Related
What would you suggest would be a good challenge for a programmer to show us her/his skills? I'm thinking of a small demo implementation of a GUI program which would not take too much time to do.
Here are the circumstances: (this should not imply the intention to find programmers here, I think there'd be other forums to do that)
We are planning a project which has a tight time frame but apparently we are short on resources so we want to pull in external developers. The project is targetted to be Qt based (although this is not yet finally set) on the Windows platform. We'd prefer Qt as this allows to use own resources later when features need to be added to the software and we are familiar with the Qt platform.
The project needs to interface with HID USB hardware (writing some data blocks out, reading back the result, within to be guaranteed time frames) and a GUI showing graphs of the analyses.
The main intention however is not to find a Qt programmer (although we would prefer that) but a capable programmer - thus the important part of this question is about the challenge.
Don't ask programmers to write something from scratch as an interview task. It's far too suspect.
Think of the qualities that you want in a developer and then write an application that has all of those things done wrong, and ask them to fix it. For example, if you want an Object Oriented developer, give them an application with the data tables directly bound to the UI and ask them to make it OO - it means they can show you in a few minutes that they have OO skills.
By starting with a sample application that is "fixed up" with all the problems, it makes it really easy to compare the results and it will be a much faster test than if you ask people to write something from scratch.
Don't forget to make the test measurable. Score each thing you are testing as well as how long it takes.
Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 6 years ago.
Improve this question
The language site: http://processing.org/
What are people using Processing for? I have the opportunity to learn this in a classroom setting and am wondering if it will be a good use of my time.
Yes, it is useful and not a waste of time. I'm using Processing mainly for building proof-of-concepts for visualisations and graphic experiments. The time between an idea in my head and working code on my laptop is small, mainly because Processing does not throw too many obstacles in that course.
The ease of experimenting with things in Processing is an advantage in learning to program. Processing is actually a front-end to Java programs. At run-time the Processing code is translated to Java code.
Processing comes with a small but capable development environment (IDE), excellent documentation, a large library of extensions and a significant set of examples and demos.
Finally, I strongly recommend the book Processing: A Programming Handbook for Visual Designers and Artists by Casey Reas and Ben Fry, the authors of Processing. It's a beautiful book, carefully edited and full of sources for inspiration.
Processing has been used for hundreds of high-end projects in a wide range of fields, from multimedia installations to information visualization. It is not a toy or an educational exercise, despite its roots as a teaching tool.
The core application framework simplifies most common multimedia needs (OpenGL, Quicktime, PDF export, camera capture), removing project overhead involved in the boring task of setting up basic applications.It uses an extensible code structure that has allowed the creation of dozens of useful libraries for everything from 3D import / export to complex geometry synthesis.
So no, it is not a waste of time.
A references from my own work:
Stockspace
Anything that beautiful could never be a waste of time. :) It's probably the leading tool in its space, which would be something like, "Declarative languages for visualizing data". (Though I'm told it can do more than that.) Its got a O'Reilly book - that's always a great sign.
'Useful' and 'Beautiful' do not describe the library (processing is not a language), but the programs written in it. They are usually beautiful, but can be useful, too. Perhaps browsing it's showcase can give you a hint about some useful programs. Processing is very well suited for visualization apps, so it can indeed be useful for that.
Now, that's for the usefulness of the applications. For the usefulness of programming them, I think it's a pretty cool way to show more visually how some fundamental concepts of programs work, which you may find enjoyable. Processing is being used a lot nowadays to teach fundamentals of programming; it'd be cool to learn recursion by making fractals.
I have used processing for many interactive installations and found it really useful, because you get real fast results. Programming visual effects is really easy and elegant.
Some examples to watch:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ziv8Q5N7mSU
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zrT5uJox0J0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y58wBAp7mac
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EZp5HsFKxCs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d4LcfsHQnYw
If you are dealing with a lot of data (many bitmaps, videos and sound) you might consider its limitations. I was happy to use it and will continue using it for certain projects.
So as a conclusion: processing is no waste of time. It's a really useful language for real world applications (in its own domain of course).
I agree with what the other posters have said, but I would add that every development tool has advantages and disadvantages. While it is easy to jump right in and visualize stuff with processing, the drawback is that it is hard to incorporate processing code into another project. Tools are in development to make this easier, but if you want a graphical environment that works in your application, all the time that processing saves you when prototyping is mostly lost in the re-adaptation of the code or getting it to work.
Processing is definitely useful for many purposes.
I think the post on "Processing for Programmers" by Eliot Lash answers your question very well, and in much detail. I'll give some highlights based on my experience below, but I recommend you have a look at the post, which also covers practicalities.
