• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

VB compiler in Linux

B

bot2600

Platinum Member
New question. Do you think there would be a demand for VB for linux? A VB compiler/interpretter that ran natively in Linux that could run and compile projects made in windows VB and vice-versa? I have started fiddling with this idea, and think it could be done.

Bot
 
C++ Builder and Delphi kicked ass on Windows, and they look exactly (well, very cose) the same on Linux. There's also JBuilder if you're into java.

I don't think VB is needed on Linux, I know most won't want it. If you want a quick and easy RAD tool pick one that's already there, most of them have a better reputation than VB anyway =)
 
I wasnt thinking so much along the lines of NEED, but along the lines of portability. There are many things written for windows in VB, and if linux seems to need all the help it can get to reach mainstream. I was just musing that making that many more applications available under linux might help garner more support. It would also have the side effect of making it easier to port a VB app written on linux over to windows, so a linux developer could have a wider margin as well.

Bot
 


<< It would also have the side effect of making it easier to port a VB app written on linux over to windows, so a linux developer could have a wider margin as well. >>



Delphi is your friend. 😛
 
what kylix really needs is an "auto-RPM" feature that takes your code and packages it into some distributable that's dependency free. That will make it the killer app for linux development

-S
 
Bot2600 .. Look into .NET , this is the idea behind evil.NET .. portability .. actaully, you can write in whatever you feel comfortable in, python/c/vb/java/perl .. etc, and its actaully wrapped in an "envelope", allowing it to be interoperable with different platforms .. with .NET there would be no reason to try to port VB to linux .. thats the whole idea behind it .. and actaully we.. linux folks are getting our own ".NET" stuff too .. like GCC.NET or GNU.NET .. something like that ..
-neural
 


<< what kylix really needs is an "auto-RPM" feature that takes your code and packages it into some distributable that's dependency free. That will make it the killer app for linux development-S >>



And only cater to a part of the linux community? Enough with RPM only releases! 😉
 
That's kinda what got me on the idea. I went to a seminar yesterday on .NET and the MS guy was talking about all the languages being interpreted into the IL and then compiled, so you could mesh them together and have each module programmed by whatever language that modules programmed felt comfortable with. I didn't here him say anything about Linux getting .NET stuff too, but then again, he was a MS guy 😉 Some of the stuff they covered was very nice. On a side not, I played with the COBOL.NET and it is QUITE different from the COBOL I remember :Q Then again, who ever thought we would have an OO COBOL? 😀

Bot
 


<<

<< what kylix really needs is an "auto-RPM" feature that takes your code and packages it into some distributable that's dependency free. That will make it the killer app for linux development-S >>



And only cater to a part of the linux community? Enough with RPM only releases! 😉 >>



Well, what's the equiv to an exe file in Windows? that's the kind of standards simplicity linux needs in some way or another. maybe RPM is not the right solution but some smart pseudo-rpm solution that magically took care of dependencies is. (I think that's what urpmi was suppose to be)

-S
 
Well, what's the equiv to an exe file in Windows?

An ELF executable file, but I assume you meant Installshield installers not just regular executable files.

that's the kind of standards simplicity linux needs in some way or another.

Why? RPMs already work fine, as to .debs in Debian.

some smart pseudo-rpm solution that magically took care of dependencies is

There are already several of these, and they use rpms and debs. It's not a function of the package itself or the package manager to fix depency problems, that's why thinkgs like autorpm and apt were created.

And frankly if you can't download and install dependent RPMs Linux probably isn't for you. If you can get Debian installed you'll have the wonders of the Debian package manager and APT, which at the very least do the dependency fullfilling you want.
 
Bot, yes .NET is very portable, and it fits what you are saying .. No the MS guy wont say anything about GCC.NET because they arent doing it .. its actaully the GNU people are kind of porting .NET to linux/unices .. like C# is being ported .. here is a link i found on a quick search, it might be a lil old but it gives you an idea ..
-neural
 


<< Bot, yes .NET is very portable, and it fits what you are saying -neural >>




Yeah...ONLY.... if your defination of portable is that it works with Windows.. and works in crippled mode with BSD someday...maybe..it they get around to it...

Real farking portable... its crap... its marketing crap... all of it..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top