I just noticed some deep conversion in the post "Harbour 3.2 Updated and available for download" https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/harbour-users/xA2kwORukTw and https://groups.google.com/forum/?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer#!msg/harbour-users/xA2kwORukTw/W0xL6sbVBQAJ
But this new post, to match the subject.
I am fairly new to Harbour, only a little over 2 years. For more than 25 years I was developing desktop and web apps in VFP (Visual FoxPro) and Python mainly.
I saw the same problems of lack of direction and support for the Harbour language, but also came to appreciate its power, cross platform support and to be a true 4GL for C.
I created the web site https://harbour.wiki with the hope to create a foundation, similar to the Python Software Foundation, to help keep the language alive.
The only person that seriously responded to the proposal for a foundation was Antonio Linares. But he became very busy with mod_harbour, a solution to bring Harbour to the web.
He is not a maintainer of the project and can not merge commits. He had the great vision of the Harbour language, but also brought a commercial solution to the GUI problem.
He now fully embraces open-source solutions and was the main force behind mod_harbour.
As was mentioned before, the main core developers left the project, and it is almost impossible to bring in new developers.
I am donating my time to maintain harbour.wiki with the hope to turn it over to a foundation. I was also able to purchase the domain name "harbour.dev" with the hope to also donate it to the foundation.
This new domain name could become the core branch for the language?
Tutorial, reference material, requests for enhancement proposals, central package indexes are some of the main issues a Harbour foundation should deal with.
I created a source code scrapper in harbour.wiki to help create a core synced documentation, and slowly I am bringing Pete's and others documentation in it. I would really like to rely on some other developers to help with that project.
Antonio also proposed to create a documentation of the compiler itself, but again we don't have real access to core developers to help.
Ideally we should have something that looks like the one made for python: https://realpython.com/cpython-source-code-guide/
But in regards to the GUI issue, in my opinion, most future projects are web apps or could be implemented with html/css technologies like electron has, but having Harbour as the core language.
Also harbour is missing local SQL support, similar to what VFP had.
I just posted a repo about creating FastCGI apps in Harbour, and will soon have a detailed article about web development in Harbour . Hopefully the mod_harbour community can also embrace it.
Again, whatever my opinions are about web vs desktop, SQL, GUI platforms are, a foundation should be created to provide support and leadership for Harbour.
We need enough members in the foundation to ensure no single point of view steers the language, but instead provides support.
We don't want another fork, like xharbour, Viktor 3.4 ...
Other solutions like X#, xbase++ are just mainly commercial enterprises and still have the same issues of lack of developers base.
X# is basically a clone of Harbour in .Net, but with the restriction of the C# language.
xbase++ is Windows 32 bit only and closed source code.
Any ideas ?
--
--
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.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/harbour-users/e5c55a41-a3ba-4d77-bc43-cbfdfc78bd00%40googlegroups.com.
--
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Harbour Users" group.
Unsubscribe: harbour-users+unsubscribe@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-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/harbour-users/360ee644-19cf-42d7-9603-b7e9f30144d6%40googlegroups.com.
Unsubscribe: harbour-users+unsubscribe@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-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/harbour-users/e5c55a41-a3ba-4d77-bc43-cbfdfc78bd00%40googlegroups.com.
--
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Harbour Users" group.
Unsubscribe: harbour-users+unsubscribe@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-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/harbour-users/db9f2af9-cbda-05ce-eb1e-fee4847de84a%40gmail.com.
Eric, thank you for the time you are devoting to Harbour.
Harbour has absorbed a tremendous amount of time and effort from all people that have been involved in the project. I tried a couple of years ago to create a kind of community, and I registered the domain xdevelopers.com (now available I think), aimed at grouping all the xbase developers, where i put a CGI program developed with the embrional dBaseWeb library that I am developing (it has a bit improved since). Some programmers answered to the call, they are still in the database. The domain has been moved then to a subdirectory of my web site, you can find it at:
My larval project is frozen, if not dead (but still working: you can register if you want, provided not to use a google mail address because TIP library for some reason was failing to send to Gmail addresses). The idea however is right IMO: we must create a community and decide all together. We don't need anymore a decider that keeps control under obscure circumstances. We need a crowfunding, a democratic process to state what to do and a serious plan to go ahead. If five thousand developers give a 100 buck each, we'll have a lot of money to carry on whatever future we want for Harbour.--
--
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.
