compiler and command-line tools at*
> *      http://www.borland.com/bcppbuilder/freecompiler*

>
> They are using Borland compiler and .bat files – not specifically
> recommending HBMK2.
>

> *So YOU have to tell us what direction you are going to lead us to, and why
> different from them.*

Please notice this is Harbour user's list and I'm developer
of Harbour, so I can only answer concerns about .bat files
inside Harbour repository.

My personal opinion about batch files and shell scripts
must be pretty well known for anybody who has been around
Harbour in the last 3-4 years (or who has counted the number
of .bat and .sh files in Harbour repository in the last 1 year),
yet it's not my job, or my goal, or even my possibility to pester
3rd party lib developers about these issues. 3rd party developers
(and/or they users) have their own reasons and preferences.

So, for your concerns regarding MINIGUI issues, go their
forums and raise them there.

> I looked at xharbour and Patrick Mast’s thrust for visual xHarbour and use
> of visual C with wxWidgets, and Pelles
>

> *So YOU have to tell us what direction you are going to lead us to, and why
> different from them.*

No.

Again, this is Harbour's list, so raise concerns about
xhb choices and recommendations on their forums.

> I like QT and wanted to use QT in spite of considerable familiarity with
> wxWidget.   Unfortunately Pritpal's first publication of the QT version and
> HBIDE was not very good, and incidentally he talked about Borland too at

> that time.   Do I have to behave like a sheep and say yes It is great?  *NO,

Sheep, Borland, QT, wxWidget, a rash is coming. Borland has nothing
to do with QT, it never had. You confuse criticism with FLAMING.
Former
is useful, latter is not tolerated. If you feel like a sheep without
FLAMING,
you won't get the help here.

> QT is great but his rendition of QT and his tutorial leaves much out.  The

> release was too premature.*

Stable HBQT was not release yet. If you're confused by public
development of free software, you shouldn't be here.

If you're complaining about the lack of or the quality of free
tutorials,
take a deep look into yourself and leave, or create better ones.

> It is no use telling me to decide what  to follow.  It would seem to me that
> you do not want to discuss or make compromises or intelligent debate and
> they, the others, don’t (as I don’t) want to be a back-scratcher.  A
> take-it-or-leave-it approach can only lead to a demise of this fine product.

For me it's impossible to start an intelligent debate with someone
showing hostile attitude, showing clear ignorance about the debated
topic, going personal and flaming.

We have a gold mine of past e-mail messages, free for you
to explore and get informed about the project's goal and directions.

> “You probably haven't realized how free open source projects work.”
>
> I have been part of two and was leader of one of them.   And let me tell the
> reader most humbly, that to start a project or be a leader of it is
> absolutely easy and does not mean much.  There are at least 1000 projects
> left abandoned at Sourceforge, and you can start a new Open Source project
> any time.

Oh, I see now :)

> “They are driven by volunteer contributors donating large amounts
> of their free time to the public”
>

> *That is precisely what you are not understanding about the relative

> importance of where to spend your valuable time.  It is time you to come to
> the realistic conclusion that windows 98 is dead, and also that a used

Why do you feel important to decide for other developers
what is important for them?

> Pentium XP with a reasonable memory and HD is WITHIN THE BUDGET of many not
> so well off countries and developers.  I tried to tell you and Pritpal that.
> In USA today, you can buy a container load  of used Pentiums @$20-$40 each.
> These are ex-lease computers.  I have been involved with a charity that
> likes to buy these and ship to third world countries and our main concern

> has been the transportation costs.*

Where I live, customers decide about their computers
on their own, from their own budget. Some decide to
still use their Win98 machine.

> *What you will have to accept (without my scratching  your back) is that it

> is about time, a consensus is achieved as to the actual way GUI is to be
> implemented, the exact functions and give it to the community.  That is
> where you and Pritpal should be spending your time and arrive at an AGREED
> TO solution by all the developers in the Harbour arena .  There is no point
> in you two languishing with a following of a score of people and bickering

> with me because I criticize you complacency and smugness.*

Sorry, I don't know what you're talking about.

