Ohanaware and Sam

Microsoft killed VB6, Kept VB.Net and modernized it a bit but focused on C#. At some point Realbasic started to feel old and needed to modernized a bit more. So they made some additions, some changes, and rebranded the name to Xojo.

Dim is currently an obsolete keyword, even modern BASIC languages hide it and prefer just accessor keywords as Private, Public and Friend instead like:
Private x, y, z As integer, pi As Double = 3.14

But… several modern languages (as C#, JS, Swift, or Go) uses Var (others use Let).

Xojo opted going that way, Var, to adhere the Dim obsolescence trend.

More a marketing decision than a real feature.

I really like the API2 language but the control changes I am indifferent to. DateTime, String.IndexOf, Dictionary and FolderItem iterators… all great.

You can certainly use API2 code and still have API1 controls. Unless you need something new like the Grid, then I haven’t seen a reason to start a new project as API2.

I’m not aware of any controls that have been changed to Desktop* and received a new method or event that is a game changer.

Being a Xojo fan though, I wish that wasn’t the case and that there was a big benefit to migrating to API2

Can you clarify this? Where did you read this?

I was sent a link to an external site where it was shared. I won’t repost that link here.

I used LET in AppleSoft’s BASIC in the eighties…

Yes. :frowning:

Can you share it PB?

Agreed. Not a big fan of all the increased verbosity, but it’s not a huge deal. The renaming of events was a completely unnecessary and unforced error that caused a lot of pain, and I still don’t understand why “desktop” etc prefixing was necessary, but whatever.

All in all, though, I have to give credit where credit is due and point out that whether you like the changes or not, Xojo have done a very good job of offering backward compatibility and supporting API 1 syntax and controls in the current IDE/compiler.

BUT NOT EVERYWHERE !:frowning:

Imagine the Xojo Source Code… What a mess it can be ! How Big it is. I am quite sure this mess could be avoided.
But this is history.

I am curious about the Java code (compiler, etc.)… was the code to deal with Java removed ?

Sorry if I point out a problem I just found with AppWrapper:

When I downloaded v 4.8 I was under the impressioin that it was a UniversalBynary; now I see that it is Intel only.

from the About window of my AppWrapper app:

The system Info too says: Intel.

Anybody in the same situation?

Mine says Apple silicon 4.8. Both are available.

Maybe something went wrong with the installation? AppWrapper 4.8 is UB:

FWW 4.8 is Intel/Apple Silicon.

4.9 is the current version. I am running Golden Gate on my secondary machine, and AppWrapper seems to do fine there.

When I moved from Mac Intel to Silicon, the system said it’s an Intel application. Re-downloading AppWrapper from its site, made it an Universal Binary application.

I’m on MacOS 27 with AppWrapper 4.8, and every time I open AppWrapper, I’m getting the MacOS notification saying Intel apps will cease to be supported in MacOS 28 and I should update AppWrapper. Well, it’s in one year, so I just keep using the version I have, presumably Intel (I haven’t even bothered checking).

Why? Just download the current version!

I had 4.8 (Intel), update reported none available, website says 4.8 is the latest, Get Info said (Intel). I didn’t, however, get the Intel deprecation notice on launch. I re-downloaded directly from the website and received version 4.8 (Universal). If you’ve got the Intel version and you need the Universal version, looks like you need to re-download.

Strange, then, that I have a 4.9. Last I remember, the tweaks were to enhance Xcode settings for Tahoe/Liquid Glass. It started as a beta, but I seem to recall it was ultimately shipped. As to 4.8 being on the website instead, I suppose that is a question for Sam.