Hi Maurizio:
Hi Maurizio:
I say: Let's leave money out of Harbour. If one wishes to make a living from Harbour, then build a great app for your users and charge *them* for it.
If you love the thought of Harbour and its development, then contribute freely until you become fatigued with it, or 'fall out of love'. If you then decide to leave, then leave gracefully and leave a product of work you are proud of.
The xHarbour group is facing the same problems as this group: Patrick Mast and Ron Pinkas split off from this group many years ago. They had gradually become disinterested, and departed. Patrick Mast always had an eye for the money-making aspects of Harbour, but could not make much headway in xHarbour, and is now pursuing / marketing his WinFakt package. He also sells support for his GUI screen for xHarbour.
The users over at xHarbour have now lost most of the original developers, and are now dependent upon Enrico Maria Giordano (with 'some' help from Luiz Culik some times) for simpler changes in .prgs and .c , and David Smith offers help to users with problems that need an expert's understanding of error messages. The users there generally use Borland/Embarcadero compilers (from Borland 5.5.1 up through Embarcadero's Borland 7.4). Whereas, in *this* group, the MinGW set of compilers are favoured.
So, please don't forget about the *many* harbour language users in the xHarbour fork. Probably many would like to join you but feel frightened to make the transition. Fright: .o instead of .obj, .a instead of .lib, etc, etc. Surely, only format changes, but still scary for them
Myself: I have apps made in both Harbour and xHarbour, and at least weekly and I transit back-and-forth.
Anyway, the developer is a wild animal and thus he's free to live
in the scape he prefer...
-Mel Smith
It is a pity that the experts here ignore their brethren over at xHarbour
Thanks for your abstract of the history and of the state of art
of xHarbour.
--
Maurizio
--
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.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/harbour-users/71b211bc-9f51-4540-b605-ca6d7e2baab5%40googlegroups.com.
--
--
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.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/harbour-users/bd94993a89e697e7dceb10553bcb9b45%40people.net.au.
Doug,
JFTR, I followed a different path.
When faced to the GUI issues, I decided that the way to go was to use
Harbour (or xHarbour) as a terrific way to produce CGI programs.
The current state of CGI programs is "disregarded, inefficient,
deprecated"? Bullshit.
Of course if you try to use .NET apps or whatever with the CGI
technology you'll probably end up with very inefficient stuff. Try to
use Harbour as it is without any GUI overhead.
You'll have something like *pure c executables run by a web server*,
something that is highly efficient and causes no overhead at all. A
monster, a killer app.
My larger executable is a mere 2-3 Mb sized program (yes, it's a pure
text-mode Harbour executable) either under Linux or Windows. Apache (or
IIS, or whatever) will execute it in milliseconds. The rendering and all
the UI issues are managed by the browser, and Harbour in pure text mode
achieves a troughput simply "alien classifiable" under current ratings. :-)
Just to test it, I installed a Harbour CGI in a puny laptop running a
squalid Windows XP Home, with a pure C highly efficient web server (Jana
server) and the user WAS NOT ABLE TO NOTICE that the technology used was
that client-server stuff with a web server and all the overhead
involved. It was faster than other "native" programs . No jokes.
Put such a execzilla monster on a modern server. Use it. Say "Oh!"
Stop with all that stuff about dBase compatibility. Harbour is a
superset of C, highly efficient, multi-platform, t is in fact pure C
made easier. It would be better than Java, if not for the GUI problem.
I don't know the dimensions you are talking about. I can figure out
that: a million users accessing the databases is over the possibilities
of Harbour. You must use SQL. Ok. World has changed etc. I manage, on
the other side, private sites that can have a hundred of less users.
Here dbf behaves quite good... more or less. So we are back to the
point: not to publicize Harbour as a compatibility tool to the
(venerable) Clipper. It is a SoPCL (Superset of Pure C Language) and
that should be the way to refer to it. Who knows about Clipper? A scarce
and old subset of old programmers ("Clipperheads", eh...). What the
hell? Do we really think that the actual Harbour has more to do with
Clipper than providing the loyal compatibility, than at the same time
being something COMPLETELY DIFFERENT?
Stop thinking of Harbour as the new Clipper - it is, but it is a new
thing, also.
On Sat, Dec 14, 2019 at 10:23 AM Appliserver <webm...@appliserver.com> wrote:Doug,
JFTR, I followed a different path.
When faced to the GUI issues, I decided that the way to go was to use
Harbour (or xHarbour) as a terrific way to produce CGI programs.
