HMGforum.com

Hi All,

Raumi has created an OSX package for HMG.4.

So, we currently have three editions of HMG.4 (Windows, Linux and OSX).

This has a very special meaning for me, because historical reasons.

By the beginning of 90's xBase ruled the programming world via FoxPro.

By that time, FoxPro had DOS, Windows and Unix versions (with a Mac version on development).

The same code could be used in all platforms without modifications, making the underlying operating system irrelevant, being, at the same time, easy and powerful.

So, if xBase was your language, you was in heaven

Sadly, Fox Software was acquired by a corporation...

Just a couple of years after the acquisition, the rumors about FoxPro's end started and support for non-Windows platforms was slightly vanishing.

Finally FoxPro was discontinued and the dream was over.

Now, we can start to dreaming again...

http://www.sourceforge.net/projects/hmg

Good! This is the xbase spirit. After all, we know which are the parts for the successful package:

- A strong, ideally multiplatform compiler (32, 64 Bit).
- A simple yet powerful high level language. After all something like this is always beautiful:
FOR EACH record IN table
PRINT record.birthdate
NEXT

- Full OOP. The commands should exist as in std.ch.. beautiful #command translations only
example:
#command OPEN DATABASE oDB => oDB := Database.New()

- GUI Controls mapped to the underlying OS.
- Multiple support of databases.
- A simple IDE designer to marry these elements (yes, i'm spoilt ! )
- Simple, royalty free distribution of executables


But as you imply, the corporations, be MS or CA didn't do it... And gave us interpreted, closed-source FoxPro (and left it almost abandoned..), Heavy odd but intriguing CA-VO (now turning into Vulcan as a last resort..), and in my simple view, to marry the approaches and get a "Clipper Fox" would have been the thing. I remember I was totally in love with Clipper, then I saw FoxPro and wow. And then Windows... Until Delphi I couldn't get a great environment and a great compiler at the same time.

But i'm missing XBase/Clipper tight database integration... Sorely.

Thanks for keeping the focus!

Roberto Lopez wrote:(Veritas Filia Temporis)

And wow, what a phrase. Important to me at this moment.

Great going Roberto. It is really amazing.

cdsaenz wrote: But i'm missing XBase/Clipper tight database integration... Sorely.

You are right. I was 12 years old, when I got in touch with dBase III plus. Before that, I only knew BASIC from my Commodore C64. It was similar to Basic in many ways, but so much more powerful, you could feel it.

I remember typing my first commands like

CREATE
BROWSE
EDIT

When I discovered the Form Designer, I was impressed, how easy it is to make a real program. It was not for dummies, but you could start with a few easy steps and work it up from there.

Just like on the C64, there was not really a distinction between a developer and a user. If you owned a computer, you wrote (little pieces) of software, that helped you get your work done.

I share Robertos opinion, that software development made a step backwards with introduction of Windows, because it became less intuitice. It became harder and harder to even start your project. Now, more than twenty years later users can't write software. Of course, they often do not have to, because programs like spreadsheet-applications have so much power and flexibility, that you get the job done, without coding.

But even harbour and HMG are huge projects, that make it hard to get started. Of course, it will never be for dummies. You will always have to be (a little) smart, to write software. I am talking about the learning curve. I dream of software that has a learning curve like dBase had.

Now after writing the previous paragrah, I realize that dBase also had a learning curve. Maybe it was just me. I was younger and better at learning...

Anyhow, let us continue to work together to get a program that makes it easy to write powerful applications.

Raumi

cdsaenz wrote: Heavy odd but intriguing CA-VO (now turning into Vulcan as a last resort..), and in

That was the real problem: CAVO.

All we expected a Clipper for Windows and found... CAVO

Maybe, the problem was the 'mood' at that time.

With 'mood' I mean: C++.

I remember a college (a teacher) with a Dr.Dobb's magazine at his hands, saying that C++ could be the new 'truth' for programmers.

Suddenly, abandon xBase high level style by obscure C++ constructions was a good thing. Even today, I can't understand it

Even Clipper 5 included C style comments (/* */) as a 'feature'

Moreover, there was some attempts to drive the xBase spirit to Windows.

IMHO, the more promising was CA-DBfast.

Other (more complex) was Borland's dBase V for Windows.

Both were unsuccessful. I can't understand what was the reason either.

Anyway... we are here and still fighting...

Our lives represent a very little chunk on the humanity history, sooner or later, the common sense will prevail and programming will be easy again, accompanying the evolution of computers.

raumi75 wrote: But even harbour and HMG are huge projects, that make it hard to get started. Of course, it will never be for dummies. You will always have to be (a little) smart, to write software. I am talking about the learning curve. I dream of software that has a learning curve like dBase had.

HMG is not more harder that dBase III+ for writing simple applications, but it lacks the interactive envirnoment (assist) to help users to do the transition from interactive operations to creating programs.

The other 'problem' is that the users are more demanding, so a simple BROWSE command with default options in most cases is not enough anymore.

These demands from the users, inevitably makes the development tools more complex.

The challenge for us, is try to keep our tools simple, when doing simple things, ie: not requiring an entire page of code to write a 'hello world' application

Roberto Lopez wrote:

raumi75 wrote: But even harbour and HMG are huge projects, that make it hard to get started. Of course, it will never be for dummies. You will always have to be (a little) smart, to write software. I am talking about the learning curve. I dream of software that has a learning curve like dBase had.

HMG is not more harder that dBase III+ for writing simple applications, but it lacks the interactive envirnoment (assist) to help users to do the transition from interactive operations to creating programs.

That is more precise. Assists took me by the hand and helped me get started.

Roberto Lopez wrote: The other 'problem' is that the users are more demanding, so a simple BROWSE command with default options in most cases is not enough anymore.

These demands from the users, inevitably makes the development tools more complex.

That's right. People always say, that they want simple applications. But they want it to be powerful and full of features.

If you got a little time, you can watch this talk "Simplicity vs. Choice" by Joel Spolsky:
http://joelonsoftware.com/items/2010/08/19.html

Roberto Lopez wrote: The challenge for us, is try to keep our tools simple, when doing simple things, ie: not requiring an entire page of code to write a 'hello world' application

... or downloading and installing from many different sources until you can get started. That's why we need a Mac OS X package that works out of the box, like the windows-package.

Nice conversation. I know about many things.

raumi75 wrote: That's right. People always say, that they want simple applications. But they want it to be powerful and full of features.

If you got a little time, you can watch this talk "Simplicity vs. Choice" by Joel Spolsky:
http://joelonsoftware.com/items/2010/08/19.html

I'll do!

raumi75 wrote: ... or downloading and installing from many different sources until you can get started. That's why we need a Mac OS X package that works out of the box, like the windows-package.

That is other problem, the collision of two cultures.

One, is the C/Unix culture, were read a long howto, download a lot of packages and runing config scripts to get the things running is ok.

The other is the Windows culture (most of us) that not found that acceptable