Your question has to do with the perception of Processing as a simple programming language and environment that doesn't require much experience to use. However, Processing is also a neat tool that makes life easier for more experienced developers, and the skills you develop with Processing can be definitely useful outside the "classroom" or prototyping contexts.
First off, as a programming language, Processing acts merely as a "layer" on top of Java that simplifies things. All Processing code is translated to Java code first. This means you can write Java code and import Java libraries in your Processing code, within (or outside) the Processing IDE. Pedagogically, this helps Processing serve as a "gateway" programming language into Java and other fully-featured languages. You can start coding with Processing, slowly make way into Java in a familiar environment, and then progress to more advanced tools.
You can also import Processing functionality into your Java projects (see here and here). This lets you exploit the speed and simplicity of Processing for multimedia etc., in the context of complex applications that require a more fully-featured programming language.
On top of these innate features, over the years, people have developed tools, libraries, etc. that can make your Processing skills useful in many contexts. Some examples:
Web/browser: Processing.js is a JavaScript library that lets you run Processing code verbatim in the browser. p5.js is a library for writing JavaScript based on Processing principles and functionality.
Mobile: You can develop Android apps using Processing by using the IDE in "Android mode".
Electronics, IoT...: The Arduino programming language and environment are very, very similar to Processing.
I really want to create a stunning-looking GUI desktop application that looks like, for example:
Mac OS X interface
Picasa desktop client on windows
IPhone apps
Office 2007
I've mostly been programming GUI using Qt/Swing/WinForm
and I'm tired of creating so plain looking GUI, lol.
So I was thinking about diving into stuff like:
jQuery
WPF/C#
iPhone SDK
Silverlight
Adobe Air/Flex
Just to get some ideas on how to create really cool looking UI.
Does that sound like a good list? Any developers here that could share what platform they use to create very cool looking desktop app?
On a sidenote, I really wonder what developers at Apple / Microsoft use to develop their own cool-looking software.
EDIT
A lot of responses talk about the importance of usability over "cool-looking"..
I totally agree that usability and simplicity are the most important aspects of user interface design. I've been doing GUI development for a while now (> 3 years), so that I understand.
But using cool-looking UI also improves user experience + it could make big difference on whether or not your software sells.
I mean, otherwise why would Microsoft/Apple try to make their OS UI look "cooler" everytime there's a new version? Why would websites like pragprog.com, or versionsapp.com. make their websites look like that? Basically you kill 2 birds with one stone: stunnning-looking UI + super usability (because it looks simple and intuitive).
That is what I'm striving for. And as far as I know, I cannot achieve that using Qt/Winform. Most of the books I have read just show you how to make average-looking (read: 1990's) UI. I want to learn how to create cool-looking UI. And the only place I see cool-looking UIs these days are the technology I list above. I'm not enamored with any technology; but I just want to know how things are done in other technology to see if I could apply them to the technology I'm using, or see if I could use those technology in my line of work.
An example: if I were to pick between this UI and this UI, I probably would pick the latter, if just based on looks alone.
Functionally, they are just the same UI; they both allow you to keep track of your time. They both contain buttons and textboxes, etc. But the fact that they look different, also differentiate them in terms of attractiveness.
So in all, I think the "ice on the cake" is very important. I would say it's the thing you strive for after you are certain you have a totally intuitive, usable UI.
I think that the major reason many people suck at designing interfaces is that they consider them to be graphic design. It is not. The core of creating a good user interface is a bit like creating a good API – the interface has to be conceptually consistent, hard to misuse, easy for common tasks.
Wanting to design something cool because you are “tired of plain GUI” is a perfect recipe for disaster. If for nothing else then because consistency is a crucial part of a good UI. If each application wanted to stay out of the crowd, the whole thing would be an unusable mess.
It is almost unfortunate that Mac OS X looks that good, because then people start to think you can create a good interface by animating it or sprinkling some graphics on the top of it. The graphical part, the “cool” of the design is just the icing on the cake. If you really want to design good interfaces, stay true to the environment, respect local human interface guidelines. And maybe read Apple’s Human Interface Guidelines to get a feeling where the problems are and what can be done to solve them.
I know this sounds much more boring than filling gradients in Photoshop, but it’s the only right approach to take if you really want to create a top-notch interface.
the key to a stunning graphical user interface is twofold:
it still has to be useful to the users, and that involves a lot of hard work, study, paper prototypes, user interviews, usability testing, et al.
hire a really really good graphic artist
Neither step is optional. If you -the programmer- also happen to be a really good graphic artist, that's fine - but the vast majority are not, and no amount of fancy tools and photoshop tutorials will replace the talent and training that real artists bring to the table.