The current state of CGI programs is "disregarded, inefficient,
deprecated"? Bullshit.+1
(I've used Harbour as a CGI app under the free Apache Web Server since 2009. With no operational problems whatsoever. My only difficulty was switching back and forth between Javascript and Harbour when coding Front-end and Back-end simultaneously. The similarity (and differences) between the languages was brain-busting for awhile. Then, add-in HTML and CSS, and you have to dance very carefully while coding.)
Addendum:
--
--
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.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/harbour-users/00a5b8df-3ea2-4099-8a73-25c3a5d3286a%40googlegroups.com.
--
--
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.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/harbour-users/7c4dc82ea0c2dee0f14b0d1ef3e8d067%40people.net.au.
--
--
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.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/harbour-users/CADPHLr9-dhvSv8jk-hsvYyCZZ36Kx%3Dw65bWPyUH1pkFu2Sfzqw%40mail.gmail.com.
I agree with Carles.
Harbour needs Web … as a full featured tool for development, including coding, debugging, testing and QA processes.
Many of us (me included) have built web applications using Harbour as a backend solution.
We’ve also built dynamic Harbour generated HTML pages to send back to the browser.
Personally, I’ve used the CGI process exclusively.
Which works great, since it’s been around for decades.
But, debugging Harbour backend processes was neither intuitive or easy.
Through awkward workarounds, I’ve have achieved debugging capability. However, real-time web debugging is critical.
My 2 cents.
Don.
--
--
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.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/harbour-users/b57f73a3-731a-4f4c-9213-408e6ca1dffb%40googlegroups.com.
If ADS becomes free of licencing or, even better, open source, this
could be a huge impulse to the (X)Harbour community.
And ADS could become an alive niche project.
And also the Delphi guys will love this.
Ok, just crazy thoughts in my mind...
From: Gerald Drouillard Sent: Wednesday, 18 December 2019 21:25 Reply To: harbou...@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: [harbour-users] The future of Harbour |
--
--
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.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/harbour-users/CAC_Y%2BMDota1hpeUGHF0bd%3D1AuMuifV3%2B5XLJa%3DrjE_NHv62s8w%40mail.gmail.com.
(a little digression: QtContribs, Pritpal where are you?)
If you are not aware ( as I read in this post ), just to let you know that GTWVG was developed by me and is in use for my all commercial applications. Yes, it is not multi-platform, only Windows, but has prooved to be robust.Pritpal Bedi
From: Eric Lendvai Sent: Monday, 23 December 2019 10:05 To: Harbour Users Reply To: harbou...@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: [harbour-users] Future of Harbour - GUI Library Support |
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/harbour-users/20191223074130.5156946.58618.5961%40gmail.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/harbour-users/CAGDVDAggfkMzO68ErzkP5%3DX3Pejf9kdyDR%2BAc94tRx%2BneJ7Yxw%40mail.gmail.com.
Creo que Harbour es un producto muy estable y que te permite realizar practicamente cualquier diseño de programa y lo que no puede siempre podras añadirlo con bibliotecas de terceros. Pienso que es un sistema duro, fuerte y robusto.
Una de las respuestas mas realistas para mi que se han escrito en este hilo es la de Alexander el pasado 18.12.2019 y qu me hizo recapacitar:
“There are many popular languages, which hasn't them and this fact doesn't prevent them to be at a top.
We should calmly accept the fact that Harbour never be in the first 100 languages list. This doesn't prevent us from using it in development. The core is stable, the language itself is complete enough and all other, any newest technologies can be realized as external libraries, written on C or other languages.”
Es cierto, completamente !!!
Creo que actualmente Harbour es una bestia en sistemas desktop y mi deseo es verlo en la web, no para mi especialmente porque por motivos de trabajo uso otros lenguajes consolidados y que funcionan muy bien. Pero me gustaria ver como nuestro querido Harbour da este gran salto y cierra el circulo como gran compilador, pero mi pobre experiencia dice que va a ser muy dificil. Por que ? Porque en general todos los programadores de Harbour somos una generación mayor, lejos de toda esta jueventud que se come y devora todo muy facilmente. El coste de aprender nuevos lenguajes (html, javascript, css, jquery, bootstrap, materialize,…) junto con el soporte de harbour va a ser el gran pretexto para no dar el salto. Demasiado coste.
