I am working on a Java application primarily on English but also hope to support Indian languages like Hindi, Telugu and Gujarati. I am wondering what can be a good strategy for this.
I have seen I18N projects in Latin script based languages but Hindi uses Devanagri script so it's a little more complicated.
Has anyone done anything close to this ?
To be honest, the scripts and languages you mentioned are not necessary very common in programming. Since you didn't mention whether it will be desktop or web application, it will be quite hard to give you any advice apart from use latest Java (7) and ICU (49.1 or even 50M2) version.
That's because this releases support newer version of the Unicode Standard, and it will play a role here.
BTW. You might want to know, that the Unicode Consortium is working on better support for Indian scripts. Therefore developing applications with this languages in mind will be easier in the future, for now you will probably struggle a bit.
I have couple of application written in PyQt4 where I've used standard Python gettext library for internationalization and localization of GUI. It works good for me. But I've selected gettext just because I've already had knowledge and experience of gettext usage, and zero of experience with Qt4 tr() approach.
Now I'd like to better compare both approaches and understand what I'm missing by using gettext instead of QObject.tr, and does there any serious reason why I should not use gettext for Qt4/PyQt4 applications?
In my understanding advantages of using gettext are:
GNU gettext is mature and it seems to be standard de-facto in GNU/Linux world.
There is enough special editors for PO files to simplify translators work, although textual nature of PO templates makes it not strictly necessary.
There is even web services available which can be used for collaborative translations.
gettext is standard Python library, so I don't need to install anything special to use it in runtime.
It has very good support for singular/plural forms selection via ngettext().
What I see as advantages of QObject.tr():
This is native technology for Qt4/PyQt4 so maybe it will work better/faster (although I have no data to prove).
The messages to translate may have additional context information which will help translators to choose the best variants for homonym words, e.g. the english word "Letter" can be translates as "Character", "Mail" or even kind of "Paper size" depending on the actual context.
What I see as disadvantages of QObject.tr() vs gettext:
I did not found in the Qt documentation how's supported singular/plural selection there.
Qt4 TS translation template is in XML format and therefore more complex to edit without special editor (QT Linguist) and it seems there is no other third-party solutions or web services. So it would require for translators to learn new tool (if they are already familiar with PO tools).
But all the items above are not critical enough to clearly say that any tool is better of other. And I don't want to start flame war about what is better because it's very subjective. I just want to know what I missing as pros and cons of QObject.tr() vs gettext.
One simple reason to use QObject.tr() is:
It saves you the need to install gettext on Windows, making cross-platform work a bit easier.
I try to have as little binary dependencies as possible on Windows.
All have their pros and cons, but to define them more clearly you would have to define first if you're targeting a mobile environment or a desktop environment.
Within our company we use different methods simply because the ideal solution does not exist yet.
For desktop development we're using PO files simply because the buttons are not scaled and therefore text will fit.
For mobile development, the translation of a string depends on the button size which could be different on landscape and portrait devices.
So this complicates it a little because a PO file can just have 1 translation of a certain word.
So we selected XLIFF for this, so we could assign unique ID's to a string.
This is not an easy task as well, because there are no good solutions to convert .RC files to XLIFF files.
(Because current tools convert ALL strings between "" which is of course unwanted behavior).
So I wrote a converter for this task.
However, when thinking of localization, then plural forms are very important so not having this is not a good localization solution.
Therefore, I would say to go for PO gettext.
Greetings,
Floris.
At the current time, Qt does not handle plural forms when you're making use of QT_TRANSLATE_NOOP
You could add that args are managed differently...
With Gettext, we can do
_("Hello %(name)s from %(city)s") % {person.__dict__}
whereas in PyQt, we do
self.tr("Hello %1 from %2").arg(person.name).arg(person.city)
OK, so we're writing our MFC application to make use of the built-in localization support with satellite DLL's since MFC 7. Everything seem to be working fine, except that my Windows 7 Enterprise Edition install with MUI support and using a Swedish UI instead of an English UI still displays the English UI in our application.
The application uses Swedish as its default language, with an English localization DLL in the form AppNameENU.dll, so MFC is actually intentionally switching to English language under these circumstances, as if it's not caring for the user choice in the MUI-enabled Windows OS, and only the default shipping language of the Windows install?
