Slashdot Mirror
Borland And Troll Tech And Kylix Delphi/C/C++
nici writes: "Borland and Troll Tech(Qt+KDE anyone?) have made some sort of licensing agreement to allow Borland's new brain child Kylix to be born. It's going to be a Delphi/C/C++ compiler for Linux... complete with a GUI interface. It's supposed to be completely compatible with windows. Here's a Press Release."
Several other people noted that Dr. Bob (CT:Not Dr. Dobbs, my bad! Mustn'y post before coffee!) has some
screenshots if you're interested in what the tool actually looks like (Hint: It looks pretty sweet).
People don't just use Linux because it is free. People use Linux because it is good.
The corporate world couldn't care less that Linux is free... they only care that it does the job that's needed. So, if a product comes out at a nominal price that does the job they want, then they will pay for it.
I use VMware - it isn't free either - but it's a damn fine product. I paid for my license - and it was money well spent.
Don't get me wrong, as a home user I will go for free (as in beer or speech - I'm not fussy) software before I will buy software. However, I won't do without if there isn't a free equivalent.
BlackNova Traders
RAD tools are sorely lacking in the Linux environment and, contrary to the GCC evangelists opinions, are really needed for success in business. Delphi on windows is REALLY strong, and I'm looking forward to being able to develop utilities with the same ease for X windows. I'm a DBA, and I need the ability to be able to throw together quick and disposable apps to fulfill a single purpose. Perl is fun and all, but sometimes things simply call for a compiled binary. I'm hoping that they will include the database interface objects in this release to give me that ability (and to have a good argument for dumping my Windows 2000 desktop =P). Anyone know if any kinda db libraries are going to be included in the release? It'd be kinda cool to whip up a MySQL/Oracle/insert your favortie Linux database tool here Enterprise manager for X.
Imagination is the silver lining of Intelligence.
...And as we all know, fromt the Windows world, "Rapid Application Development" == shovelware.
Call me elitist, but I believe if any fool can write a Linux application (quickly, no less), then we can probably expect the Linux world to be flooded with lots of applications seemingly written by fools.
Fire up a Windows box one day, go to www.download.com, and start downloading and trying out random shareware applications you find and you'll soon see what I mean.
There's a computer class at a local high school. They teach C++ there, but no one mentions Kernighan or Ritchie. This class is for the most advance kids in the district. 30 students every year are selected for it. And this is how advanced it really is. That means something.
it's green.
Those Linux zealots brought you Linux in the first place.
Not true. Linux zealots whine and complain about other operating systems and rave about how great Linux is. They don't do anything significant. The people making the big contributions tend to be more secure and much lower key.
If you want to be slow then be slow. Nobody is making you use Delphi or even entertain the idea of using it.
shots here :)
nuff said
I will not buy this software, it is scratched
At the very heart of Delphi, and the part of Delphi you will use most is the IDE editor. Not the form designer, not a wizard, but an actual text editor. And one helluva text editor too. Map your own keys, set up your own highlighting, configure it however you want.
Im not so sure the IDE alone is really all that different from stuff like KDevelop, etc. Another thing that people haven't been mentioning is the fact that the IDE uses an OpenTools API which lets you do anything with it, including using your tools if you so choose. There are a variety of alternative programming editors out there that support Delphi in this way.
I don't imagine the license for Kylix is going to be any more expensive then Delphi's current cost which is anywhere from 200 bucks to 2000 depending on which version you get. Note that it includes a C++ compiler as well as ObjectPascal compiler.
I can't speak from any specific comments or commitments from Borland, but there HAS already been a port of Delphi to the Alpha processor (mainly as something to run native with Windows NT running on an Alpha box). Much of the compiler core is written in Object Pascal, as well as the IDE (which was written with Delphi), so I can't imagine that it would be particularly difficult to port to other environments.
Porting from Windows to Linux is a much bigger step than going from an i386 platform to some of the other architectures, especially if you can make sure the system calls are consistant. That is one big bonus that Linux has over the Microsoft products.
Don't forget, that you also have a command line compiler with Delphi, and can you use it, if you are hating visual programming :))
1. Handle it with speed
2. Write custom widgets to deal with the display of the data
3. Get the data from the database using Corba, Midas
4. Fetch a PNG image from a BLOB field, manipulate the pixels via walking pointers, composite it onto another image grabbed from another BLOB and export to JPG. In approximate realtime.
