Re: Kparts and Bonobo..

[Erik Bågfors <erik bagfors nu>]

On Fri, 2001-09-14 at 15:28, Weiqi Gao wrote:
> On Fri, 2001-09-14 at 02:56, Erik Bågfors wrote:
> > 
> > At dot.kde.org you can find a link to a document about KDE components.
> > In that document they explain why Kparts is good and why corba and
> > of course bonobo if bad for a desktop.  
> 
> Anybody who tells you CORBA is bad is bound to spend three years to
> reinvent CORBA.  They'd be lucky if what they come up with is anywhere
> near the versatility of CORBA.

That might be true.

> > So.  I would like to know alittle more about the differences between
> > the component-systems.
> 
> KPart is not a component system.  So you cannot compare it with Bonobo.

According to KDE it is..

> > I'm sure that both systems are great technology and I'm not trying to
> > start a flame-war.
> 
> You do realize that you are starting a flame war, don't you?  Why do
> people lie to themselves?

Why?? I'm asking a simple question.  If people cannot answer in their
oppinion without making it into a flamewar I think something is
seriously wrong.  The answers I've gotten so far (from both you and
other people) has in my oppinion not been flamewars.

> > I wanted to ask this question before this article but never got around
> > to do it.
> > 
> > I know next to nothing about KParts and a little more about bonobo but
> > not a whole lot there either.
> 
> The best way to learn Bonobo is to learn two things: COM and CORBA. 
> 
> Excellent books on the subject of CORBA abound.  
>
> [CUT]
> 

Thanks for the information but I've never asked for this :)

> > It seams like the documentation for
> > KParts is a little bit better than the documentation for bonobo.
> 
> Some of the Bonobo documentations and tutorials are a bit dated.  But
> since Bonobo uses two well established technologies, you can pick it up
> quickly even with these documentations.

Ohh..  I don't think I agree.  Outdated documentation sometimes makes
things even harder than without any documentations.  Reading
documentation and doing as they say and nothing works makes people very
frustrated :)

> KParts, on the other hand, was invented haphazadly to make one thing
> happen.  Yes, you can learn it quickly through one tutorial.  But pretty
> soon you will realize that that isn't all.  You have to learn something
> else that they invented to solve another problem.  And then another
> thing, and then another thing.  While existing technologies would have
> solved all of their problems.

Ok, I didn't know this.  Thanks again.
 
> > I'd love to see a "convert your program to a component"-tutorial for
> > bonobo like there is a short one for Kparts.
> 
> There is a Bonobo controls tutorial available from the GNOME CVS.

I've read it and I've tried everything in it. It's good..  But it's not
really what I was looking for..

> > Anyway.  Like I said, I'm not trying to start a flame-war, I'm just
> > curious :)
> 
> Learn CORBA.  Learn COM.  Forget KParts (It jsut doesn't apply
> elsewhere, and I doubt you can find a job doing KParts).

I know CORBA (for c++) but nothing about COM.  I'll try to read up on
that..

> And you started the flame war!

If that's your view on a simple question that's just sad..



Anyway. Thanks for the answer.

/Erik
 
-- 
Erik Bågfors               | erik bagfors nu
Supporter of free software | GSM +46 733 279 273
fingerprint: 6666 A85B 95D3 D26B 296B 6C60 4F32 2C0B 693D 6E32