Recientemente he tenido la suerte de vivir el nacimiento de mod harbour para la web. Realmente la semilla estaba puesta gracias a Antonio Linares, funciona, va bien y va a mejorar cada dia mas. Independientemente de que otras tecnologias o maneras de funcionar como fastcgi u otro, puedan ser otras soluciones, el problema q veo en si no el el core o nucleo sino la asimilación de la metodologia para programar en este entorno, porque un “Hello World” lo hace todo el mundo pero un programa no: Programar es facil, hacer programas es dificil…”.
Señores: Programar en la web es dificil, muy dificil
Hace unos meses cree un framework hecho con Harbour basado en “Laravel”, uno de los frameworks mas populares usados hoy en dia, para poder probar la potencia del mod. La misma filosofia y mismo patron de arquitectura de software, no he inventado nada, simplemente emular lo que tiene éxito entre cientos de miles de programadores. El sistema funciona realmente y de hecho el proyecto que hemos iniciado con Antonio Linares, Genesis (http://genesis.mod-harbour.org/) demuestra que podemos hacer programas en la web con Harbour. Ah !!! junto (html,css,js,…) y es que va todo junto, cogidos de la mano.
Entonces que ha pasado con el framework Mercury. Veo que los colegas no quieren usarlo, pero la gran pregunta es: ¿Por qué? Porque creo que entrar y dar el salto a la web es dificil como hemos dicho antes y el precio de estudiar todos estos lenguajes de complemento, patrones de diseño de aplicaciones, nuevos sistemas,… es muy alto.
Entonces que podemos hacer para crear aplicaciones en la web con nuestro Harbour ? Tiene sentido habiendo otros lenguajes potentes y preparados para ello ? Independientemente de que muchos Harbourianos quieren seguir en desktop, los que quieran dar el salto a la web, podrán hacerlo con Harbour ? Si como dice Alexander, somos una minoria que no estamos ni entre los 100 mejores,… tiene sentido estas inquietudes y sobretodo esfuerzos ?
Felices fiestas.
C.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Traducido con Google Translator:
Hi everyone,
On this holiday I want to share some small reflections with you.
I believe that Harbor is a very stable product and that allows you to make practically any program design and what you cannot always add it with third-party libraries. I think it is a hard, strong and robust system.
One of the most realistic answers for me that have been written in this thread is that of Alexander last 18.12.2019 and what made me reconsider:
“There are many popular languages, which hasn't them and this fact doesn't prevent them to be at a top.
We should calmly accept the fact that Harbour never be in the first 100 languages list. This doesn't prevent us from using it in development. The core is stable, the language itself is complete enough and all other, any newest technologies can be realized as external libraries, written on C or other languages.”
It is true, completely !!!
I think Harbor is currently a beast on desktop systems and my desire is to see it on the web, not for me especially because for work reasons I use other consolidated languages that work very well. But I would like to see how our beloved Harbor makes this great leap and closes the circle as a great compiler, but my poor experience says that it will be very difficult. Why ? Because in general all the Harbor programmers are an older generation, far from all this youth that eats and devours everything very easily. The cost of learning new languages (html, javascript, css, jquery, bootstrap, materialize, ...) together with the harbor support is going to be the great excuse for not making the leap. Too much cost.
Recently I have been fortunate to live the birth of mod harbor for the web. The seed was really laid thanks to Antonio Linares, it works, it goes well and it will improve every day more. Regardless of whether other technologies or ways of functioning as fastcgi or another, may be other solutions, the problem I see in itself is not the core or core but the assimilation of the methodology to program in this environment, because a "Hello World" everyone does but one program does not: Programming is easy, making programs is difficult… ”.
Gentlemen: Programming on the web is difficult, very difficult
A few months ago I created a framework made with Harbor based on “Laravel”, one of the most popular frameworks used today, to test the power of the mod. The same philosophy and same pattern of software architecture, I have not invented anything, just emulate what is successful among hundreds of thousands of programmers. The system really works and in fact the project that we have started with Antonio Linares, Genesis (http://genesis.mod-harbour.org/) shows that we can do programs on the web with Harbor. Ah !!! together (html, css, js, ...) and that is that everything goes together, holding hands.
So what happened with the Mercury framework. I see that colleagues do not want to use it, but the big question is: Why? Because I think that entering and making the leap to the web is difficult as we have said before and the price of studying all these complement languages, application design patterns, new systems, ... is very high.
So what can we do to create applications on the web with our Harbor? Does it make sense having other powerful languages prepared for it? Regardless of how many Harborborns want to stay on desktop, those who want to make the leap to the web, can they do it with Harbor? If, as Alexander says, we are a minority that we are not even in the top 100, ... does this concern make sense and especially efforts?
