Home » Community » Coffee corner » U++ public image - please read and discuss...
| U++ public image - please read and discuss... [message #1102] |
Mon, 20 February 2006 17:32  |
 |
mirek
Messages: 14290
Registered: November 2005
|
Ultimate Member |
|
|
In order to improve public image of U++, there are several claims I would like/need to be commented/tested by the community:
- "The structure of the website and navigation is all boasting how ultimate clever we are. People see that childish."
- "Website should be more friendly. The accents must be: We serve humanity by delivering powerful things in a simple way. And everyone who reads the web pages must feel that spirit."
- "We need more features in U++ library"
- "We need more features in TheIDE"
- "Default forum design/layout repels people, it should be more similar to the website (blueish)."
- "Website design repels people"
Please feel free to add your own suggestions to the list.
And one nobody argues with, so I am adding that here just for completeness:
- "U++ needs better documentation"
however, the question is, do we need more
- "tutorials"
or
- "concept overviews"
or
- "reference"
?
Also, if you find some documentation topic worth special attention, feel free to post it here so we can make it priority.
Mirek
[Updated on: Mon, 20 February 2006 19:16] Report message to a moderator |
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: U++ public image - please read and discuss... [message #1106 is a reply to message #1102] |
Mon, 20 February 2006 18:52  |
 |
fudadmin
Messages: 1321
Registered: November 2005
Location: Kaunas, Lithuania
|
Ultimate Contributor
Administrator |
|
|
also have a look and read this as example:
BTW, read about the founder...
And, btw, they are using AGG...
About REBOL Technologies
Our Mission
We dramatically improve the way people and applications communicate, collaborate, share, and process information over the Internet.
Our Premise
We believe that modern distributed applications do not need to be large, complicated, and expensive.
In fact, we believe that when it comes to software, smaller is better. Smaller software is cheaper to develop, more efficient to operate, and easier to update and improve.
We believe that the X-Internet can make web applications a lot faster, a lot smarter, and run on a lot more devices in the future.
We believe that an open collaborative development community is key in creating and expanding on the fundamental technology and inspiring an exciting variety of applications and methods.
We believe that the Internet is always changing, and that the more flexible and lightweight your technology, the more rapidly you can adapt and benefit from change.
http://www.rebol.com/mission.html
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: U++ public image - please read and discuss... [message #1109 is a reply to message #1102] |
Mon, 20 February 2006 20:43 |
jadeite
Messages: 42
Registered: January 2006
|
Member |
|
|
 Hey, you 2 settle down. 
It is interesting how the forum page is a continual topic of discussion. I personally like the blue/gray colors, but it is a matter of taste, and not critical.
I'll have to think about the question some more, but on the opposite end, 1 of the things that drew me towards checking out Ultimate++ was:
-Has an IDE with layout designer
-Template-heavy, which is slightly unique to GUI frameworks.
Then, what made me look even deeper was the fact that even complicated apps (like the text editor) are VERY responsive to resizing. I mean, when I grab the edge of the app frame and resize it, it just flows. This is something you only see in Delphi and MFC apps.
The name Ultimate++ seems fine to me. You remember it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: U++ public image - please read and discuss... [message #1111 is a reply to message #1109] |
Mon, 20 February 2006 21:04 |
|
mirek
Messages: 14290
Registered: November 2005
|
Ultimate Member |
|
|
| jadeite wrote on Mon, 20 February 2006 14:43 |
Hey, you 2 settle down.
|
Oh, no, this was not supposed as "he is right - he is wrong" flamewar, just the reality check.
I am definitely ready to change things, but for some of them I would like to hear more opinions.
As for U++ improvements itself, they will definitely be happening. They always did. And IMHO, development was and is fast.
However this thread is about possible drawbacks in public image - I can deal with engineering issues, but I am not PR guy.
