Re: Fwd: Fw: Re[2]: argv

["Andrew Robinson" <arobinson18 cox net>]

Hi David,

I am here because I have a problem getting GTK+ to work and am seeking
community support. So I was surprised to see this off-the-record email
response from David ...

<A very lengthy but very unhelpful reply, pared down for brevity>

> On 4/15/2016 at 5:03 AM, David Marceau <uticdmarceau2007 gmail com> wrote:

> You should be using 64-bit hardware by now and I encourage you to get some.
> Then try straight GNU/Linux rather than windows.  ArchLinux and Debian
> are the go-to choices in respective order of my preference.
> If all hell breaks loose and I need to use Windows, then MSYS2 is where
> I decide to land and so should you.

> If you learn about assembler,then you'll need to expose yourself to gnu
> assembler because you are eventually going to care about portability.
> Otherwise stick to c++ or golang and forget about assembler and focus
> your efforts on your problems at hand rather than smaller assembler
> instructions.  You're tripping up on very trivial stuff.  arguments.
> You would have overcome this problem in seconds if you had been using
> golang rather than assembler or gcc/g++.  The gtk stuff is doable and
> portable from golang also with gotk3 and go-gtk.

1) All my hardware is 64-bit ... that has nothing to do with my problem.

2) Are you trying to say that GTK+ doesn't work very well in Windows or that
no one in the Linux world wants to support any Windows related issues, and
that is why I should get rid of anything Windows related and move over to
Linux?

3) I do not need to know GNU assembly to understand the workings GTK+ or to
program my app. GNU is cryptic because it deviates from the machine code
language used to document microprocessor operation by ALL microprocessor
manufacturers, so it is very reasonable to not want to learn it or use it.

4) My program is portable, not because it is written in ASM but because it is
a GTK+ program. Since my program is not open source, nobody has to know.

5) A great number of DLLs and apps are 32-bit code and probably will always be
32-bit because <surprise> 32-bit has some advantages that 64-bit does not. I
need some of those 32-bit DLLs as helper functions for my program. 32-bit and
64-bit DLLs cannot be mixed, I don't want to resort to COM objects or some
other such nonsense, so I settled for a 32-bit only solution for my app.

I know you have a problem with what I am doing and why I am doing it, but I am
here to solve my problems, not yours.

The bottom line is, none of your "advice" helps me to fix my "trivial"
problem, it is a dodge and evade of my problem. It still won't work and am I
basically being told to not expect any help because no one will attempt to
reproduce the issue, that no one will actually look into the issue, that I am
using the wrong programming language, that I am using the apparently inferior
Win32 GTK+ libraries, that I should be using a different OS, and then all my
problems would go away. All that advice has done is give me a very good reason
to never want to switch to Linux or any of it's derivatives.

I hope this thread makes the news. I want people to see how horrible the Linux
community is at supporting or encouraging it's customers. Thanks for turning
me off to Linux forever and I hope this thread turns many other people off to
Linux forever too. At least the community "support" I have received here
explains why, even with the extra horrible Win8 and Win10 releases, Linux
STILL cannot make a dent in the desktop OS world -- and never will.

Have a nice day,

Andrew