Happy Holidays.
Carles.
For me, FiveTechSoft / FiveWin is a very acceptable and straightforward GUI solution.
From: 'Gilbert Karweru' via Harbour Users <harbou...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, December 25, 2019 3:00 AM
To: harbou...@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [harbour-users] Future of Harbour - GUI Library Support
I honestly think harbour is at crossroads. It is either we are willing to change or die out since we don't seem to be attracting new users/developers and soon enough, we will be too old.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/harbour-users/496639964.4009223.1577264415962%40mail.yahoo.com.
I just noticed some deep conversion in the post "Harbour 3.2 Updated and available for download" https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/harbour-users/xA2kwORukTw and https://groups.google.com/forum/?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer#!msg/harbour-users/xA2kwORukTw/W0xL6sbVBQAJ
But this new post, to match the subject.
I am fairly new to Harbour, only a little over 2 years. For more than 25 years I was developing desktop and web apps in VFP (Visual FoxPro) and Python mainly.
I saw the same problems of lack of direction and support for the Harbour language, but also came to appreciate its power, cross platform support and to be a true 4GL for C.
I created the web site https://harbour.wiki with the hope to create a foundation, similar to the Python Software Foundation, to help keep the language alive.
The only person that seriously responded to the proposal for a foundation was Antonio Linares. But he became very busy with mod_harbour, a solution to bring Harbour to the web.
He is not a maintainer of the project and can not merge commits. He had the great vision of the Harbour language, but also brought a commercial solution to the GUI problem.
He now fully embraces open-source solutions and was the main force behind mod_harbour.
As was mentioned before, the main core developers left the project, and it is almost impossible to bring in new developers.
I am donating my time to maintain harbour.wiki with the hope to turn it over to a foundation. I was also able to purchase the domain name "harbour.dev" with the hope to also donate it to the foundation.
This new domain name could become the core branch for the language?
Tutorial, reference material, requests for enhancement proposals, central package indexes are some of the main issues a Harbour foundation should deal with.
I created a source code scrapper in harbour.wiki to help create a core synced documentation, and slowly I am bringing Pete's and others documentation in it. I would really like to rely on some other developers to help with that project.
Antonio also proposed to create a documentation of the compiler itself, but again we don't have real access to core developers to help.
Ideally we should have something that looks like the one made for python: https://realpython.com/cpython-source-code-guide/
But in regards to the GUI issue, in my opinion, most future projects are web apps or could be implemented with html/css technologies like electron has, but having Harbour as the core language.
Also harbour is missing local SQL support, similar to what VFP had.
I just posted a repo about creating FastCGI apps in Harbour, and will soon have a detailed article about web development in Harbour . Hopefully the mod_harbour community can also embrace it.
Again, whatever my opinions are about web vs desktop, SQL, GUI platforms are, a foundation should be created to provide support and leadership for Harbour.
We need enough members in the foundation to ensure no single point of view steers the language, but instead provides support.
We don't want another fork, like xharbour, Viktor 3.4 ...
Other solutions like X#, xbase++ are just mainly commercial enterprises and still have the same issues of lack of developers base.
X# is basically a clone of Harbour in .Net, but with the restriction of the C# language.
xbase++ is Windows 32 bit only and closed source code.
Any ideas ?
I feels as if my ship, Harbour, has lost its captain!
To jog our memories, please refer to Wikipedia article to
understand why Clipper compiler for xbase became so popular.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clipper_(programming_language)
Antonio Linares initiated the Harbour Project to deliver an open source alternative to Clipper. Therefore, we must never forget Clipper. Harbour is Clipper on steroroids.
As I have articulated before, we must regroup and release Harbour Core V3.2 for Windows and Linux, and possibly for MacOS platforms. Including other OSes will slow down Harbour development.
Harbour is, as Clipper was, an invaluable tool for me and I am sure many others. It allows programmers like me build reliable business applications quickly without having to resort to C.
Regards.
Ash
For me, FiveTechSoft / FiveWin is a very acceptable and straightforward GUI solution.
From: 'Gilbert Karweru' via Harbour Users <harbou...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, December 25, 2019 3:00 AM
To: harbou...@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [harbour-users] Future of Harbour - GUI Library Support
I honestly think harbour is at crossroads. It is either we are willing to change or die out since we don't seem to be attracting new users/developers and soon enough, we will be too old.
We shouldn't be held back by individuals who believe you can move forward by not changing.
