Overview
Examples
Screenshots
Comparisons
Applications
Download
Documentation
Tutorials
Bazaar
Status & Roadmap
FAQ
Authors & License
Forums
Funding Ultimate++
Search on this site
Search in forums












SourceForge.net Logo
Home » Community » Coffee corner » First impressions
First impressions [message #8010] Sun, 04 February 2007 05:24 Go to next message
filipg is currently offline  filipg
Messages: 3
Registered: February 2007
Location: USA, East Coast
Junior Member
Howdy. I've been programming for over a decade and using wxWidgets for a few months. I tried out U++ and hope my suggestions help. I downloaded the Linux rpm and it installed without any problems on Fedora 6.

With that said, I spent about 15 minutes looking for something to "run". Maybe a link from theide should exist to "upp"? I had to reinstall with verbose flag to find that what I was really looking for had nothing to do with "upp" - completely unexpected (to a new user!)

Second, it would be very nice if there was a man-page (even one page!) for both "theide" and "upp" - there is currently nothing.

Third, once I executed "theide", I could find no way to ADD an existing tree to the IDE. That is, having a directory of c++ files in a subdirectory "testing", how to make the IDE "see" these files. In fact, I gave up.

Fourth, it would be nice if the "Comparisons" page on the homepage, where U++ is compared with wxWidgets, had some information on specifically which platforms are supported. I see that Linux & Windows are supported but what about Mac OS? PalmOS? WinCE? I know it's under the "Status & Roadmap" but if you're going to compare...

Finally, as there does not appear to be a downloadable version of the documentation, perhaps provide a link to some site-grabber like http://www.httrack.com (free and cross-platform).

U++ looks impressive. If I *wasn't* anxious to try it, I wouldn't be posting here :-)

Cheers,
Fil

P.S. I do not have Internet at home (by choice), so if it's not in the package, I can't get it until the next day.
Re: First impressions [message #8012 is a reply to message #8010] Sun, 04 February 2007 07:46 Go to previous messageGo to next message
mirek is currently offline  mirek
Messages: 12050
Registered: November 2005
Ultimate Member
filipg wrote on Sat, 03 February 2007 23:24


Third, once I executed "theide", I could find no way to ADD an existing tree to the IDE. That is, having a directory of c++ files in a subdirectory "testing", how to make the IDE "see" these files. In fact, I gave up.



I understand that this is irritating. However, it is direct result of package/nest/assembly system, which makes things simple and effective in the long run. Things are different, it is like importing .doc file into .xls... (or .odt into .ods Wink

Quote:


OS? PalmOS? WinCE? I know it's under the "Status & Roadmap" but if you're going to compare...



Not quite sure why. Sources will be the same in Mac OS X.

Quote:


Finally, as there does not appear to be a downloadable version of the documentation, perhaps provide a link to some site-grabber like http://www.httrack.com (free and cross-platform).



You have already all documentation downloaded. Just, in TheIDE, press F1.

Quote:


U++ looks impressive. If I *wasn't* anxious to try it, I wouldn't be posting here Smile



You are welcome. Please keep in mind that for most people, first U++ hands on impressions are scary. That is standard.... Some design decisions are very unusual.

Mirek
Re: First impressions [message #8018 is a reply to message #8012] Sun, 04 February 2007 14:51 Go to previous messageGo to next message
guido is currently offline  guido
Messages: 169
Registered: April 2006
Experienced Member
[quote title=luzr wrote on Sun, 04 February 2007 07:46]
filipg wrote on Sat, 03 February 2007 23:24



Quote:


OS? PalmOS? WinCE? I know it's under the "Status & Roadmap" but if you're going to compare...



Not quite sure why. Sources will be the same in Mac OS X.


If you are going to evaluate cross-platform toolkits, you will quickly want to know just how cross-platform each really is. So it does make sense to have this info readily available on that page, I think he is right there.
Even better, if supported platforms were more obviously recognizable from the frontpage directly. Now you have to guess from the download section. So clearly point that out, with OS logos/mascots as visual clue. My suggestion anyway.
Next release would be a good time for that.
List of supported platforms is a major selling point, that should make the headline, and emphasizing the native look&feel.
On that account only wx and qt are left as competitors, so that's worth bragging about.

Guido
Re: First impressions [message #8021 is a reply to message #8010] Mon, 05 February 2007 06:27 Go to previous messageGo to next message
filipg is currently offline  filipg
Messages: 3
Registered: February 2007
Location: USA, East Coast
Junior Member
Thank you. Another thing that would help sway new users (like me) would be a comparison/table of particular strengths of upp vs wx and qt (and maybe fox).

I understand that choosing the criteria is tricky but from my limited inspection of upp I would say that the documentation for upp is much clearer than wx in the high-level sense. That is, I "grasped" upp in 1/100th the time it took me to "get" wx. I don't know about qt or fox but *would like* to know - it would help a stranger determine whether their project/application matches a certain toolset's strengths.

Another strength of upp over wx is the ide... I'm using netbeats 5.5 (with C/C++ module) with wx - it has nothing of its own. That makes the documentation a pain (thanks for the F1 tip!). Often, I have to have another console open with the PDF file (10MB) for wx and it's a real pain (i.e., can't set bookmarks, etc.)

