Hehe,
tperry2x wrote: ↑Sun Dec 22, 2024 3:41 pm
All apart from the SQLite bit - I'll steer clear of attempting to handle SQLite databases in the LCC engine entirely, at all costs. [...]
I accept this - getting used to databases takes some time, and I know they look terrifying at first.
But there's a reason God & her dog are using SQLite for prefs and what else. I'd die for a OXT where the dreaded preferences stack would be replaced with a nice, tidy SQLite that never gets corrupted ;-)
Or is there another reason I'm not aware of?
tperry2x wrote: ↑Sun Dec 22, 2024 3:41 pm
I know what you mean about LCC9 engine. I'd have loved to base OXT on the LCC7 engine instead. Unicode be damned. It's so so much faster than 9 will ever be. Why did LC make a 64-bit version of the v7 engine for Linux, and not do a 64-bit version until v8 on the Mac?
Well, I think LCC7 was already "over the rainbow". The IDE had been hit hard (at least for Win), the overall speed had seriously deteriorated, and the bugs had multiplied. Compared to the last LCC6 versions.
The last versions I'd actually have paid money for was 6.7.10/11, and when I learned about this, it wasn't for sale anymore. What was released after was, in my humble opinion, one pre-beta after another, without any half ways stable release versions (LTS, with backported bug fixes) ever. Nothing that I saw fit to use to deliver my mission-critical commercial software with.
And coding in LC, and selling my work, was until recently my sole source of income - for nearly 10 years.
As you may know I had lobbied for keeping a openSource "LC classic" based on the last 6.7. I even had asked LC Ltd. for an estimate of the costs to port the last 6.7 to 64bit, at least for Android/ Linux/ Win - they didn't even reply (I had some financial background at the time & might have been able to collect a serious sum). Similarly, my corresponding proposal here has been smashed.
Still I wonder if not this "unicode over alles" mentality (well, it was kind of a hype back then) wasn't the last nail for the coffin of XTalk languages in commercially applicable software products (that unfortunately are the sole reliable source of income).
I wonder if anybody (besides Richmond for sure) actually pays for a current LC license + actually uses the unicode features. Maybe it had been better LC Ltd. had just finally improved the field object (for instance, full support for tabular data as well as output according to OS settings) and the still broken font support - this might have been enough.
But I don't really understand the unicode thing (it never bit me, even my japanese customers happily accepted western style output as long as it was correct ...), so I may be blatantly wrong. Educate me then, plz!
Oh oh. Anyways, reminds me of:
ConspiracyTheory wrote:Bishop to Duke: "I'll keep 'em stupid, you keep 'em poor!"
Duke to Bishop: "Nice & thanks, but they keep complaining."
Bishop to Duke: "Then we need help, gimmi a moment, plz!"
HiredMinion to both: "What can I do for you?"
Bishop to HiredMinion : "You keep 'em divided, so I can keep 'em stupid, and he can keep 'em poor!"
HiredMinion to both: "Hehe, easy. I assume it'll pay?"
Bishop & Duke: "Grmml, 10% to you."
HiredMinion to both: "20%!"
Bishop & Duke: "Grmml, 15%."
HiredMinion to both: "Done. They'll be at each others throats in no time. But I need an alias, know me as 'SJW' from now on."
Bishop, Duke, SJW: "*grin*"