Reflection on Harbour's Sustainability and Strategies for Its Revitalization
marcos...@gmail.com
Dear Community,
As developers experienced in Harbour, we are aware of its robustness and capability as a programming language. Its architecture, which combines a modern xBase environment with notable interoperability (C, SQL, etc.) and cross-platform portability (Windows, Linux, macOS, Android), positions it as a competitive tool against more widely adopted solutions.
However, we face a critical sustainability challenge. The Harbour ecosystem shows a clear trend of demographic aging. Most active developers are over 40 or 50 years old, which poses a real risk of obsolescence if we fail to attract new generations of programmers.
The need for action is immediate. We must:
Modernize technical dissemination: It is not enough to mention its virtues; we must demonstrate them. It is crucial to generate specialized technical content: tutorials on interacting with modern APIs (REST, JSON), managing NoSQL databases, using current graphical libraries (Qt, HMG), implementing design patterns, and providing examples of integration with other languages.
Centralize and update resources: Encourage the migration of key projects and documentation to platforms like GitHub or GitLab. This facilitates version control, collaboration, and visibility. An active repository with practical examples, updated demos, and docks is essential.
Content strategy: I have started a technical blog (https://miniguiextended.blogspot.com/) with the goal of publishing detailed articles on specific language features, best practices, and advanced use cases. I invite everyone to visit it, contribute ideas for topics, and, if possible, collaborate with content.
Proactive community engagement: Every member can be an agent of change. I recommend:
Answering technical questions on forums (Stack Overflow, Reddit) tagging harbour.
Publishing personal projects or useful scripts in public repositories, with clear documentation and open licenses.
Participating in or creating events (webinars, virtual hackathons) that solve current problems using Harbour.
The goal is clear: to transform the perception of Harbour from a "legacy" tool to a viable and powerful option for contemporary development. Its future depends on our ability to demonstrate its technical relevance in the current context.
I look forward to your comments, contributions, and collaboration proposals.
Sincerely,
Marcos Jarrin
Mahmoud Fayed
Ring is influenced by many programming languages, including xBase (Clipper, Harbour, and Visual FoxPro).
Ring supports the development of domain‑specific languages, and it can be used to create a DSL similar to xBase (if desired) as an optional library.
If we take this approach, Harbour could be integrated into the Ring ecosystem as a library responsible for managing DBF files. This could open a modern path forward for Harbour, where:
1. Ring is used as the main programming language (modern, and conceptually close to Harbour).
2. xBase commands are provided as an optional DSL library (leveraging Ring’s DSL‑friendly features).
3. Harbour is used specifically for DBF file processing.
Regarding point 3:
1. Ring uses the MIT license, so it is unclear whether Harbour can be used for DBF processing in this context.
2. It would be much easier if someone provided Harbour‑style DBF processing features as a standalone C library under the MIT license.
Summary: Programming languages influence one another, and we hope that in the future, Ring can become a strong and appealing option for Harbour developers.
Antonio F.S.
Hello Mahmoud, Marcos, and everyone.
Marcos's comments are obviously not unfamiliar to me, as I
expressed something similar in this forum a few years ago as well.
I hope and wish that in this case something more is achieved than
indifference.
I am fortunate to also be a member of the Ring forum. It is not my
intention to draw comparisons between that site and this one, but
I do want to mention, with constructive intent, what I see present
in the former and lacking in the latter, for the benefit of
Harbour and its ecosystem:
- A very well-documented and regularly updated website.
- Constant cooperation among members to help Ring progress
steadily.
- Continuous improvements to Ring (as a language). And new
contributions (ecosystem) through a unified package manager
(RingPM).
- A clear commitment to real and modern portability: Ring tends to
offer a more direct and "out-of-the-box" path for web and mobile
(Android/iOS) development within the same core. In Harbour,
although there are brilliant initiatives (like mod_harbour or
implementations for Android), they often feel like external
extensions or isolated efforts, not as a native and unified
feature of the "core."
- A built-in development environment (IDE) and integrated visual
tools.
- Standardization of GUI libraries: In Ring, creating graphical
interfaces usually follows a clear and standard path. In the
Harbour ecosystem, its richness is also its weakness: the
fragmentation between FiveWin, HMG, HWGUI, etc., dilutes community
effort and confuses newcomers about which "standard" to follow.
- Active project marketing and visibility: Ring is actively
promoted as an innovative language (with features like Natural
Language Programming), attracting new generations. Harbour often
lacks a unified communication strategy to "sell" it outside its
xBase niche, leading to it being unfairly perceived as just
"legacy" or outdated technology.
- Educational documentation and learning curve: Beyond the
technical documentation I mentioned initially, Ring often offers
step-by-step tutorials focused on the modern developer (creating
games, simple apps). Harbour has its technical documentation very
scattered, giving the impression that it lacks modern, pedagogical
material for those not from the Clipper/xBase world.
Best regards,
Antonio F.S.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------