|
STL Port once you are up and running just works to the point I forget I use it.
These days if you do anything cross platform, I find it pretty hard not to run into open source code. e.g. I write code to cross compile on Windows, Solaris & Linux.
If I need an FTP library in CPP, I don't go and write my own, I go and use a public domain, or open source licenced implementation.
No point in reinventing the wheel.
Saying that I use proprietary components as well. I choose the best for the job.
|
|
|
|
|
It is very difficult to access the serial ports in C# programs which are independent to Windows versions. Tell me the way to do that.
|
|
|
|
|
It's impossible to do that with C#. Every programmer knows you can only access the serial ports in Perl, and then use a C# wrapper. Perhaps you can find a 3-rd party componment written in Perl to use in your C# app.
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
Jeremy Falcon wrote:
Every programmer knows you can only access the serial ports in Perl, and then use a C# wrapper. Perhaps you can find a 3-rd party componment written in Perl to use in your C# app.
So , for my real time comms interface I have to use Perl ? Silly me , I thought I would just use com interop communicate with my com dll .
|
|
|
|
|
I'm not sure if he was just kidding with the "Every programmer knows...." statement or not, but if he wasn't, that was an idiotic statement. --oops sorry, missed the joke icon -- Trev
Your idea sounds like a more reasonable answer. There are/were lots of ActiveX comm controls out there, but I haven't needed one for a long time.
A quick Google revealed this which looks promising...
http://www.scientificcomponent.com/products.htm[^]
HTH
-- modified at 8:35 Thursday 15th September, 2005
|
|
|
|
|
Hi.
I found this site a while ago when I needed serial port communication in my C# app. This is written in VB.NET but it wasn't too difficult to translate into C#. The code uses the WinAPI functions directly by P/Invoke - has worked fine for me - with events to incoming serial data also implemented.
http://www.codeworks.it/net/VBNetRs232.htm[^]
|
|
|
|
|
trevstar wrote:
I'm not sure if he was just kidding with the "Every programmer knows...." statement or not, but if he wasn't, that was an idiotic statement. --oops sorry, missed the joke icon -- Trev
And here I thought that my post was obvious enough that any half-witted programmer would know it's a joke with or without an icon.
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
Guess I'm only quarter-witted. Sorry for my previous post.
Trev
|
|
|
|
|
Hey, no big deal. I don't take much stuff on CP personally anyway. But seriously, I was trying to be obvious. I suppose I need to brush up on my dry sense of humor. 
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
I suspect it was my mood yesterday more than any problem with your sense of humour. What a week... 
Trev
|
|
|
|
|
It is difficult to answer, as many people do have a different meaning when talking about "Open Source"
Did you mean?
1) (L)GPL and all that stuff (forcing you to obey many restrictions)
2) Simply open source as it was even before the GPL was born and is still used by the majority of developers (every code project article source code is open source)
My answer:
1) Definitely Not
2) Definitely
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I try to learn some part of them I needed & use that parts.
I try to write this parts my self,
Iman Ghasrfakhri
|
|
|
|
|
I usually read articles or presentations in CP,in MSDN and in MSDN-TV with purpose NOT to copy and paste specific solutions but to enrich my areas of interest and knowledge and not to "reinvent the wheel".Based on some useful and bright ideas I adapt them on my needs.This adaptation requires thinking, exercising, and hard studying and as a result I gain experience and some good baseline of code which is easily maintainable because I have earned the knowledge hidden beneath the surface.
I see many fellow programmer using all the time other people's components without any will to learn about them.They spent more time surfing the web to find what the are looking for than open their IDE or grab a piece of paper and design a solution.And when the time of maintainance or of curious bug comes around they are completely lost.
If we're talking about GPL the only open source component I've used is MySQL 4.0.18.Initially i was very impressed from the potential and the momentum of this product and i used it in a large-scale project.As the time passed (about 2 years after the deployment of the project) i was largelly disappointed because the rate of the evolvement of MySQL is extremely slow.In addition version 4.1.x had an incompatible storage engine with 4.0.x and version 5.x isn't adequate even for hobbiests.I don't know what's the matter with those folks but i know i can't count on them.
At the time talking we are working on the second version of our project and we have totally got rid off MySQL and we're experiment on Microsoft SQL 2005 and Oracle 10g.The usage of MySQL was a real slap on the face (not in terms of performance but in terms of evolvement) and i seriously doubt if we are going to use a GPL license in the near future.
|
|
|
|
|
I voted No because I don't use Open Source (note capitalization) meaning GPL and all of that "copyleft" stuff that is intended not to be used to make money (ie, for hobbyists only) But I do use Code Project and other freely distributable sources of code all the time.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yep, I agree (although I voted Yes before I saw your post).
I especially use Boost[^] libraries. They are high quality, freely available for any purpose, released under a simple license, and don't fall under "let's change the world" OSS sentiment.
My programming blahblahblah blog. If you ever find anything useful here, please let me know to remove it.
|
|
|
|
|
Nemanja Trifunovic wrote:
Yep, I agree (although I voted Yes before I saw your post).
I vaguely remember that you are a user of UNIX tools (sed, grep, ...). But, of course, I must be mistaken. You would never use those disguisting GPL stuff, right?
|
|
|
|
|
Sloppy Joseph wrote:
I vaguely remember that you are a user of UNIX tools (sed, grep, ...). But, of course, I must be mistaken. You would never use those disguisting GPL stuff, right?
 well put.
/bb|[^b]{2}/
|
|
|
|
|
Sloppy Joseph wrote:
You would never use those disguisting GPL stuff, right?
Sloppy, Sloppy... why are you angry with me? We are talking about using OSS components in our code, aren't we?
Also, most Unix tools (including sed and grep) are older than GNU and are available with different licenses.
My programming blahblahblah blog. If you ever find anything useful here, please let me know to remove it.
|
|
|
|
|
Nemanja Trifunovic wrote:
why are you angry with me?
It could be his time of month.
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
Nemanja Trifunovic wrote:
Sloppy, Sloppy... why are you angry with me?
I nearly choked on my afternoon snack reading this.
Hey don't worry, I can handle it. I took something. I can see things no one else can see. Why are you dressed like that?
- Jack Burton
|
|
|
|
|
Sloppy Joseph wrote:
a user of UNIX tools (sed, grep, ...). But, of course, I must be mistaken. You would never use those disguisting GPL stuff, right?
You might want to look up the history of both unix and sed, grep, etc. All of this was available (and still is), well before the GPL, and all of them are available in non-GPL versions. Look up any of the *BSD's and you'll see that they have a complete application stack whose code is written under the BSD license, not the GPL. UNIX != GPL. Believe it or not there is a wider world out there, both more interesting and more colorful than the one Richard "Tricky Dick" Stallman would have you buy into.
¡El diablo está en mis pantalones! ¡Mire, mire!
Real Mentats use only 100% pure, unfooled around with Sapho Juice(tm)!
SELECT * FROM User WHERE Clue > 0
0 rows returned
Save an Orange - Use the VCF!
|
|
|
|
|
The question is a little vague, too. Did it mean, do you use open source in your *code* or just use it? In most cases, you can use even GPL programs on your own machine, to help you develop or do auxiliary tasks (e.g., Linux, the Gimp, etc) or for internal-only projects.
Now, using GPL in code is a different story. Yes you can use it even for products that make money, you either have to release your modifications back to the open source community, or use it in kind of a loose-coupling sense. Example: it's OK to use Linux as an embedded OS and then build tools/programs on top of it. You would only need to release the source to any changes you make to Linux to get it to run on your device.
The generation of random numbers is too important to be left to chance.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