Mirek
|
|
|
|
| Re: U++ public image - please read and discuss... [message #1114 is a reply to message #1102] |
Mon, 20 February 2006 21:53 |
zsolt
Messages: 702
Registered: December 2005
Location: Budapest, Hungary
|
Contributor |
|
|
About documentation:
Basic documentation found on the website was enough for me.
With the lack of real reference, I'm using doxygen generated documentation. It is very useful, you can browse it very fast using the many cross-links. And you can read sources if the name of a method or function is not descriptive enough.
My personal opinion is that the documentation should be something similar with some descriptions.
Or you can check Qt's docs.
Website:
It is not childish, basically it is good, I think. Maybe it could be good to put a screenshot to the examples.
I think it could be a good idea to write something about the incredible productivity of programmers using upp. And simplicity of course.
Forum:
The default theme for guests is awful. When you login, the default is OK.
PR:
It is needed to write a press release about the release of upp-602 and describing it's strengths.
Mainly: simplicity, productivity, cross-platform, BSD-license, Ide with debugger, layout designer, fast build-technology, etc.
The text should be written (or at least edited) by a native english person.
This press release should be sent to all major open-source sites.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: U++ public image - please read and discuss... [message #1126 is a reply to message #1114] |
Mon, 20 February 2006 23:14 |
|
fudadmin
Messages: 1321
Registered: November 2005
Location: Kaunas, Lithuania
|
Ultimate Contributor
Administrator |
|
|
| zsolt wrote on Mon, 20 February 2006 15:53 |
About documentation:
Basic documentation found on the website was enough for me.
With the lack of real reference, I'm using doxygen generated documentation. It is very useful, you can browse it very fast using the many cross-links. And you can read sources if the name of a method or function is not descriptive enough.
My personal opinion is that the documentation should be something similar with some descriptions.
Or you can check Qt's docs.
Website:
It is not childish, basically it is good, I think. Maybe it could be good to put a screenshot to the examples.
I think it could be a good idea to write something about the incredible productivity of programmers using upp. And simplicity of course.
Forum:
The default theme for guests is awful. When you login, the default is OK.
PR:
It is needed to write a press release about the release of upp-602 and describing it's strengths.
Mainly: simplicity, productivity, cross-platform, BSD-license, Ide with debugger, layout designer, fast build-technology, etc.
The text should be written (or at least edited) by a native english person.
This press release should be sent to all major open-source sites.
|
Yes, simplicity and productivity. But that should be accented, stressed, pressed etc. on the upp.sourceforge.net not only in one article which will be forgotten after a week or so!
Now the home page of U++ advertises for months:
| Quote: |
C++ has the potential to be the most productive language in computing history. Its multiparadigm nature allows the effective development of almost any kind of software, from low level driver code to very high level business logic abstractions.
Unfortunately this potential has been left untapped, due to the lack of truly effective libraries, causing C++ evolution to be stuck somewhere between STL-iterator adaptors and smart-pointers. Ultimate++ finally uncovers this potential....
|
Who after reading this "untapped" simplicity of U++?
|
|
|
|
| Re: U++ public image - please read and discuss... [message #1128 is a reply to message #1126] |
Mon, 20 February 2006 23:27 |
|
mirek
Messages: 14290
Registered: November 2005
|
Ultimate Member |
|
|
| Quote: |
Yes, simplicity and productivity. But that should be accented, stressed, pressed etc. on the upp.sourceforge.net not only in one article which will be forgotten after a week or so!
|
Why not. But we definitely need that article. Nobody says it cannot be recycled in www (I have already done that with the Overview).
| Quote: |
| Quote: |
C++ has the potential to be the most productive language in computing history. Its multiparadigm nature allows the effective development of almost any kind of software, from low level driver code to very high level business logic abstractions.
Unfortunately this potential has been left untapped, due to the lack of truly effective libraries, causing C++ evolution to be stuck somewhere between STL-iterator adaptors and smart-pointers. Ultimate++ finally uncovers this potential....
|
Who after reading this "untapped" simplicity of U++?
|
I have no problem with improving that info. We have been "developing" frontpage text as community effort for more than month, but there is always a room for improvement. (If I remember well, that "untapped" phrase was suggested by Jan Wilmans and most of us liked it
However, this is too important for any quick fix posted over private message - any change there must go through another community review process.
