REALLY IMPORTANT: is anyone interested in HMG4 ?

[Rathinagiri]

Hi Luigi,

I want to tell you only one thing.

Roberto, while creating HMG, didn't count the number of followers. If HMG4 is simple, stable, platform independent and also somewhat HMG3 compatible, definitely there will be many followers.

Regarding the speed and memory size, there would always be faster computers with huge memory. And we have to verify whether HMG4 is that slower. I personally don't think so. Once loaded, it is as fast as windows, I think.

IMHO, many of the controls are already ported and many of the functionalities are also ported. But, while doing basic structural changes, it would be better if the number of persons involved are less. They know what they do. Once the basic structure is ok, up and ready I am sure, we can do wonders.

So, in Roberto's words, "Never ever give up your dreams".

[ClaudioGalera]

Creo que el fuerte de HMG4 es la portabilidad a otras plataformas.
Desarrollar una aplicacion en windows y que corra luego de su debida compilacion en Linux, Mac Os x o el que sea, en forma nativa. De otra manera nos hubieramos quedado con hmg3 y a esperar que no existan incompatibilidades con windows 8,9,10 o las que sigan...

Gracias a todos por su trabajo e interes en HMG 3 y 4

Google Translate

I think the strong HMG4 is portability to other platforms.
Develop an application that runs on Windows and after its compilation due on Linux, Mac OS X or whatever it is, in native form. Otherwise we would have stayed with hmg3 and expect that there are no incompatibilities with windows 8,9,10 or continue ...

Thank you all for your work and interest in HMG 3 and 4

Claudio Galera

[mrduck]

Hi Rathinagiri, Hi everybody

So, in Roberto's words, "Never ever give up your dreams".

We have a dream. A full OOP library we can use to develop some "business oriented" programs, a thin framework to avoid duplicating code, based on a robust, proven, worldwide widely used, crowss-platform library whose name is Qt....

And is shouldn't necessarily be HMG4....

When I heard of HMG4 and come here I was excited because I found a very active development team committing code at high speed. A good backlog of HMG3 coders let me think that there would have been someone willing to port their programs, at least willing to test their programs and report errors, missing bits, different behaviours.

But this group of developers vanished, with half baked code in the svn...

IMHO, many of the controls are already ported and many of the functionalities are also ported. But, while doing basic structural changes, it would be better if the number of persons involved are less. They know what they do. Once the basic structure is ok, up and ready I am sure, we can do wonders.

Ok, less people, less comunication waste....

But, are you (all the readers) willing to cooperate ? How ?

For example, do you have a "small complete program" that you can try to port to HMG4 ? With "small complete program" I mean something with 3/4 forms, with some DBFs ?
Can you please create a doc for set/getProperty (for all its variants), _GetValue and _SetValue and _HMG_SYSDATA used in your program ?

[/quote]So, in Roberto's words, "Never ever give up your dreams".[/quote]

I don't.... but pobably we don't dream the same...

[mustafa]

Hola amigos:
Muy interesantes los comentarios vuestros, lo más importante es la sinceridad
cuando no te encuentras ha gusto en un entorno como me ha ocurrido a mi,
com HMG4 por que utiliza una metodologia distinta que HMG3, reconozco
que no me siento con animos de continuar, reconozco que los que procedemos
de la antigua escuela Clipper, nos costó bastante reciclarnos al entorno Gráfico
pero al final con HMG3 salimos adelante bastante bien.

Cuando aparecio HMG4 vi que sinceramente no podia volverme a reciclar y
continuaba con HMG 3 o desistia en este entorno de programación.

Un Buen dia encontre el nuevo proyecto Marinas-GUI que la metodologia de
escritura de programación es casi identica al HMG 3 y si ven el anterior post
http://hmgforum.com/viewtopic.php?f=24&t=1959
Hasta me atrevi a reciclar un Browse al nuevo entorno de Marinas-Gui, yo
quiero dar animos a todos los que con vuestro esfuerzo estan desarrollando
nuevos caminos, pero piensen que los lenguajes de programación no pueden
ser solo para minorias.
Ya que no veo que HMG4 ,sea estructurada como HMG3 como lo está
haciendo Marinas-Gui.

Seguiré con HMG3 , para mi es una maravilla.

Un fuerte abrazo a todos
Mustafa

Google translation

Hello friends:
Your very interesting comments, most important is sincerity
when you are not liked in an environment like me has happened to me,
com HMG4 that uses a different methodology that HMG3, I recognize
I do not feel up to continue, I recognize that we proceed
Clipper of the old school, we took some recycled to the graphical environment
but in the end we went ahead with HMG3 quite well.