Harbour must embrace new techonologies (especially GUI and web), and honour its promise of 'write once compile on many'. The approach to GUI must then be generic and replaceable GUI architecture seems a very good way to go.
What I must ask, probably from experienced developers like Priptal,Kresin,Robez,Grigory etc, is whether the GUIs they have developed so far, can be condensed into a single library, such that one would only need to include such during compile?
Gilbert.
It seems to me that instead on narrowing our goals, we are widening them, adding good ideas but very difficult to put in practice.
Theoretically is a great idea but I'd like to ask this question: how many of you are available to modify your programs to accommodate the new syntax/library?
If you coded like Maurizio did, the port is easier. Not easy, easier than the way I coded my software.
--
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Harbour Users" group.
Unsubscribe: harbou...@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 harbou...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit
--
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Harbour Users" group.
Unsubscribe: harbou...@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 harbou...@googlegroups.com.
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.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/harbour-users/2bb0fd7b-eda1-4029-9b2c-e4a7ccb11782%40googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/harbour-users/CADZi2kJrjdEScLPgD1qVY0-CmBa1dcVQ45TNKEFL4tFL4GKFDg%40mail.gmail.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/harbour-users/CAGDVDAhPEUKop-LM2KYfaT4uMmkZPchEnqY%2BsCCptS2wrXh3rA%40mail.gmail.com.
Sincerely, Mike
wapi_MessageBeep()
José M. C. Quintas
--
--
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.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/harbour-users/7633ec49-4a50-4c71-9078-3acab7ae12db%40googlegroups.com.
I developed some GUI apps in Harbour and HMG but I wasn't sattisfied. Comparing them to my works in NetBeans it took more time and effects were worse.
After these improvement Harbour will be great however probably not used be lot of programmers. My old Harbour-team stucked with Harbour 2.0 and commercial and/or forsaken solutions like siergiej or mediator. They will rewrite all programs in C# because .Net is more powerful, better supported and easier to use in business work. The can't upgrade to Harbour 3.x because of compability reasons.
Can you please write more on these points:I developed some GUI apps in Harbour and HMG but I wasn't sattisfied. Comparing them to my works in NetBeans it took more time and effects were worse.
#command @ <row>, <col> GET <v> [PICTURE <pic>] ;
[VALID <valid>] [WHEN <when>] [SEND <snd>] ;
[CAPTION <cap>] [MESSAGE <msg>];
#command @ <top>, <left>, <bottom>, <right> ROWBROWSE <obj> ID <id> [COLOR <color>] ;
[BORDER <border>] [TITLE <title>] [ALIGN <align>] [TITLECOLOR <titlecolor>] ;
[ROW <row>] [ACTION <action>] [COLORBLOCK <colorblock>] ;
[HEADERCOLOR <headercolor>] [KEYMAP <keymap>] [CARGO <cargo>];
[AUTOHIGHLIGHT <autohighlight>] [SKIP <skip>] [GOBOTTOM <gobottom>] [GOTOP <gotop>];
Which are the blocking problems that don't allow to move to a more recent version of Harbour? Are you using some external libs not available for Harbour 3?
Are you really sure that developing a new solution in C# is doable in a finite timeframe?
Basically I'm in agreement with you when you write
But I think we can't compare XBase (Harbour) framework with other (many times payed) framework.
C++ + Qt otehrwise. It's why I think that Harbour development should be focused on CUI solutions.
--
--
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.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/harbour-users/21eebe8e-a3da-4180-bb54-3c2505ef2ee9%40googlegroups.com.
2. There open source parts published on github.These project are maintained by 3 developers.
3. Xsharp has only similar syntax to harbour.
4. It seems that MS SQL is main target, regarding data access layer
I would never choose migration path harbour -> XSharp:
1) Migration would be slow and expensive journey
2) If I want use .NET platform, C# or F# are program languages to go.
I strongly believe that harbour is by far better developer tool than XSharp.
I Agree.HMG and HMG MiniGUI is the best can happen to Clipper programmers.XSharp is a commercial try, which is not wrong per se, to earn some by giving customer support (as per their website).
The free support and development we get in HMG MiniGUI is unprecedented to say the least.We are not only thankful but grateful to Grigory and other members.
Regards,Anand
Unsubscribe: harbou...@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 harbou...@googlegroups.com.
--
--
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.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/harbour-users/e5c55a41-a3ba-4d77-bc43-cbfdfc78bd00%40googlegroups.com.