You are welcome to start new forum topic with this mission.
Mirek
|
|
|
|
| Re: U++ public image - please read and discuss... [message #1133 is a reply to message #1128] |
Mon, 20 February 2006 23:54 |
|
fudadmin
Messages: 1321
Registered: November 2005
Location: Kaunas, Lithuania
|
Ultimate Contributor
Administrator |
|
|
| luzr wrote on Mon, 20 February 2006 17:27 |
| Quote: |
Yes, simplicity and productivity. But that should be accented, stressed, pressed etc. on the upp.sourceforge.net not only in one article which will be forgotten after a week or so!
|
Why not. But we definitely need that article. Nobody says it cannot be recycled in www (I have already done that with the Overview).
| Quote: |
| Quote: |
C++ has the potential to be the most productive language in computing history. Its multiparadigm nature allows the effective development of almost any kind of software, from low level driver code to very high level business logic abstractions.
Unfortunately this potential has been left untapped, due to the lack of truly effective libraries, causing C++ evolution to be stuck somewhere between STL-iterator adaptors and smart-pointers. Ultimate++ finally uncovers this potential....
|
Who after reading this "untapped" simplicity of U++?
|
I have no problem with improving that info. We have been "developing" frontpage text as community effort for more than month, but there is always a room for improvement. (If I remember well, that "untapped" phrase was suggested by Jan Wilmans and most of us liked it
However, this is too important for any quick fix posted over private message - any change there must go through another community review process.
You are welcome to start new forum topic with this mission.
Mirek
|
It's not the word "untapped". Sentences and their wording sound like from philosophy lecture...
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: U++ public image - please read and discuss... [message #1146 is a reply to message #1128] |
Tue, 21 February 2006 13:49 |
gprentice
Messages: 260
Registered: November 2005
Location: New Zealand
|
Experienced Member |
|
|
| luzr wrote on Tue, 21 February 2006 11:27 |
| Quote: |
Yes, simplicity and productivity. But that should be accented, stressed, pressed etc. on the upp.sourceforge.net not only in one article which will be forgotten after a week or so!
|
Why not. But we definitely need that article. Nobody says it cannot be recycled in www (I have already done that with the Overview).
| Quote: |
| Quote: |
C++ has the potential to be the most productive language in computing history. Its multiparadigm nature allows the effective development of almost any kind of software, from low level driver code to very high level business logic abstractions.
Unfortunately this potential has been left untapped, due to the lack of truly effective libraries, causing C++ evolution to be stuck somewhere between STL-iterator adaptors and smart-pointers. Ultimate++ finally uncovers this potential....
|
Who after reading this "untapped" simplicity of U++?
|
I have no problem with improving that info. We have been "developing" frontpage text as community effort for more than month, but there is always a room for improvement. (If I remember well, that "untapped" phrase was suggested by Jan Wilmans and most of us liked it
However, this is too important for any quick fix posted over private message - any change there must go through another community review process.
You are welcome to start new forum topic with this mission.
Mirek
|
| Quote: |
- "The structure of the website and navigation is all boasting how ultimate clever we are. People see that childish."
|
Regarding the above sentence from the original post in this thread - it's good that the UPP website now says that "comparisons are tricky" when comparing U++ to other toolkits, and that you've tried to be fair (I hope this is true). The website also says U++ achieves RAD through "smart and aggressive"
C++. It's fair enough to say this if it's justified but it's open to the "boasting" criticism, though most people seem to think they write smart C++. Maybe "innovative" would be better than "smart".
Regarding the "C++ being most productive language in history ... " paragraphs - they honestly makes me squirm - though I'm not sure how much my opinion's worth. I notice that Bjarne Stroustrup says there are way too few proposals for the C++ library and way too many for the core language.
