Re: Hello?

Micah Dowty wrote:

>I think the biggest problem was just motivation in general. It's hard to
>get excited about a GUI that doesn't already do everything you want it to...
>  
>
I think this interpretation is only right for the unixish targets, and 
therefore misses my point. In the unixish world you _have_ alternatives, 
so it was only consequent that folks didn't get excited enough to reach 
the "critical mass" of developers. In the "deeply embedded" world, 
developers would have been very happy about PicoGUI feature-wise, 
size-wise and concept-wise. I think it was mainly the portability issue 
which held them back. The portability issue can hardly be solved by 
application developers. If it's not in the main focus of the core 
developers, a specific port would become an unmaintainable oneway street 
and nobody wants that.

I would have written PicoGUI applications if there was sufficient 
portability in the first place, no matter wether I lack some features 
for a while. To be more exact, I even started to port PicoGUI, but 
quickly ended up in a jungle of small problems, which I personally could 
only have solved "dirty" losing maintainability. So I gave up.

>especially when it has no applications :)
>
In the embedded world, applications are often very product specific, 
pre-existing applications do not play such an important role. I feel 
that the existing examples show enough features to get the embedded 
developer interested. Then he'll look in into the sources, and see that 
he isn't able to port it.

All the best
Peter




-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by: InterSystems CACHE
FREE OODBMS DOWNLOAD - A multidimensional database that combines
robust object and relational technologies, making it a perfect match
for Java, C++,COM, XML, ODBC and JDBC. www.intersystems.com/match8