Viktor

[Qatan]

Hello Wayne,

That's encouraging!
I am happy for you.
Did you notice how your new appl built with Harbour runs faster now?
Regards,

Qatan

----- Original Message -----
From: "Wayne" <awayn...@gmail.com>
To: "Harbour Users" <harbou...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Friday, 15 de April de 2011 21:20
Subject: [harbour-users] Re: A REAL BEGINNER

I JUST HAVE TO TELL ALL OF YOU THAT HAVE HELPED.... I JUST COMPILED MY
127 FILES AT 11 MEGS INTO THE SAME CLIPPER PROGRAM I HAVE USED. NOW
ALL I HAVE TO DO IS MODIFY SOME OF THE MINOR DIFFERENCES I SAW IN THE
WAY IT DISPLAYS SCREENS. THIS HAS BEEN EXCITING

THANKS SO FAR

WAYNE

On Apr 15, 3:08 pm, Bopdji Shah <bop...@gmail.com> wrote:
> If it was that clean and simple, why is there a large file explaining how
> to
> use HBMK2.
> I found that that file was necessary, and i still look it up often. I
> think

> it is a very nice how to use file too by none other than Viktor Szak�ts.

[Bopdji Shah]

Victor said: "Nobody else besides you know what "XBasic for Harbour" is.

Or maybe it's just me who missed this new wonder pet of yours,
which comes again without a link, and without any google search hits
for that matter. Maybe someone develops it in a shed with no
internet connection. All I can hope is Harbour's codepage or
Win98 support won't cripple XBasic GUI capabilities, so you
won't find some new bases to complain."

I DID NOT SAY "XBasic for Harbour".  There was a time when everybody experimented with the then new "Windows" and "Win API"  People wrote GUI directly from their applications if they could access Microsoft's C language API.  There were no "wrappers".   I too experimented using MASM assembler, and had partial success, because although the instructions to connect were simple enough, when the API call did not work properly it was difficult to debug.
Then I discovered Xbasic.  It had integrate Basic with Windows.  But you could and even now you can use their GUI separately and create a complete GUI solution for your other needs if your language.  I had a Clipper application in which I tried this integration and for the limited need I had I succeeded in presenting clipper with GENUINE Windows GUI to my clients.

"So, I'm sorry, but I don't care about "XBasic" whatever it is,
and all I can see you use this forum as a place where you
can pose in public"

If you were not as "busy" as you are you would go and look at what Xbasic is and what their GUI is capable of.  You would also look at how smooth flowing and understandable manual and tutotial they provided way back in 2001 or 2002.  Anybody with some computer programming knowledge and some knowledge of Basic can even now create a GUI application for himself in Harbour connecting to Xbasic's GUI commands, the same way as you connect to QT or wxWidgets - except that you are using Basic compiled and not C++.   But then everybody on this forum, who you think will  accept your calling me "a clown" know how excessively busy you are, finding faults with senior programmers instead of learning what has already been taught and created in the past, even when it is clearly and explicitly brought to your attention.

For those who are reading this:  There are also other GUI design tools already built, published, and working.  Here are some URLs.

Xbasic. is free completely opensource language established in 2000 or before and is  multi-platform.  The current windows version
xbasic-6.3.13-win32-src-110222.zip was released in February, 2011
and the current Linux version is
xbasic-6.3.13-linux-src-110331.tar.gz was released in April, 2011
It's built in GUI can be used independently for other languages. The latest releases are available via
YahooGroups http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/xbasic/
It has an excellent Manual and tutorial.  I have not been too happy using it with Unicode but am persevering.

Xblite is the current Windows only fork  of XBasic.  I have not tested this fork fork, but it is somewhat different, but claims to have full Unicode support.

gui4cli - Open Source, event-driven language
 Gui4Cli is a powerful, Open Source, event-driven language for easily creating many types of GUIs (user interfaces, windows, dialogs etc) to use as stand alone programs or as interfaces for other programs. It is easy and extendable with many powerfull commands and a simple intuitive structure.

Age3D - 2007 UI Editor is AGE's tool for designing and building graphical user interfaces (GUIs) from AGE components. It allows you to design and build widgets and windows using on-screen forms using the same widgets that will be used in your application.

wxDesigner -2010 Commercial but free trial available built on wxWidgets.  This version uses wxWodgets beta 3.0, fully Unicode compliant.

wxForms for C++ 1.0.7 - not freeware but based on wxWidgets

wx Python is wxWidgets C++ class library using Python
Harbour programmers will find his wrapper  not diffficult to use.  It is free with EXCELLENT support from Python programmers.  Look at the activity and you will realize that it is a group effort far in excess of what is available elsewhere in the GUI world.

FLTK 1.3.x - Dec.2010 and FLTK 2.0.x-alpha - Apr 2011
This totally free one has a long history and is well supported.

