Dear Guy, and others,
As indicated in the message I just sent to this forum, I do believe
that the difficulty of doing MVC programming in Oberon/F is a, or the,
major problem.
However, Guy, your last sentence that ends in "will probably enable you to
implement them yourself" is what prompts me to comment immediately.
Yes, if you are willing again and again to extend the framework to do the
things
the framework should already do, then with time you can do it yourself.
This is the achilles heel of Oberon. It appeals mainly to those iconoclasts
who feel they must do it themselves to do it right. I wish I had the time,
because if I did I would love to spend a lot of my time adding framework
components. I too know that with time I can make it closer to what I like.
But I don't have the time, so I place a VERY high premium upon speed
of extension (for classes) and availability of the libraries I need.
Java's JKD 1.02 had more of that, as a very early implementation, than I have
seen in any implementation of Oberon.
By the way, you needn't tell me something that I already know, which is
that the
good start with Java is endangered by the scheming of the mega-companies.
If fact, my best hope for the future is that some group with vision will
extend and redo and rename Oberon so that it is an even better implementation
of Java than Java - but not tell anyone so it will seem like a miracle
coming from nothing,
or call it JavaSomthing but make it even better - which is what a lot of
people seem
to be trying. It is hilarious watching Borland warp C++ products into things
with a Java label. And I don't mean calling an Oberon "Component Pascal"
with no
significant changes, or that all "it" needs is Juice. Those are pieces of
what
would be good, but, God help us, those who might do it the right way don't
seem (IMHO) to have the right combination of vision, resources, and
marketing.
Sigh, Bob
PS On the other hand, an Oberon or a Java once a decade is perhaps all we
deserve. ;-)