Well, if a program downloads some data from the internet, this has nothing to do with the programs which are ran by a web server. They are not web-based applications.
A web-based application is one that runs remotely, on another server, and which can be accessed by a web browser, and not by its own client program.
But this is like the discussion about which sites are Web2.0, and which are not. :-))
Yes, you are right that the site could say which language is better fore some tasks, but that information won't be a true one. It won't be true, because it would probably not say that Java and C# are less productive than Ruby or perl, so the advertising made by big companies like MS, Oracle, IBM, Sun would be more important than a sample source code which is not shown on the page, but hidden in a zip archive.
Anyway, as I told, a single section and specifying the type of program or 2 sections but with the same language on both is OK, but 2 sections and placing some languages incorrectly only on one of them is not ok.
Octavian----- Original Message ----- From: "Jamal Mazrui" <empower@xxxxxxxxx>
To: <programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> Sent: Sunday, October 14, 2007 3:13 PM Subject: Re: Fruitbasket in Perl and Win32::GUI, OO Style I think there should be no division of languages or projects into desktop and web categories, but it's fine to mention, within the description of a language, that one of its strengths is, say, rapid development of GUIs, CGI scripts, web frameworks, etc. VBNET is often used to develop web sites with ASP.NET. Desktop and web applications are also increasingly hybrid in nature -- combining elements of both on the assumption that desktop processing is more efficient or intuitive for some tasks but an Internet connection can be assumed and used productively for retrieving data from anywhere on the Internet. That is another reason that a desktop/web division may be misleading for languages. Jamal On Sun, 14 Oct 2007, Octavian Rasnita wrote:
Date: Sun, 14 Oct 2007 14:56:33 +0300 From: Octavian Rasnita <orasnita@xxxxxxxxx> Reply-To: programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx To: programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: Re: Fruitbasket in Perl and Win32::GUI, OO Style Ok, but in that case it should be made no distinction at all, it should be created a single section, and eventually specify for each program if it is one for the desktop or one for the web. Otherwise, some programs won't be found because they are for the desktop, but they are stored in the section with the programs for the web. But I still think that a distinction should be made, because the usersshould see that a certain language is better for the desktop or for the web if there are more programs for that environment, and they should see that acertain language is not very much used for creating applications for a certain environment, like VB.net for the web for example. I think C++ could also print something to STDOUT, so it could be used for creating programs for the web, and possibly assembly also. Maybe Visual Basic 6 can't be used normally. I heard that there is a project began that should allow to create programsfor the desktop with PHP also. But... how many programs for the desktop aremade (if there are) with PHP, and how many programs are made with VB.net? The users should see how easy is to code in a certain language, and also find out if that language is used by many programmers. That's why I said some time ago that anyone should come and create his own version of this program, no matter if there are other versions made in a certain language. Octavian ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jamal Mazrui" <empower@xxxxxxxxx> To: <programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> Sent: Sunday, October 14, 2007 1:52 PM Subject: Re: Fruitbasket in Perl and Win32::GUI, OO Style I also appreciate Inthane's work on this, and suggest that the distinction between desktop and web languages is not sufficiently meaningful to be worth doing. Besides C++ and Assembler for the desktop and PHP and JavaScript for the web, almost every other language is now commonly used for both desktop and web programs. VBNET and C#, for example, are used to make web sites built with the ASP.NET classes. I think the intent of the distinction was good, but in practical terms, it is no longer a useful, top-level categorization in the project. Just my opinion after some reflection on this issue. Jamal On Sat, 13 Oct 2007, Octavian Rasnita wrote: > Date: Sat, 13 Oct 2007 18:45:35 +0300 > From: Octavian Rasnita <orasnita@xxxxxxxxx> > Reply-To: programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > To: programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > Subject: Re: Fruitbasket in Perl and Win32::GUI, OO Style > > I don't think you need to make 3 sections. You just need to make only 2. > > Thinking from the point of view of the beginner programmer that wants to > start learning a new language, I think that he or she might intend to > create > a certain kind of program. > Maybe the programmer doesn't know yet which would be the best language, > but > he or she knows for sure that wants to create a desktop program or a > program> for the web, so he will look in the section of sample programs for > desktop> or for the web. > > If I'd be in his place, I wouldn't choose a language that is not for the> desktop and not for the web, but that can do both, because I wouldn't > know> if I'll find samples for what I need in that third section. > > So, let's say I want to create a desktop program. Well, I'd look in the > section of the languages that can be used for creating desktop programs. > But I wouldn't find perl there and this is not good. > > If you'll create a third section and I would want to make a program for > the > web, then maybe I will look in the Ruby example because I would see that > it > is for desktop and for the web, but I won't find a version for the web > there, so I won't trust that section anymore, so I'd look only in the > sections that clearly say that are only for the web or only for desktop. > > The fact that you added a word "mostly" in the explanation is absolutly > not> important because nobody would know what he would be able to find in > that> section. > > I have seen that you organized the programming languages, but I don't > think > they are important here. The most important things are the sample > programs, > no matter the programming language.