Over and above, there are releases like the ones that come with:

RealBasic and realstudio/  Real Basic (excellent GUI creation) You can create a separate GUI and merge with Harbour. Realbasic has an excellent branch called Elfdata with COMPLETE support of Unicode.  For developers, the cost of realbasic is a minor cost

Purebasic has excellent GUI capabilities and full Unicode support.  Use them with their own builtin DB commands or use with with Harbour. For developers, the cost of PurelBasic is a minor cost

Powerbasic. 10 has built-in GUI and DB, and you can create GUIs for Harbour.  You can use version 9 if you do not need Unicode or use version 10 for Unicode compliance.

 Euphoria. - Win32LIB and wxEuphoria
Old established free Interpreter/compiler.  wxEuphoria is a multi-platform GUI library using wxWidgets.  Euphoria created GUIs can be C files or DLLs.

Seccia Seccia is a software development environment that offers you powerful assistance to create your own win32 applications. This software is distributed as FREEWARE. If you want OOP GUI for your Harbour Application than this is it.

AutoIt v3.3.6.1 - 2010 is completely free with integrated GUI.  You can use it to create GUI for your Harbour app.   If you like oop use this.

Autohotkey - Oct 2010 and later as well AutoHotkey is a free, open-source utility for Windows.  You can create Keyborad and Mouse shortcuts and full GUI libraries.   The -L version 19702 is good for Unicode. 

The above is not a complete list of available GUIs for your Harbour application, but any developer, who is concerned about good GUI based program professionally composed and delivered,  will see that there are full GUIs with properly created syntax for use directly or via their own languages.  Most if not all of the above can be used with Harbour.  It is unfortunate that Harbour does not have an agreed upon syntax for writing GUIs.

Many of the above GUIs come with their own IDEs, so really you have ready made tools to create GUI application with Harbour or xHarbour.  And Victor, I have given ALL the URLs, so if you complain about lack of references, it would be because you did not click properly or need to change the mouse on your computer.  I regret you were not able to google these yourself, but I know you are very busy.

Finally, I would like to quote this reference verbatim from Digitalmars
"No pointless wrappers around C runtime library functions or OS API functions

D provides direct access to C runtime library functions and operating system API functions. Pointless D wrappers around those functions just adds blather, bloat, baggage and bugs."

Viktor

[Wayne]

I wonder if I am missing a trick or something, so back to the group.
I have the complete program working in the "dos" window almost the
same as clipper or it runs in widows xp the same way. However, in
clipper the window is complete .. only one size and when it goes to
the next screen, line 24 is still the bottom line.

Now I have a window that is the same width, but as the program
progresses, the bottom lines proceed further down. I have to move the
side back up to see the top of the screen.... Is there a way to limit
the window?

Wayne

On Apr 15, 3:08 pm, Bopdji Shah <bop...@gmail.com> wrote:

> If it was that clean and simple, why is there a large file explaining how to
> use HBMK2.
> I found that that file was necessary, and i still look it up often.  I think
> it is a very nice how to use file too by none other than Viktor Szakáts.
>
> Now that the Gurus are agreed on MinGW (I have no quarrel with it) will they

> also recognize that *90% of people need and want GUI*.  Is there any

> agreement, any set methodology, any set manual and command set, or we going
> to go on in 5 different directions.
>
> The OOP changes occurring, mostly in the GUI world and some also in the
> "lower level" world, running round in circles between Minigui (I think, two
> versions), Visual xharbour and flirting with Microsoft's C++ 2005,
> wxWidgets, and QT Designer,  the more sophisticated programmers (mostly the

> developer gurus) have alternatives and *the ordinary programmer is

> completely lost*!  The ordinary programmer does NOT want 1000 GUI features -

> he only need 60-80 agreed upon functions, which unfortunately do NOT exist
> as an agreed GUI.  In widgets and QT, etc., why can't the gurus selectively
> use the GUI part and set aside the non GUI which already exists at the
> console level in Harbour?
>
> I don't know what it is like in South America or in India, but in UK and
> North America, people can buy a used Pentium 3 or even 4 for $70 with a
> 100-150GB drive and additional 1 TB drive is available for $59.   Yet I see
> preoccupation in many areas and by many of the Gurus. with Windows 98, Ansi,
> Code pages, instead of going whole heartedly with two byte character set of
> 16 bit LE used by Microsoft's XP and Win 7.   The most fundamental fact has
> not sunk in, that if everything is at 2 byte or even 4 byte level, it is
> easy to come down to 1 byte level when required.
>

[Viktor Szakáts]

