That is a valid concern. On the other hand, win32 has a strong developer community with 20+ years of legacy as the primary API of Windows. Now only if Microsoft hadn't try to screw its own developers by trying to push a new framework every 5 years.
It does but as you say due to the emperor's new clothes every few years, the loyalty isn't there now. I know of no companies doing greenfield desktop dev that are using any of their tech. It's all Qt, CEF, python/wx and JavaFX. Even the financial companies we deal with who were pretty heavy with the WPF are canning it next cycle.
Incumbent MFC, Winforms and WPF stuff will live as long as VB6 did (and still does) though.
Edit as HN won't let me reply (submitting too fast). In Europe and JavaFX also has hardware acceleration as does CEF as it uses Chrome's rendering engine.
>> Even the financial companies we deal with who were pretty heavy with the WPF are canning it next cycle.
Where are you based? What are they planning to adopt?
My company is consulting a couple of hedge funds in New York and they have no plans of replacing WPF for their trading apps.
The desktop CLR VM plus proper GPU acceleration makes WPF faster than any alternative (when avoiding binding). As far as I'm aware no other UI toolkit comes anywhere close.
But it does, it just hides the link. All you have to do is to go to the child's comment by clicking the time link, then you'll get a reply box. In your case the comment you probably want to reply to is this: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10416018
It really is surprisingly bad, isn't it? I recently was involved in a continuous deployment system targeting Windows. We simply couldn't get WinRM to reliably upload fast and ended up installing SSH everywhere.
Having worked on that code (in Packer) - the WinRM protocol is completely unsuitable for use as an SCP replacement. It's amazing it works at all even for small files! The actual "winrmcp" implementation is here https://github.com/packer-community/winrmcp if you're interested in the inner workings.
OK, but that code (cp.go) uploads base64 chunks of 8K and echo's them to a file and decodes when done. That surely isn't the real WinRM file copy implementation right?
Well... I just went looking for how it's implemented and holy shit I don't think they considered this case. Top results say "use a file share". Wow. I feel less inadequate.
Yep definitely the worst thing ever. Not just that though; everything. I've lost so much hair in the last few months over trying to get a CD environment up on windows.
It's not that painful to write in large quantities, at least no more so than other static languages. And (given the IDE support), it's significantly easier to refactor code in Java than a dynamic language.
> It's not that painful to write in large quantities, at least no more so than other static languages. And (given the IDE support), it's significantly easier to refactor code in Java than a dynamic language.
Java does not have type inference, does it? That alone makes it more painful than other static languages.
In certain situations, like some generics declarations, and in the lambda syntax. Overall, no.
Even still, it's only a bit of typing, which has never really bothered me. Once typed, the available refactoring tools make it super simple to edit, and I find that I spend way more time editing code than creating it from whole cloth.
Yeah, I remember reading about it a couple of months (years?) ago and being very surprised and impressed. The details: https://sqlite.org/threadsafe.html
(from Yosemite's license, but I can't imagine that Apple have improved it):
C. TO THE MAXIMUM EXTENT PERMITTED BY APPLICABLE LAW, THE APPLE SOFTWARE AND SERVICES ARE PROVIDED “AS IS” AND “AS AVAILABLE”, WITH ALL FAULTS AND WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, AND APPLE AND APPLE'S LICENSORS (COLLECTIVELY REFERRED TO AS “APPLE” FOR THE PURPOSES OF SECTIONS 7 AND 8) HEREBY DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES AND CONDITIONS WITH RESPECT TO THE APPLE SOFTWARE AND SERVICES, EITHER EXPRESS, IMPLIED OR STATUTORY, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES AND/OR CONDITIONS OF MERCHANTABILITY, SATISFACTORY QUALITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, ACCURACY, QUIET ENJOYMENT, AND NON-INFRINGEMENT OF THIRD PARTY RIGHTS.
D. APPLE DOES NOT WARRANT AGAINST INTERFERENCE WITH YOUR ENJOYMENT OF THE APPLE SOFTWARE AND SERVICES, THAT THE FUNCTIONS CONTAINED IN, OR SERVICES PERFORMED OR PROVIDED BY, THE APPLE SOFTWARE WILL MEET YOUR REQUIREMENTS, THAT THE OPERATION OF THE APPLE SOFTWARE OR SERVICES WILL BE UNINTERRUPTED OR ERROR-FREE, THAT ANY SERVICES WILL CONTINUE TO BE MADE AVAILABLE, THAT THE APPLE SOFTWARE OR SERVICES WILL BE COMPATIBLE OR WORK WITH ANY THIRD PARTY SOFTWARE, APPLICATIONS OR THIRD PARTY SERVICES, OR THAT DEFECTS IN THE APPLE SOFTWARE OR SERVICES WILL BE CORRECTED. INSTALLATION OF THIS APPLE SOFTWARE MAY AFFECT THE AVAILABILITY AND USABILITY OF THIRD PARTY SOFTWARE, APPLICATIONS OR THIRD PARTY SERVICES, AS WELL AS APPLE PRODUCTS AND SERVICES.
+ the usual warnings about not being suitable for use in nuclear facilities, aircraft or air traffic control, life support & weapons systems.
(I wonder if they'll be adding self-driving cars to that list?)
I'm not sure if this is also true in the US, but the ability to revoke a licence is implicit by law in many places - though the revoker may be liable for any losses caused by the revocation.
Although when I went through school, A level mathematics didn't even touch anything past polynomials and physics didn't go much past classical mechanics and energy. Now they're all over calculus and quantum mechanics!
