faq
flatforty
contribute
subscribe
configure
search
rdf
main
parent
thread
|
Re: You GOT to be kidding me!!
by anon on Wednesday 31/Mar/2004, @14:04
|
Oh, please - neither of you have the first clue what XAML actually does, and the same (sadly) goes for the author of this article. I really don't like Microsoft or its products, but even having said that I have to admit their implementation of XAML is damn clever.
For your reference, the XAML code is designed to lay out GUI objects. You have this much correct - you can put in tabs, buttons, menu items, etc. All things that XML describes very well.
However, that XAML can then have scripts added to it either in a compiled language (such as C#) or a script language such as JScript. One XAML file can contain a complete application written in VBScript and XAML: both very, very easy (if somewhat verbose and slow) languages. Comparing it to C++ is very stretched, and not accurate - XAML allows you to /fully/ separate design from the code driving it (a place that Qt Designer is rapidly approaching, as opposed to the 95% separation we have now), which means developers can be beavering away in Visual Studio with their C# whilst the designers are pointing and clicking to make the GUI look nice.
As far as I'm concerned, having the GUI defined in XAML and the code written in C# makes life much easier for the Mono developers, so everyone's a winner.
Honestly: did you really think MS made a technology that did nothing but display a fancy GUI? |
|
|
The Fine Print: The following comments
are owned by whomever posted them.
( Reply )
|
Re: You GOT to be kidding me!!
by David on Saturday 03/Apr/2004, @11:51
|
"However, that XAML can then have scripts added to it either in a compiled language (such as C#) or a script language such as JScript. One XAML file can contain a complete application written in VBScript and XAML: both very, very easy (if somewhat verbose and slow) languages. Comparing it to C++ is very stretched, and not accurate - XAML allows you to /fully/ separate design from the code driving it (a place that Qt Designer is rapidly approaching, as opposed to the 95% separation we have now), which means developers can be beavering away in Visual Studio with their C# whilst the designers are pointing and clicking to make the GUI look nice."
Yes I did know that, and it is still rather pointless. It may be of use to Windows developers, but not to others - that was the point of the article.
"Honestly: did you really think MS made a technology that did nothing but display a fancy GUI?"
Yes, and they have.
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
The Fine Print: The previous
comments are owned by whomever posted them.
( Reply )
|
|