There are many application domains other than GUI and SQL/databases so U++ is not the answer to the prayers of all C++ programmers. The statements pretty much trash all other C++ libraries, yet there's a ton of brain power and peer reviewing goes into boost libraries. What is so effective about the U++ libraries compared to other C++ libraries? I doubt that many people would agree that C++ evolution is stuck.
In my opinion it would be better to say something like ...
Ultimate++ is a radical and innovative GUI toolkit whose number one priority is programmer productivity. C++ is a great programming language but C++ programmers are sometimes hampered by the lack of effective libraries. U++ libraries enable genuine productivity gains with shorter development times and greatly reduced application source code size. U++ includes a full featured GUI library and an optimised STL replacement (the NTL).
Phrases like "most productive in history" and "U++ finally uncovers this potential" are hype that make me uncomfortable. Until you get to know U++ (and I still don't) it's far from obvious that U++ libraries really are more effective than other libraries (It's certainly a very big claim) and the average person would be very skeptical. Hype will only reinforce this feeling and give the impression that U++ developers are one-eyed zealots.
Now don't go changing the web page just coz I said I didn't like it . I'm only one opinion and I honestly have no clue about the productivity gains that are claimed as I haven't used U++ anywhere as much as I'd like yet.
Graeme
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: U++ public image - please read and discuss... [message #1158 is a reply to message #1149] |
Tue, 21 February 2006 17:17 |
hojtsy
Messages: 241
Registered: January 2006
Location: Budapest, Hungary
|
Experienced Member |
|
|
I see these issues as the main obstacles for U++:
1) documentation coverage is the worst I have ever seen for any library
2) there is no well known big application built on it which would prove the concept (theIde is not a well known app!)
3) navigation in the topic browser is so inconvenient that even a single text file with all the docs would be better. At least a searchable panel with the class names should be provided ASAP as the first step.
4) it is perceived as a one-man project, meaning that:
4a) if something would happen to the one or two developpers the development would be discontinued
4b) some uncommon personal preferences appear which might not seem justified for the majority of developers. For example several other GUI toolkits get along quite well withouth inventing an own rich text format. Or that a hundred other text editors save only when the user requests it, but theIde knows better and saves anyway. Or the ColumnList scrolling vertically, while multi-column lists scrolls horizontally everywhere outside U++. Or that the root namespace is contaminated with 2000 global functions! This list could go on and on. I don't want to be offensive: I also have strange uncommon preferences but these should be suppressed when a library is developed for the public.
5) I feel that organization of website is unprofessional and confusing, but I can not pinpoint what exactly makes me feel this way. Altough I recently accepted to administer the updating of the website from the uppweb source, I am a developer, and not a web designer. So most probably my attempt to reorganize the site would result in something which is not any better.
I think that the strenghts of U++ are:
- very fast runtime & compile time
- feature rich
- some library services are very polished and forces a "wow": for example serialization, Nformat, xml parsing, logging, callbacks
- RAD if you already know how to use U++ (but learning is not easy enough)
I tried looking around the web for U++ related discussions. There are very few. I added a few lines to the wxWidgets wiki, mentioning some factual errors in their comparison to U++. http://www.wxwidgets.org/wiki/index.php/WxWidgets_Compared_T o_Other_Toolkits#wxWidgets_compared_to_Ultimate.2B.2B
| Quote: |
wxWidgets compared to Ultimate++
* Ultimate++ only supports Windows and Linux, not MacOS
* The comparision on http://upp.sourceforge.net/www$vswx$en-us.html isn't really fair. The (very old) wxWidgets sample they took is well-commented and well-structured to show the reader how to design a wxWidgets application. Their implementation is uncommented and doesn't even behave the same. Also, a small example like that doesn't show how the toolkit scales to bigger applications.