I don't mean to sound harsh, but most programmers are terrible GUI designers. Myself included. It's ok to leave art to the pros. ;-)
I'm all for WPF/Silverlight, but it really about the platform that you need to support.
The real deal is your own talent, as WPF is a powerful tool, if you ain't got the talent to use it, it will look like improved winforms. (Also check out the Expression Studio from MS - which enhance what you can get out of WPF).
If you want to know more about UI you can read this books:
About Face 3: The Essentials of Interaction Design
The Inmates Are Running the Asylum
UI development is not about technologies. In some cases console is the best solution.
We can get commercial GUI add-ons like Telerik which also supports Mono as well.
Regardless of the UI technology, you will of course be well-served to adopt a programming style where the look and logic of the app are as decoupled as possible. This allows you maximal flexibility to design and evolve the look of your application (the View) while potentially requiring very few code changes in the back-end (the Model or ViewModel).
While possible using all UI technologies, it's particularly easy to execute this in the case of WPF/Silverlight/Moonlight via the MVVM programming style, due to the succinctness of databinding (very little boilerplate "glue" code).
Some years ago I used to program in VB6, I really liked it because it was very simply and fast, when VB.net came out, I abandoned it because they changed a lot of things.
I wonder if after all this years there's a new language or IDE that helps programming in an easier and faster way than VB6.
I'm not very interested in academic/personal issues like, very high performance, great movility through OSs, open source, etc. I would like to know if there's is something to program small and medium desktop apps. in an very easy and fast way.
Excuse me if my english isn't very clear.
Edit answering Nicholas:
Well, I must admit that I didn't try VB.Net too much, I was a little disappointed because I would had to learn a lot of new things and I've had learned VB6 not so long before (in that moment).
VB.Net is the natural progression of VB6, and has a lot of free tools and resources online to get started. Microsoft even provides a free development environment as well as a free database for development/bundling in your applications.
Check out this website for information and download links on all the free Microsoft software.
Also, you said you tried VB.Net and didn't like it-- I'd be curious to know why? Yes, there's a little learning curve, but the abundance of getting started information on the internet surely can help that. I was a bit overwhelmed by .NET at first (particularly ASP.Net) not seeing the value in switching/learning a new language.
I always felt Microsoft Access was far and away the best for this kind of requirement.
edit - I realize this isn't a politically correct answer. But the total package of a built in DB, a great GUI development package, a great report generator (far superior to crystal reports, for example), the easy development of tables and queries, all put in one friendly package, make it nearly trivial to develop with. For rapid development, it's the best I've used.
FWIW, I do Java, C++, C, VB4/6, ASP, JSP, Perl, PHP, CSS/ DHTML, JavaScript, Pascal, Fortran, Kenemy and Kurtz Basic, BAL, unix shell scripting, Oracle, mySql, RPG III, COBOL, some proprietary stuff, various macros, various distributed technology, Job control language, CPL, etc. etc. I got out of developing in Access because of scalability limitations.
Powerbasic may be to your liking -
http://www.powerbasic.com/
One of the easiest languages to learn and use is Python.
FLEX / AS3 / MXML / AIR (tnx le dorfier) comes very close to that VB6 feel from many years ago. But understands stuff like CSS and produces output that works in browsers on any platform (or desktop with AIR). You write code and run it, the coding cycle is very fast. And AS3 is at least as powerful as VB6 ever was, plus there are myriad add-ons and libraries to support all sorts of applications, all the major web-services, database interface, animation, video, 3D, auto-generation of PHP code, etc.etc.etc...
And Flex Builder 3 is free for students and educators.
alt text http://www.infoworld.com/infoworld/img/17TC-adobe-flex-builder.jpg
Python or Ruby.
Dynamic languages has a number of advantages (and disadvantages) but for what you propose they seem perfect.
I would recommend python or ruby bindings of a high level toolkit as a perfect environment. For instance Qt library gives most functionality you would need and dynamic languages let you easy experimentation
Microsoft has a new dialect of BASIC called Small Basic. From the website:
Small Basic is ... a small and easy to learn
programming language in a friendly and
inviting development environment,
Small Basic makes programming a
breeze. ...
Small Basic derives its inspiration
from the original BASIC programming
language, and is based on the
Microsoft .NET platform. It is really
small with just 15 keywords ...
The Small Basic development
environment ...provides
powerful modern environment features
like Intellisense™ ...