From the MSDN page on this (the link above), I read it as MFC should actually take these settings into account though, but I'm not 100% sure. Can someone please clarify?
It's because the MFC support for language selection has a design bug: It will decide to load resources from the exe only if no DLL match user OR system language.
In your case: It sets up its (ordered) list of languages as such:
Swedish (User language)
English (System language)
Then it looks up your DLLs (Bug: only the dlls, not the exe!): No match for Swedish. But there's a match for English!
Solution: Use my CLanguageSupport class. It works fine even in your use case.
Feel free to use it. You'll need only a couple of minutes to incorporate it into your app and it uses the exact same DLL scheme as the one you already implemented. (Hint: Don't forget the step where you must get rid of the CWinApp::InitInstance() call!)
In addition, if you are interested (this is optional), you can get an automatic languages menu to let user pick his own preference in case the default is not what he wants.
And if you're looking for a great tool to help you manage your translations, think appTranslator ;-)
HTH,
I am working on a new small utility desktop application but I am not really able to choose the GUI framework to use. I have worked on both JAVA,C# and C++, so language is not really a constraint. My criteria are:-
A very well designed architecture, something like QT. It's better if it follows typical C++ design methodologies.
Layout management should be easy, intuitive and not really cumbersome. I hate adjusting pixels on screen.
Its license should be open.
It should look good :)
Mentioned QT seems to comply to all your requirements. QT has "deploy everywhere" attribute, whilst Java needs no deploying at all (it depends on what is use of your utility).
Ad. 2 QT has really convenient GUI designer.
Ad. 3 LGPL. Usually it is enough.
Ad. 4 It is always matter of taste. IMO QT4 looks awesome under linux, but it's windows look'n'feel is correct at best. It's strong point is, that without additional tweaks it almost everywhere looks native.
I've been using Swing, and it works fine. NetBeans (a decent IDE by itself) even supports graphical GUI building.
It's well designed (basically
everything is done with listeners,
functions that are registered for a
certain event). It has bindings, so
you don't have to write code to set
up a value in a text field or read
it out
Layout is not perfect, but
acceptable within NetBeans. It's
WYSIWYG (almost). Look-and-feel can
be changed on the fly.
License is free. Source-code is not
available, I think.
Looks fine on Windows and Linux,
less so on OSX.
You could always try SWT. The advantages of Java with the standard L&F of supported operating systems.
Well designed. Lots of
documentation, and very easy to
develop with. (If you know Swing,
you can pick up SWT in no time.)
I believe layout managers do exist
that support SWT. I'm not positive
about this though, as I typically
don't use layout managers too much.
Uses the Eclipse Public
License. Should meet most of
your requirements.
From Wikipedia on SWT:
SWT is written in Java. To display GUI elements, the SWT implementation accesses the native GUI libraries of the operating system using JNI (Java Native Interface) in a manner that is similar to those programs written using operating system-specific APIs. Programs that call SWT are portable, but the implementation of the toolkit, despite the fact that it is written in Java, is unique for each platform.
Hope that helps you.
I'd suggest wxWidgets if you want to program in C++ or wxPython (the python language binding of wxWidgets if you know or don't mind learning Python.
Architecture is similar to QT I think.
Layout using sizers. Quite easy once you get the hang of it.
Liberal open source license.
Widgets are native on all platforms (Windows, Mac OS X, Linux).
my background: i've been developing web applications using php and javascript for the past ten years. before that, i've developed applications using turbo pascal for DOS. in my opinion application and web application development are two different kinds of development (at least it's what i think when i remember back the old days of DOS application development).
now i am in the need to go back to "normal" application development for various reasons. the application i want to build needs a GUI and it has to run on osx and windows. as mac os user it would be very nice for me to get an application as result, that really feels like an osx application. i don't need any special UI components: an explorer/finder like tree, a datagrid and some form-elements would be enough for my needs.
now the problem is, that i don't know where to start: i would classify me as newbie, because it's that long time since i last developed anything other than a web application. are there any recommendations of programming languages and gui toolkits with a not to steep learning curve? or can you recommend any book i should read for getting into cross-plattform osx/windows app development?
many thanks!
thanks everyone! i think i'll have a look at realbasic!
Edit Nov 2011 - a retraction
Most of what I say below is still true however I have now got serious reservations about recommending REALbasic for anyone trying to release commercial-quality applications. To save me remembering to edit this post later, see if RealSoftware have managed to release a robust version of their IDE using the Cocoa version of their frameworks. If not, be very cautious.