When I saw HMG4 appeared genuinely could not return to recycle and
HMG continued 3 or abandoned in the programming environment.

One fine day I found the new Sea-GUI project that the methodology
programming script is nearly identical to HMG 3 and if they see the previous post
http://hmgforum.com/viewtopic.php?f=24&t=1959
I even dared to recycle Browse to the new environment Marinas-Gui, I
I want to encourage all your efforts that are developing
new roads, but think that programming languages ​​can not
be only for minorities.
Since I do not see HMG4, is structured as HMG3 as it is
by Marine-Gui.

I will continue HMG3, for me is wonderful.

A big hug to all

Mustafa

[Ricci]

And we have to verify whether HMG4 is that slower. I personally don't think so. Once loaded, it is as fast as windows, I think.

It´s a bit slower because the way of a command to the graphical output is "longer" and the definition of objects seems to be slower (because of QT?).
About the size of the remaining exe: if I include the QT-libs into the exe it will be about 50 MB, the same HMG3 program under 3MB.

But that´s nothing to worry about. When I said, HMG4 is slower than HMG3, I mean that it is a bit slower not "it is slow".
It is normal that platform independent software is slower than platform optimized. If you compare Office 2010 with OpenOffice, there is a big difference in speed (especially when loading the program) but you can work with both of them without problems.

[Ricci]

But, are you (all the readers) willing to cooperate ? How ?
For example, do you have a "small complete program" that you can try to port to HMG4 ? With "small complete program" I mean something with 3/4 forms, with some DBFs ?

Yes, I can port my Orchid program to HMG4, I still started some month ago but stopped because at this time browse/grid did not work with dbf. The main form is still working so I can continue with the rest.

[mrduck]

But, are you (all the readers) willing to cooperate ? How ?
For example, do you have a "small complete program" that you can try to port to HMG4 ? With "small complete program" I mean something with 3/4 forms, with some DBFs ?

Yes, I can port my Orchid program to HMG4, I still started some month ago but stopped because at this time browse/grid did not work with dbf. The main form is still working so I can continue with the rest.

Thanks, I was about to ask to you since I found reference to your test with marinas in an old thread. Is it open source ?

PLEASE tell me if you have problems with the GRID/BROWSE, I'm doing some work on it.

If there are errors, please send me the GRID/BROWSE istruction to test.

Thanks

[concentra]

Hi Everybody.

I and Luigi are trying to get HMG4 in better shape.
I was thinking about some problems:
1) HMG3 compatibility.

To me this is irrelevant since I do not have HMG3 code.

2) HMG4 compatibility with itself... IS ANYONE ALREADY USING IT ?

I am.

Should I delete it or keep it ?

My perception of HMG4 is that it is in beta stage, functional but beta. And so must be used with careful in a production environment. And as a beta if it must be changed, don't hesitate just do it.

3) Using Qt directly
IS anybody using QtObject to access underlying Qt object ?

Not me.

4) is anyone really interested in HMG4 or have some software in production using HMG4 ?

Very interested.

we may take a different route in class management, widget handling, etc... to produce a framework that "looks like" HMG3 but points to be really OOP oriented...

This is what I want...

I and Luigi are spending really big time on HMG4 because we believe it can be a good base for writing "business" software. But are we alone in this ?

In one word: thanks. You are not alone and your work is for sure helping myself.

Mauricio, do you have software in the works based on HMG4 ?

Parts of my mainstream software, the one that puts the money in my pocket, are in HMG4 in production environment.
Is a huge mixed console/GUI application using WVG/WVT and FiveWin.
All new functionality we are trying to write in HMG4 and the goal is to have it all in HMG4 in the future, multiplataform. If not HMG4 for sure other QT / Harbour related tool.
And I am realistic, I don't expect this goal to be completed in less than 2 or 3 years.
And, HMG4 still have a long way to be finished itself.

P.S. All I write is a personal perception, and I really respect any other different point of view.

[concentra]

HMG4 would be very interesting when Harbour/QT would run on mobile devices (Android, iOS) but i´m not sure if this is planned or available.

Don't know about iOS but Android is Linux and HMG4 is tested to work in Linux...
So, if QT is avaiable to Android, and seems it is, HMG4 is already capable to work in Android.
And of course such an application must be coded accordingly to run in the device Android is running, don't expect to have a fully functional desktop application running efficiently in a cell phone...

[concentra]

As some other people I also made a "pit-stop" at Marinas.
But I didn't like the code, it was really confuse to me.
HMG4 is really cleaner and easyer to understand that I docked here...