The first two versions of VB.NET had serious shortcomings compared to Visual Basic 6. However most of these issues has been fixed since Visual Studio 2005. Today, for new projects, I feel that everything that made VB6 so easy to use is available with VB.NET plus you get new language constructs, and the .NET framework. There also refactoring, and the VB Power Pak which brings back the older simple to use print engine.
Of course there is a learning curve involved. But no more than the leap from QuickBASIC/PDS to VB 1. If you have to maintain or transfer an older project then the differences between VB6 and VB.NET are much more serious.
Finally there is the Mono Project which support the VB compiler. This provides a degree of relative immunity from Microsoft deciding to break backwards again.
You could try FreeBASIC.
It's syntax is very similar to that of VB and it is an actively worked on open-source project, it is also portable across different platforms.
You can grab a download here and there are several exemplary works that can be found here.
If it already wasn't done I'd recommend python. It's one of the easiest languages to learn.
My first language was Pascal and I think it's also one of the easiest languages and with Delphi getting popular again I think it's a very good alternative to VB6.
I've always found Delphi to be easier than VB despite popular belief.
take a look at Lua
very small core language, the whole documentation is a single (very readable) webpage. you can easily learn the basics in a weekend.
very good (small) books with good tips.
very helpful community.
very fast, both with the standard bytecode VM, and the JIT.
used a lot in games, both because it's fast and easy to embed in the application, and because it's easy to explain to players interested in extending the game.
readable sources.
MIT license, use for whatever you like, no strings attached.
Perhaps Clarion is what you're looking for? Personally, I don't have much experience with it, but you can build some nice apps with virtually no coding skills.
I think C# is a very good language to program GUI apps quick and easy.
While this might not be a complete answer to your question, I would recommend spending some time learning a more complex language (Objective-C, Java, C#, etc). With the experience you learn with OOP design patters etc, in the future you won't have to shop around for the "easiest" language to program with.
visual basic.NET is much more easier and have complete features than VB6 as I've experienced.
I recently messed around with Microsoft Lightswitch and found it extremely VB like. Very fast for binding to a database and generating forms, grids, etc.
More than 10 years after this question was asked, the best answer is...
...to continue using the VB6 programming language.
VB6 still works on Windows 10 and Windows Server 2019. Just as it has since Windows 98.
Microsoft's support policy for VB6 is here VB6 support policy
Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 5 years ago.
Improve this question
I have experience writing console and network client/server applications in C and C++, but I know next to nothing about using the win32 visual API, MFC, Qt, wxWidgets, etc. Where is a good place to start, and what method should I specialize in, so as to be future ready and robust?
This is a rather broad question, as programming GUI applications in Windows can be done in so many ways.
There are two main parts to developing any GUI app: the language and the API/framework. Considering you're interested in learning to build Windows GUI apps, the language isn't really a point of focus for you. Hence, you should pick a language you already know and work with a framework or API that can be harnessed by your chosen language.
If you want to use C you're pretty much restricted to dealing with the Win32 API yourself, in which case reading Petzold or Richter would be great places to start. The Win32 API can be quite daunting, but it's well worth the effort to learn (imho). There are plenty of tutorials on Win32 on the web, and there's always MSDN, with a complete reference/guide to the Win32 API. Make sure you cover not just the API, but other areas such as resources/dialogs as they are building blocks for your Win32 application.
If you want to use C++ you have all of the options that you have when using C plus a few others. I'd recommend going with the Win32 API directly, and then moving on to a known framework such as MFC, Qt, wxWindows or GTK so that you can spend less time working with boilerplate code and instead focus on writing your application logic. The last 3 options I just listed have the added benefit of being cross-platform, so you don't have to worry too much about platform-specific issues. Given that you said you want to work with Windows, I'll assume you're keen to focus on that rather than cross-platform -- so go with MFC, but spend some time with the Win32 API first to get familiar with some of the concepts.
When dealing with MFC and the Win32 API, it's a good idea to try and get a solid understanding of the terminology prior to writing code. For example, you need to understand what the message pump is, and how it works. You need to know about concepts such as "owner-drawn controls", and subclassing. When you understand these things (and more), you'll find it easier to work with MFC because it uses similar terminology in its class interfaces (eg. you need to know what "translate messages" means before you can understand how and when to use PreTranslateMessage).
You could also use Managed C++ to write .NET GUI applications, but I've read in a few places that Managed C++ wasn't really intended to be used in this manner. Instead it should be used as a gateway between native/unmanaged code and managed code. If you're using .NET it's best to use a .NET language such as VB.NET or C# to build your GUIs.