It's with a heavy heart that I write this because I still really like the language and think the framework and IDE are well-done. The problem is apparently one of under-capitalization and possibly a software development culture inside the company that consistently fails to deal with a bug regression problem. Many bugs are fixed each release but there appears to be a huge tax on the developers in the number of introduced bugs. They have a very small team for the complexity of the product, especially considering the newly released Web Edition which is effectively an entirely new platform.
It's still theoretically a great product but take advantage of the trial period, test it thoroughly on each of the platforms you plan to target and decide if you can live with any bugs you find because they may be there for a while.
REALbasic.
The language is a powerful, modern OO language that won't be hard for you to adapt to from your vaguely remembered Pascal or current JavaScript. It has most of the power of C++ without the dangerous bits that make debugging a nightmare. You will also find the IDE simpler and easier to deal with than say Visual Studio.
The IDE makes it very easy to throw together a GUI and have it just work on multiple platforms. The Pro version has one of the best cross-platform debuggers I've used and it is easy to just work (say) on a Mac and develop for Windows and Linux, compiling and testing with one click.
There is also a thriving community including many people at your level of expertise so you won't be mocked for being a newbie.
I am a professional software developer with over 25 years experience and currently mainly working in REALbasic, C++, C#, Objective-C and a bit of Ruby. For apps such as you mention, REALbasic is my tool of choice.
edit: I can't believe someone downvoted this but didn't have the guts to add a comment explaining why. I'd heard about prejudice against REALbasic but this is the first time I've encountered it. In what way was my answer inappropriate for this question?
Just to add to my cred, I've implemented cross-platform frameworks used by systems deployed to tens of thousands of end users - I have the C++ cross-platform experience to applaud someone else doing a good job and the REALbasic frameworks are very nice.
The best cross-platform tool I've dabbled in with a relatively small learning curve...especially if you're familiar with Visual Basic...is REALbasic. With REALbasic Pro you can compile a program to target Win32, Linux, and OS X from the same codebase, as long as you're not using OS-specific calls and features (which you can do with plugins or direct calls). Their support has been pretty responsive to my questions, the personal edition (which compiles to only the single target platform you'd downloaded the IDE for) is free for Linux and inexpensive for other platforms, but really you might want to download and try it out. One IDE, relatively inexpensive, and can compile native applications on OS X, Windows, and Linux...it's less hassle, and for me that's important when you want to get a job done.
I'd advise against C and Qt and would also recommend REALbasic.
With your background in Pascal and probably JavaScript you'll feel much more comfortable with REALbasic. I've done a lot of coding in Pascal and C/C++ - where Pascal guides you to avoid programming mistakes, C lets you step right in, even invites you, and then you'll have a hard time figuring out why it went wrong. Qt is a very abstract framework and requires you to learn a lot before you can get something working, just like with C. When compared to the easyness we used to have with TP back then.
RB is much more like Pascal in this regard. And its IDE is quite modern in regards to supporting your programming, with an easy-to-use GUI designer, straight-forward editor to fill in the gaps for handling UI events, code completion, etc.
Only when you get into huge program sizes, RB loses some of its appeal because it is missing tools to give you a good overview of complex class interactions etc.
Another thing is that Qt is more likely to cause ugly-looking Mac apps than RB would. RB visually guides you to get it all aligned nicely - in Qt you have to work with numbers, offsets, etc. to position your objects (at least it was that way when I used Qt 2 years ago).
I've written quite a few x-platform apps in RB and am pretty happy with the results.
You won't probably write those super-nice looking apps that compete with the best on the open small business market, but if you just want to get some solid code working, with an easy-to-design UI that's acceptable to the average user, give RB a try.
It's not free, though. But its rather small community is on your side - they're eager to help, instead of bashing everyone who's trying to talk sense :)
I'm new here but picked up on this thread through the REALbasic User Group. I think my position was similar to yours. I did website design for my work, using mostly javascript (with a little php, not much). I had a Pascal and BASIC background. I'd dabbled it C but didn't like the level of detail you needed to monitor it. It reminded me too much of assembly (which I still have nightmares about from my high-school/college days).