> If a beginner programmer will see and like the code of a certain > program,> he> might want to learn the language that program is made in, no matter > which> is > it, but this only if that program does what he wants. >> So the explanation of what the languages are good for is good, but > should> be > accessible only after the code of the program. > > But anyway, you put some work in this site and we should thank you for > this. > > Even though I think it could be better, I can't recommend to make the > effort> and improve it, because.... (but this is just my opinion), I think that > it> not very helpful at all... for the moment. > > (Not because it is bad or less good, but because maybe the beginner > programmers start learning in a different way... who knows). > > > Octavian > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "inthaneelf" <inthaneelf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > To: <programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Sent: Saturday, October 13, 2007 5:12 PM > Subject: Re: Fruitbasket in Perl and Win32::GUI, OO Style > >> > Octavian, this is why the header for the sections both say "mostly" > > this> > means that many of the languages can be used for both > > > > I did not wish to have to make three distinct sections, its confusing > > enough, but I'll consider doing so. > > > > there, also, is a definition file for each language, which would talk > > about this point as well. > > > > thanks again, > > inthane > > . For Blind Programming assistance, Information, Useful Programs, and > > Links to Jamal Mazrui's Text tutorial packages and Applications, visit > > me > > at: > > http://grabbag.alacorncomputer.com> > . to be able to view a simple programming project in several > > programming> > languages, visit the Fruit basket demo site at: > > http://fruitbasketdemo.alacorncomputer.com > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Octavian Rasnita" <orasnita@xxxxxxxxx> > > To: <programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > Sent: Saturday, October 13, 2007 1:35 AM > > Subject: Re: Fruitbasket in Perl and Win32::GUI, OO Style > > > >> >> Sorry but I think I didn't understand the question. I don't > >> understand> >> what you mean by "idiomatic". > >> > >> And yes, I remember that the FruitBasket in Perl with Win32::GUI was > >> put > >> in the section of languages for the web, which is not correct, and I > >> already told that. > >>> >> FruitBasket versions in perl using Win32::GUI and WXPerl should be > >> put> >> in > >> the section of languages for desktop programs, because in those > >> programs > >> perl is used as a desktop program, and FruitBasket made as a CGI > >> program > >> should be put in the section of languages for the web, because that > >> program is one for the web, just like the one made in Javascript. > >>> >> And one more thing, it is important to let the users know that perl > >> can> >> be used as a language for desktop programs and as a language for the > >> web > >> programs, while other languages cannot, or at least for the moment > >> there > >> are no FruitBasket demos made in those languages. > >> > >> Octavian > >> > >> ----- Original Message ----- > >> From: "Veli-Pekka Tätilä" <vtatila@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > >> To: <programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > >> Sent: Saturday, October 13, 2007 12:19 AM > >> Subject: Re: Fruitbasket in Perl and Win32::GUI, OO Style > >> > >> > >>> Hi Octavian, > >>> About the Win32::GUi version of Fruit Basket in Perl.> >>> Or maybe I simply missed it, since I only looked at the link names > >>> and> >>> read the info blurb mentioning Perl being a server side lang. How > >>> idiomatic code is that, by the way? > >>> > >>> I have a bad, in terms of maintenance, habit of trying to code as > >>> Perlishly and concisely I can. So one thing I've gottten lately into > >>> OO > >>> Perl are initializing the fields of an object by assigning to a hash > >>> slice. Like this (untested): > >>> > >>> @$object{qw|field1 field2|} = (3.14, 42); # whatever. > >>> > >>> In stead of using up two precious statements and the deref arrow. > >>> > >>> -- > >>> With kind regards Veli-Pekka Tätilä (vtatila@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx) > >>> Accessibility, game music, synthesizers and programming: > >>> http://www.student.oulu.fi/~vtatila > >>> > >>> Octavian Rasnita wrote: > >>>> I sent a version made with Win32::GUI in perl, and one in perl as a > >>>> server > >>>> side language, but maybe they are lost... > >>> __________ > >>> View the list's information and change your settings at > >>> //www.freelists.org/list/programmingblind > >>> > >> > >> __________ > >> View the list's information and change your settings at > >> //www.freelists.org/list/programmingblind > >> > >> > > > > __________ > > View the list's information and change your settings at > > //www.freelists.org/list/programmingblind > > > > __________ > View the list's information and change your settings at > //www.freelists.org/list/programmingblind > __________ View the list's information and change your settings at //www.freelists.org/list/programmingblind __________ View the list's information and change your settings at //www.freelists.org/list/programmingblind
__________ View the list's information and change your settings at //www.freelists.org/list/programmingblind __________View the list's information and change your settings at //www.freelists.org/list/programmingblind