On Apr 17, 7:20 pm, Bopdji Shah <bop...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Victor said: "Nobody else besides you know what "XBasic for Harbour" is.
> Or maybe it's just me who missed this new wonder pet of yours,
> which comes again without a link, and without any google search hits
> for that matter. Maybe someone develops it in a shed with no
> internet connection. All I can hope is Harbour's codepage or
> Win98 support won't cripple XBasic GUI capabilities, so you
> won't find some new bases to complain."
>
> I DID NOT SAY "XBasic for Harbour".  There was a time when everybody

Quote from you:

"I was USING XBasic GUI with Harbour"

> experimented with the then new "Windows" and "Win API"  People wrote GUI
> directly from their applications if they could access Microsoft's C language
> API.  There were no "wrappers".   I too experimented using MASM assembler,
> and had partial success, because although the instructions to connect were
> simple enough, when the API call did not work properly it was difficult to
> debug.

Let's forget assemblers for business applications in 2011 please.

> Then I discovered Xbasic.  It had integrate Basic with Windows.  But you
> could and even now you can use their GUI separately and create a complete
> GUI solution for your other needs if your language.  I had a Clipper
> application in which I tried this integration and for the limited need I had
> I succeeded in presenting clipper with GENUINE Windows GUI to my clients.

Great, though it has nothing to with Harbour apparently,
so I suggest you to move these thoughts to a forum of
"general GUI" or "general programming language" interest,
and let this list's readers focus on Harbour.

> If you were not as "busy" as you are you would go and look at what Xbasic is
> and what their GUI is capable of.  You would also look at how smooth flowing
> and understandable manual and tutotial they provided way back in 2001 or
> 2002.  Anybody with some computer programming knowledge and some knowledge

If you want to see more smooth flowing manual for Harbour
and nobody else had so far fulfilled this desire of yours, the
solution is easy: Create one. It's a free project.
That's how it works.

> of Basic can even now create a GUI application for himself in Harbour
> connecting to Xbasic's GUI commands, the same way as you connect to QT or
> wxWidgets - except that you are using Basic compiled and not C++.   But then
> everybody on this forum, who you think will  accept your calling me "a
> clown" know how excessively busy you are, finding faults with senior
> programmers instead of learning what has already been taught and created in
> the past, even when it is clearly and explicitly brought to your attention.

As a former leader of projects similar to Harbour, you must
know that knowing about something is certainly not the same
as implementing it. If you want to implement something in
Harbour, just start it. Your "good advices" are not enough.

> *For those who are reading this:  There are also other GUI design tools

> already built, published, and working.  Here are some URLs.

[...snipped long list of other languages and projects...]

> *The above is not a complete list of available GUIs for your Harbour

> application, but any developer, who is concerned about good GUI based

You seem to be confusing languages, GUI frontends and APIs,
and IDEs. F.e. I'm sure you like BASIC language, but it has
nothing to do with Harbour, besides that it is also a language.
We do not want to change Harbour to BASIC.

> program professionally composed and delivered,  will see that there are full
> GUIs with properly created syntax for use directly or via their own
> languages.  Most if not all of the above can be used with Harbour.  It is
> unfortunate that Harbour does not have an agreed upon syntax for writing

> GUIs.*

So develop one.

> Many of the above GUIs come with their own IDEs, so really you have ready
> made tools to create GUI application with Harbour or xHarbour.  And Victor,
> I have given ALL the URLs, so if you complain about lack of references, it
> would be because you did not click properly or need to change the mouse on
> your computer.  I regret you were not able to google these yourself, but I
> know you are very busy.

You can't imagine I'm not interested in programming in BASIC, are you?
You also can't imagine I'm not interested in using non-standard IDEs,
are you?

> Finally, I would like to quote this reference verbatim from

> Digitalmars<http://www.digitalmars.com/d/2.0/phobos/phobos.html>

> "No pointless wrappers around C runtime library functions or OS API
> functions D provides direct access to C runtime library functions and
> operating system API functions. Pointless D wrappers around those functions
> just adds blather, bloat, baggage and bugs."

Bopdji Shah: This the last time I ask you to stop flaming
around this _Harbour user's group_, and use it to pose
your questions regarding Harbour usage, or help other
users with useful and Harbour related answers, keep your
answers on topic to the thread title, which was in the
case basic question about how to build an old Clipper
in Harbour. (not xhb, not XBasic, not D, not Powerbasic)

If I see a sign of you acting otherwise, I will ban you.

Viktor

[Chee Chong Hwa]

Hi Wayne

Have you tried

SetMode( 25, 80 )  ?