(The reference to code comments is incorrect. The 600 line wxWidget sample on U++ page contains a sum total of 4 comment lines, namely: 1 occurence of "// Constructor and destructor", and 3 of "//precompiled headers". This does not qualify as well-commented. Also the hidden hint to the U++ example being not well-structured is unfair: it just employs a more simple and straightforward structure. - Sandor Hojtsy)
|
Could you comment on the "behaves differently" part? It would be more fair to reproduce the functionality of the example exactly.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: U++ public image - please read and discuss... [message #1182 is a reply to message #1158] |
Wed, 22 February 2006 09:00 |
|
|
| hojtsy wrote on Tue, 21 February 2006 11:17 |
I see these issues as the main obstacles for U++:
1) documentation coverage is the worst I have ever seen for any library
|
It is not so bad.. believe me  I can even say that Bulider C++ which I am force to use at work is much worse in this case. Besides upp has only 2 main developers, who most of their time spend on developing commercial apps..
I think we need to write more tutorials. This what is the most needed at the very begining. I wanted to write one about creating own widgets but there is always lack of time..
| Quote: |
2) there is no well known big application built on it which would prove the concept (theIde is not a well known app!)
|
what about 'application wrtitten in upp'. There are quite a few
| Quote: |
3) navigation in the topic browser is so inconvenient that even a single text file with all the docs would be better. At least a searchable panel with the class names should be provided ASAP as the first step.
|
agreed. And if the text could be selectable.. And some docs in topic browser should be always visible (not only when that and no other package is open).. like docs for ide
One more thought: We could deliver the chm doc-file with an installation.
| Quote: |
4) it is perceived as a one-man project, meaning that:
4a) if something would happen to the one or two developpers the development would be discontinued
|
Iteresting I think about it from time to time But the community is growing, the first patches appeared from outside. I hope it will be continual tendency.
| Quote: |
4b) some uncommon personal preferences appear which might not seem justified for the majority of developers. For example several other GUI toolkits get along quite well withouth inventing an own rich text format. Or that a hundred other text editors save only when the user requests it, but theIde knows better and saves anyway. Or the ColumnList scrolling vertically, while multi-column lists scrolls horizontally everywhere outside U++. Or that the root namespace is contaminated with 2000 global functions! This list could go on and on. I don't want to be offensive: I also have strange uncommon preferences but these should be suppressed when a library is developed for the public.
|
Having your own rich text format is an adavantage in my meaning.. You have full control on your documents, raports, etc.. Besides qtf can be easily converted to any other format.
Saving the files is in fact different to any other editor but I don't think it is an very important thing. I didn't have any problems to get used to it (and now I even miss it in others editors )
|
|
|
|
| Re: U++ public image - please read and discuss... [message #1183 is a reply to message #1107] |
Wed, 22 February 2006 09:14 |
|
|
| fudadmin wrote on Mon, 20 February 2006 13:08 |
7. there is no Grid widget
8 there are no regular expressions
|
7 There is - ArrayCtrl. And I want to add my GridCtrl soon
8 I will be working on it (because I need it) and I will public my wrapper for pcre, but I think that Mirek probably will be interested in his own solution and better integration with the whole upp lib.
|
|
|
|
| Re: U++ public image - please read and discuss... [message #1184 is a reply to message #1182] |
Wed, 22 February 2006 09:21 |
|
mirek
Messages: 14290
Registered: November 2005
|
Ultimate Member |
|
|
| Quote: |
| Quote: |
3) navigation in the topic browser is so inconvenient that even a single text file with all the docs would be better. At least a searchable panel with the class names should be provided ASAP as the first step.
|
agreed. And if the text could be selectable.. And some docs in topic browser should be always visible (not only when that and no other package is open).. like docs for ide
|
We had a chat about this with Tom and it seems like things can start improving there as soon as the next week. First two issues to solve: browser will show everything from current nests instead of active packages only (but active will be bold) and there will be the search tool.
Mirek
[Updated on: Wed, 22 February 2006 09:23] Report message to a moderator |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Tue Apr 28 12:57:24 GMT+2 2026
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.00877 seconds
|
U++ framework
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