Cheers,
Fil
Re: First impressions [message #8022 is a reply to message #8010] Mon, 05 February 2007 06:34 Go to previous messageGo to next message
filipg is currently offline  filipg
Messages: 3
Registered: February 2007
Location: USA, East Coast
Junior Member
Make than "netBEANS" (http://www.netbeans.org/)

However, if you don't already have the Java JDK, I suggest you get the JDK 6 from http://java.sun.com/javase/downloads/index.jsp (130MB!) - the linux install is painless on Fedora 6. Then, add the C/C++ plugin http://www.netbeans.info/downloads/index.php?rs=11&p=7

Cheers,
Fil

P.S. U++ ide is a LOT smaller than that - see what I mean about table of "advantages"?
Re: First impressions [message #8023 is a reply to message #8021] Mon, 05 February 2007 07:32 Go to previous messageGo to next message
mirek is currently offline  mirek
Messages: 12050
Registered: November 2005
Ultimate Member
filipg wrote on Mon, 05 February 2007 00:27

limited inspection of upp I would say that the documentation for upp is much clearer than wx in the high-level sense. That is, I "grasped" upp in 1/100th the time it took me to "get" wx.



Wow, thank you, it seems we made some progress. Year ago, "lack of documentation" was mentioned as major drawback of U++ Smile

About most other points, you are mostly right. But our resources are somewhat limited. E.g. right now, I do not quite like U++ front page (or wikipedia article about U++, which is BTW the main place where people are coming from....), but we have nothing better...

(Besides, optimizing Core and writing the new code is so much more fun Smile

Mirek
Re: First impressions [message #8024 is a reply to message #8018] Mon, 05 February 2007 07:35 Go to previous messageGo to next message
mirek is currently offline  mirek
Messages: 12050
Registered: November 2005
Ultimate Member
guido wrote on Sun, 04 February 2007 08:51


On that account only wx and qt are left as competitors, so that's worth bragging about.



Well, I am rather thinking about C#/.NET, Java and Python as competitors Smile

Mirek
Re: First impressions [message #8034 is a reply to message #8024] Mon, 05 February 2007 15:23 Go to previous messageGo to next message
guido is currently offline  guido
Messages: 169
Registered: April 2006
Experienced Member
luzr wrote on Mon, 05 February 2007 07:35

guido wrote on Sun, 04 February 2007 08:51


On that account only wx and qt are left as competitors, so that's worth bragging about.



Well, I am rather thinking about C#/.NET, Java and Python as competitors Smile

Mirek



But winning over C++ developers from wx/qt would be quite substantial success in itself. While winning over is always hard, there should be good chances with "freshmen". But upp must appear on their radar from the outset in the first place, that's the trick.

Also C#/.NET isn't so cross-platform and python in the end means pygtk, pyqt, wxpython, so...
Making that case is quite hard anyway. A few samples won't convince anyone, upp can compete in coding speed with those.
C++ suffers a bad reputation, and that's hurting.

What would help , on X11 especially, real working apps in the hand of the masses. Im always thinking, UWord would make a nice show-case, if it was enhanced a little more to be usable as a basic word processor. If it could compete with AbiWord somewhat, its footprint and speed might make some people take notice. Now, upp is rather invisible, and that's not helping.


Guido
Re: First impressions [message #8040 is a reply to message #8034] Mon, 05 February 2007 18:39 Go to previous messageGo to next message
mirek is currently offline  mirek
Messages: 12050
Registered: November 2005
Ultimate Member
guido wrote on Mon, 05 February 2007 09:23

luzr wrote on Mon, 05 February 2007 07:35

guido wrote on Sun, 04 February 2007 08:51


On that account only wx and qt are left as competitors, so that's worth bragging about.



Well, I am rather thinking about C#/.NET, Java and Python as competitors Smile

Mirek



But winning over C++ developers from wx/qt would be quite substantial success in itself. While winning over is always hard, there should be good chances with "freshmen". But upp must appear on their radar from the outset in the first place, that's the trick.

Also C#/.NET isn't so cross-platform and python in the end means pygtk, pyqt, wxpython, so...
Making that case is quite hard anyway. A few samples won't convince anyone, upp can compete in coding speed with those.
C++ suffers a bad reputation, and that's hurting.

What would help , on X11 especially, real working apps in the hand of the masses. Im always thinking, UWord would make a nice show-case, if it was enhanced a little more to be usable as a basic word processor. If it could compete with AbiWord somewhat, its footprint and speed might make some people take notice. Now, upp is rather invisible, and that's not helping.



I agree with everything Wink

The only problem is that somebody must take on these quests. It is beyond U++'s core developers capacity I guess.

The main problem with UWord is export/import (.doc, .odt). That is a huge amount of work.

Mirek
Re: First impressions [message #9731 is a reply to message #8040] Mon, 28 May 2007 18:58 Go to previous message
forlano is currently offline  forlano
Messages: 1071
Registered: March 2006
Location: Italy
Experienced Contributor
luzr wrote on Mon, 05 February 2007 18:39

Quote:


What would help , on X11 especially, real working apps in the hand of the masses. Im always thinking, UWord would make a nice show-case, if it was enhanced a little more to be usable as a basic word processor. If it could compete with AbiWord somewhat, its footprint and speed might make some people take notice. Now, upp is rather invisible, and that's not helping.



I agree with everything Wink

The only problem is that somebody must take on these quests. It is beyond U++'s core developers capacity I guess.

The main problem with UWord is export/import (.doc, .odt). That is a huge amount of work.

Mirek



I think UWord is very good and useful as it is now. What a normal user could consider really prioritary I guess are:

1) import/export rtf;
2) set the dimension and the margin of the page to be printed.

Luigi

[Updated on: Mon, 28 May 2007 18:59]

Report message to a moderator

Previous Topic: the long view (whats the roadmap for UPP?)
Next Topic: crush of the program
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Sat Oct 19 23:55:19 CEST 2019

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.01322 seconds