Cheers

CCH
http://cch4clipper.blogspot.com

[Wayne]

I have just tried that and there is no change. In my clipper version
I have a window in dos or windows that is about 1/4 of the screen...
with harbour I have the same size window with the scroll bar on the
right. In clipper when I press Alt <Enter> the window covers the
entire screen in windows but with harbour, all that command does is
make the scroll much longer and shows the program as it shifts down
the screen.

Help

Wayne

On Apr 18, 5:12 am, Chee Chong Hwa <chonghwa.c...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Wayne
>
> Have you tried
>
> SetMode( 25, 80 )  ?
>
> Cheers
>

> CCHhttp://cch4clipper.blogspot.com

[Pritpal Bedi]

Hi

> I have just tried that and there is no change.  In my clipper version
> I have a window in dos or windows that is about 1/4 of the screen...
> with harbour I have the same size window with the scroll bar on the
> right.  In clipper when I press Alt <Enter> the window covers the
> entire screen in windows but with harbour, all that command does is
> make the scroll much longer and shows the program as it shifts down
> the screen.

Just add SetMode( 25,80 ) and it will fix yoyr issue.
It will not harm your Clipper compilations as well.
Must understand that Harbour is a 32 bits and
does not touches the screen devices directly
which Clipper does.

Alt+Enter will not expand to full screen for
the same reason. Once you are familiar with Harbour
then try to link with GTWVT where you have a near
full screen option, but that is the next stage.

Pritpal Bedi

[Chee Chong Hwa]

Hi Wayne

Take a look at how you can have a real Window (which you can max/min)  instead of a Command Prompt Window

http://cch4clipper.blogspot.com/2011/02/simple-usage-of-gtwvt.html

Cheers

CCH
http://cch4clipper.blogspot.com

[Wayne]

THAT DID IT ... THANKS AGAIN! I CAN NOW TEST AND SEE IF THE REST OF
THE PROGRAM DOES WORK.

The only other thought I have is that there is more information out
there than I can comprehend.

Now that I have my program working in a real window, I want a
mouse .... a whole new learning experience.

Thanks for getting me this far.

Wayne

On Apr 19, 12:24 am, Chee Chong Hwa <chonghwa.c...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Wayne
>

> Take a look at how you can have a real Window (which you can max/min)
> instead of a Command Prompt Window
>
> http://cch4clipper.blogspot.com/2011/02/simple-usage-of-gtwvt.html
>
> Cheers
>

> CCHhttp://cch4clipper.blogspot.com

[Sunil Pendse]

Hi Wayne,

I am in the same boat as you. Can you walk me thru as to what you did to get your PRG compiled.

I have downloaded harbour and can see it in windows  (Vista). However after that I am stuck.

Should I go to DOS to set path=?? or can I do that in windows?

If in DOS what are the steps did you take?

 

Can you help me to kick start my first 'Hello World' project....

Thanks

Sasha

[Bernard Mouille [w]]

Hello Sasha,

 

If you understand the french language, look :

 

http://bernard.mouille.pagesperso-orange.fr/Harbour/ZD00000001/000004.html

 

Bernard.

 

---

De : harbou...@googlegroups.com [mailto:harbou...@googlegroups.com] De la part de Sunil Pendse
Envoyé : dimanche 31 août 2014 18:25
À : harbou...@googlegroups.com
Cc : awayn...@gmail.com
Objet : [harbour-users] Re: A REAL BEGINNER

--

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Harbour Users" group.
Unsubscribe: harbour-user...@googlegroups.com
Web: http://groups.google.com/group/harbour-users

---

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Harbour Users" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to harbour-user...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[marek.h...@interia.pl]

Od: "Sunil Pendse" <sash...@gmail.com>
Do: harbou...@googlegroups.com;
Wysłane: 18:25 Niedziela 2014-08-31
Temat: [harbour-users] Re: A REAL BEGINNER

Hi Wayne,

I am in the same boat as you. Can you walk me thru as to what you did to get your PRG compiled.

I have downloaded harbour and can see it in windows  (Vista). However after that I am stuck.

Should I go to DOS to set path=?? or can I do that in windows?

If in DOS what are the steps did you take?

 

Can you help me to kick start my first 'Hello World' project....

Thanks

Sasha

 

 

Hi Sasha

I have on pulpit icon that runs bat file. In this bat I have many set instructions and on ende run ndn.exe ( like Norton Commander from ndn.muxe.com). From ndn all sets are visible, and we can in harbour\test put command :

hbmk2 somefile.prg 

somefile is a name of any file in this folder. Pls read README.md file in harbour folder.

Regards,

Marek Horodyski