I'll give the RC trick a try. Thank You.
Perhaps I miss understood the licensing on the "Demo version of Claw".
I had understood this was a "demo" version that:
1. Could not be redistributed
2. Could not be used in commercial applications
3. Could not be changed / added to and redistributed with all kinds of
new wiz bangs, and for other platforms, etc.
If I understand your e-mail correctly, your demo version IS OpenSource
(www.opensource.org). What are the licensing terms on it? Can I do 1-3?
I haven't looked at the CLAW code, but if it is REALY open source,
I'll be happy to look through it and
S C R A P M Y O W N S T U F F
and start with your code as a base (if it makes sense).
I am sincere in the desire to move Ada in to a market place that will
benefit from Ada, ie. the main stream off the shelf consumer products.
I would realy like to use Ada for the projects that would normally get
VC++, VB, and Delphi, ie. I want to produce QUALITY where shmootz is
the norm. OK. I am sick in the head, but I like when my software does
what it says it does and reliably.
The current set of Ada tools just doesn't cut it and I can't
compromise my companies $$$ to have me constantly re-inventing the
wheel to use Ada, when a tool like VC++ or Delphi will let me code the
entire GUI in no time flat with ActiveX controls, MSMQ, MTS, etc.
While CLAW or ObjectAda may some day be the solution I am looking for,
they are both not OpenSource. I never want to be taken for a ride
again. I had an entire project colapse because Borland (even after
paying for Tech support, etc.) didn't pull through. MS, we don't even
have to talk about. When I can, I go OpenSource.
There is no Open Source RAD Delphi style environment out yet. This is
Ada's chance to move in to the world riding on top of Linux, GNU, and
the FSF efforts.
There is money to be made later (there is money in OpenSource), but
now is the time to act and produce the tools to make it possible.
Free in the software world is not about price (ask ACT), but rather
about freedom. See http://www.opensource.org/
The GUI classes I am working on are not like CLAW nor do they
re-invent the wheel.
1. Cross platform to X, JVM, and Win32
2. Support for pluggable look and feel (your app can look the same on
all platforms), ie. I don't wrap around the host OS widgets, I write
my own. This has its + and -.
3. Extension through OO or "call backs". No OO needed to use the
classes if you choose.
4. OpenSource - GPL or less (c)
5. Freely distributed (available on the net for free with its freedoms).
6. Some day they may also support ActiveX/COM.
CLAW has real advantages over my classes and probably always will. I
am one guy with very little free time. (Hey, my family, community and
Job come first) CLAW is a supported professional commercial product.
I have been the direct recipient from everyone in the Ada community, I
hope others have benefitted from me. I think it is time we start
thinking about growth.
The money will come. The honor will come.. etc. If that is what you
In the mean time would you like a copy of what I am working on so you
can bash it in and WE make it better? Or if CLAW is real open source
with its freedoms, then let me know, so I can get cranking!
---Tom Moran <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> > Also support for RC files is important and executables created by
> > current GNAT version with linked in RC files and NT don't like each
> > other.
> From the installation instructions for CLAW at www.rrsoftware.com
> > If you experience problems running Claw programs on Windows NT,
> > probably run into a bug in GNAT 3.10p1. Windows applications with
> > resources do not work with that version. The problem can be worked
> > around by running Strip (a GNAT provided program) on the executable
> > file. The problem programs will work on Windows 95 without running
> > Strip. Warning: Do not run Strip on executables produced by 3.11
> > versions of GNAT!!
> Perhaps this solves your problem?
> BTW, the "demo" version of Claw is free, and open source, and while
> including all the fancy bells and whistles, it is all by itself a
> non-trivial, useful thick binding to Windows. It really seems a shame
> to me (having spent quite a bit of time working on Claw) for a)
> be multiple re-inventions of the same wheel and b) multiple people
> spending a lot of time doing/waiting for those reinventions. Better
> build on top of one another's work than to attempt each time to start
DO YOU YAHOO!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com