I was looking for a cross-platform language, with a familiar feel to it, but initially started with VB because it was free. I prefer programming in MacOS however, so I tried REALbasic. I found that REALbasic's UI builder was much easier to use than VB's. I'd echo other comments that the community is the most responsive of any user groups I've been involved with. I've since used REALbasic and my Mac to make several programs that over 100 users use every day at my work (on PCs, mostly XP and 2000). I've received compliments on the polish and ease of use of these programs. You DO have to remember to adjust the 'little' things to make it look right cross platform (ie: default button placement is opposite on PC vs. Mac, button sizes are different on Linux, etc). Many people have donated custom classes that do this stuff for you though.
People seem to assume that a "BASIC" language cannot be powerful enough for their purposes. While it is BASIC at it's core (with For..Next, Do..While, and If..Then commands), it ain't your daddy's BASIC. It's much more OOP than anything else I've used, based upon an event-driven structure, which for me was easy to pick up. They have a free trial, so grab a demo and run through the tutorial. If you get stuck, ask for questions on the NUG or Forums at the website and you'll likely get an answer quickly.
You may be interested in the following questions and answers:
Cross-platform development - Go with a cross-platform UI toolkit or native on multiple platforms?
Easiest cross platform widget toolkit?
Should I use a cross-platform GUI-toolkit or rely on the native ones?
Using a Mac for cross platform development?
and many others suggested in the Related sidebar of these questions.
Some answers suggest gtk (which is used by cross-platform gimp). Others suggest native approaches. Some suggest that a Mac is a nice platform for developing for Mac OS X, Windows, Unix and Linux.
I wholeheartedly recommend RealBasic too. I have been using RB for about 8 years now and find it to be a perfect tool for my Companies development needs, from small apps, to large multi-user systems.
It is perfect for beginners and those that are getting back into programming, and also for professional developers.
Highly recommended.
As Andy Dent and others here have indicated, for a newbie to create cross-platform applications it is hard to beat REALbasic (now Xojo).
Sure, there are plenty of other cross platform solutions such as QT (C++), Java, .NET (to some extent) and wxWidgets but they are not something a beginner would be able to use effectively.
I have many years of professional development experience in a wide variety of languages and technologies and I prefer to use REALbasic most of the time.
With that said, you might also consider Runtime Revolution or Adobe Air.
Whilst it might seem tempting to use a language thats platform independent and allow you to write the app once and use anywhere, you will undoubtably be sacrificing something on each, particularly in the UI and user experience.
If you can your best creating something using a native API that lets you take full advantage of the features of the OS to make your application shine.
I would definitely go for C++ and Qt, the code you write once will compile and run without problems on Windows, Mac and Linux. The new IDE that comes with Qt - Qt Creator is brilliant, works and looks the same on Windows, Mac and Linux, you don't need to anything else to start writing cross-platform applications.
I tried WxWidgets but didn't find good IDE, the best one was Code Blocks but GUI Designer is not perfect and has different problems on different systems and the IDE itself is still under heavy development.
Other options are Java and C# but those are not cross-platform languages, those are platforms themselves. Although you wouldn't need to compile code for each platform there will a lot of different issues on the way...
If your GUI's simple enough, why not just create a generic GUI layer, then program to that? Compile a version for each OS using native widgets. That's the best way to ensure native L&F on multiple platforms.
Both the Qt and REALbasic suggestions are good, although they tie you to that particular technology (which I can't imagine would be an issue in this particular case).
Personally, I'd go with Java, because it's worked for me before (I had an app that ran on my PDA, my phone and my desktop), but it doesn't use native widgets.
Adding a late comment here:
Take a look at Revolution. It's sort of like a modern Hyper-card on roids. And it's cross platform (Mac, Linux and Windows). This is a serious competitor to RealBasic and is coming on strong. Though I still use RB (and like it) I'm giving Revolution a serious look at.
I would also look into either Realbasic or Revolution. They both create cross platform native apps. Personally I think Realbasic would be a better choice as it is very similar, language wise, to VB. You can learn some valuable skills with RB and it can grow with your experience. I have been using VB and RB for more then 10 years combined and I think you will be happy.
If you need your code to be cross platform, you would have to go with something like QT.
Although, I would recommend using native API for each one (Cocoa for Mac OS X, .NET or the Win32 API for Windows). User experience will be much better. But of course, that will cost you more money in terms of developers hours.