So if you are going to use .NET, you currently have the choice of the WinForms library, or WPF. I personally feel that you'd be wasting time learning to build WinForms applications given that WPF is designed to replace it. Over time WPF will become more prevelant and Winforms will most likely die off. WPF has a much richer API set, and doesn't suffer from many of the limitations that Winforms does. If you do choose this route, however, you'll no doubt have to learn XAML, which is a markup language that drives WPF applications. This technology is coming of age, and there are many great places to learn about it. First, there are sites such as LearnWPF, and DrWPF which have some really great articles. Secondly, there are plenty of quality books on the topic.
So, to sum up, once you've picked your language and tech, the path is actually quite easy. Just pick up a book or two, read some blogs, get into some code samples.. and most importantly ... write code. Keep writing, keep making mistakes, and keep learning from them.
As a final note...
In other words, Silverlight. If you don't want to go the MS route you might give Adobe's Flash/Flex a look see. Both Silverlight and Flash/Flex build RIA's. Which I think is where we are headed. They days of Office like apps are numbered
I don't agree at all. Silverlight is not the same as WPF. Silverlight is web-specific, and only has a subset of WPF's features. Given that the question asks for Windows GUI apps, Flash/Flex Rich Internet Apps are not really a fitting suggestion. I also don't agree that the days of Rich Client Applications (such as office) are numbered at all.
I hope that helps. Good luck :)
I don't know if I'd call it a good place to start, but if you want to be future ready, take a look at the windows presentation foundation which is built entirely for the purpose of programming GUI's for windows
My first experience writing simple GUI applications for Windows was with C# and Visual Studio. The GUI-building interface is a simple drag and drop deal that generates skeleton methods based on potential user actions. I only did fairly basic programming with this, but I imagine it would be an excellent place to start to learn the basics and extend into the more advanced capabilities as you go.
There are plenty of online Win32 tutorials:
http://www.zeusedit.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1218
There are plenty of compilers to choose from:
http://www.zeusedit.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=238
I would also recommend getting the Borland Win32 SDK documentation in WinHelp file format:
http://www.zeusedit.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=7
It only covers the bare basics of the Win32, but when starting, this can be helpful as it is less daunting and less bloated than the MSDN.
I'd never go down the Silverlight, Flash/Flex or any similar route. It does look nice, but the main problem is that the code of the engine that runs it is completely closed-box and controlled by a single company. Take, for example 64bit versions of both of those. If some new platform emerges, you won't be able to migrate your existing code to it.
For business apps, Windows Forms is very mature. It provides a gentle path from auto-generating a lot for you into allowing fine-grained control and rolling your own. There are tons of high-quality third party controls and a large body of examples, docs, etc out there. It's hard to run into a problem that someone else hasn't solved. I highly recommend acquiring some background Win32 knowledge (e.g. Petzold) as the WinForms framework lives on top of it.
I have no WPF experience, but from the sample apps I've seen it looks like a good choice for apps whose interfaces would benefit from more graphical metaphors. So if you're doing a banking app, probably not worth the extra design overhead. But if you're doing, say, a warehouse management app it could be improved by dropping pretty boxes into pretty bins.
#StephenCox: wrong answer to the wrong question. OP is asking about desktop client apps, and moreover, WPF != Silverlight.
For a simple starting point to get your head around the "event-driven" nature basically all frameworks are created around look at FLTK.
Here are some quick starting videos Link
For professional use I'd recommend Qt, expensive but often worth it in commercial situations.
Since you are already familiar with C and C++ I would recommend learning how to write a simple Windows GUI app using Charles Petzold's book. It will give you the fundamental understanding of how Windows works. It's good to understand that most everything that you see is a window (a button is a window for example) and that these windows respond to messages. I wouldnt' spend a lot of time on this though and you don't necessarily need to do this first if you are going to chose WPF. I just think it's good to have a basic understanding of this.
There was a good podcast recently on .Net Rocks called "Kate Gregory Develops in C++ for Vista!" on there she recommends that someone starting out now should not use/learn MFC (even though it has been recently updated).
As far as getting ready for the future you need to learn WPF, but it isn't complete yet, so depending on the kinds of client side apps you want to create, you will probably need to learn WinForms. The majority of people aren't using WPF yet, so it's a good time to start learning. I think you will find it easier using C# to learn it instead of doing managed code with C++.
Get your basics right first. Best tutorial I've found is: http://winprog.org/tutorial/start.html
After that, although the homepage is hatefully distasteful, the tutorial pages are good in content and aesthetics: http://www.tenouk.com/cplusmfcdotnet.html
Then of course there's MSDN.