5. Perform multi threaded inserts, selects from and to multiple servers at the same time
Delphi isn't hoping to be anything other then the "delphi of linux". Note that Microsoft hired the head architect of the first two delphi editions and put him directly to work on VB in a weak attempt to catch up and/or match Delphi.
They still aren't even close.
I am wondering if they are going to use the gnu compilers or are they just going to use their own prepriatory compilors. It seems to me that businesses haven't figured out yet that if you contribute to one of the many projects as opposed to doing your own then you don't have to reinvent the wheel. You benefit from other ideas. And everyone benefits overall. What happens when every company out there is vying for their own status as the standard. It seems to me then there won't be any standards...
A few points:
1) There are a TON of third party data access components for Delphi, and I expect they will follow shortly for Linux. They are discussed and listed on my web site:
http://kylecordes.com
2) The idea that data aware controls are only for disposable apps is something that comes from the VB world, there that is true. However, Delphi data aware controls work extremely well and have various events, states, etc. that you might need to get the desired behavious. If you don't use data aware controls, you essentially write your own data awareness layer - why bother? The Borland layer works well, and you have the source to it (The VCL) if you are concerned about how it works.
3) Delphi is a fantastic development tool, as many others here have pointed out.
400-500 out of how many? I was referring to all Linux developers. I guess it's a pretty hard one to pin down though. We may not know until it comes out.
-Effendi
-Effendi
That's what I miss the most in Linux.. of the viable editors, the only class view I've found is in the emacs speedbar, and it feels too weak to use to me.
His spelling mistakes clearly distinguish him from the average journalist he's competing with.
"If one is really a superior person, the fact is likely to leak out without too much assistance" -- John Andrew Holmes
Since when has how something looked translated into functionality? Hmm?
So now /. is equating a pretty interface with a good tool?
Methinks it'll soon be time to leave.
Deleted
But then you would not be compatible with Delphi/C++Builder. For current users of Delphi/C++Builder it would be _very_ convenient to port an application by simply recompiling (with a few changes, of course... or some more... :)
At least in C++Builder (I don't know Delphi) you are free to use any graphical library you like, you _can_ use VCL (and look like Windows) but you can as well use QT or whatever you like (but of course the integrated GUI builder is for VCL)
Yes lets talk about those two for a minute clueless idiot. 1. GTK is not object oriented no matter what anyone says. It is inflexible, slow, and just generally a piece of crap. 2. KDE is not much better, the main gripe I have with it is the damn signal slot meta compiler crap. It is near impossible to put pascal wrappers and object model on these toolkits without just about starting from the ground up.
Got Code?
Not all programmers like spending their nite fixing their C code so that the GUI looks right. Some prefer doing real work coding the "logic" of the program, and doing the GUI with a point-and-clic interface.
Kylix/Delphi is not about dumbing down programming, it is about automating the boring and tedious task of writing the GUI code.
Why bother using it when there alternatives? Simply because many people like it. Why else?
Actual, don't knock me off as a troll. I'm trying to say, why should I bother with Borland when I can use gcc/g++ and any ol' IDE (sorry about that obscure pun) that I want. I just don 't make sense. I already got dem tools
But you for you windows boys, yes now you too can write programs for Linux!
Don't knock Delphi until you have tried it and written a app with it. It's amazing. The compiler is maybe the best compiler ever written. Compile time is effectively zero. There's no link time. Object Pascal has niceties, like having single file modules instead of source + header files, that make you wonder how you ever managed with C++. You can ignore all the GUI and OOP stuff and just use Object Pascal as a straight compiler. The built-in assembler is so nice I've even used it for all-assembly programs, as it's much faster than NASM/MASM.
And all of this is really just used as the back-end for a very slick and complete GUI design package. You can click on controls and add event handlers for just about anything. It's very complete.
The killer is that everything is extremely solid and well-implemented to a level that is foreign to Linux desktop environments. gcc may be nice, but we've all had our general oddities and bizarro error messages from it. Putting a cranky GUI layout package on top of this is not the same thing. The bottom line is that Delphi is much, much stabler and slicker than what we're used to using in Linux. Ignoring it for GUI-based programs is on par with writing an OS in assembly code instead of C. Don't wear a hair shirt because this comes from Windows. Delphi will change Linux application development, no question about it.
Let's start off with one huge assumption. This thing works well, is delivered on time, generates clean code, looks and feels like the Windows Burland stuff with enough Linux enhancements to attract new users. It should also generate KDE code with deep integration down to the KOffice and Panel applet level. Ohh... and it should mostly be compatible with The Windows software.
This is a tall order but is pretty much what has been promised and Burland has a habit of delivering. Under that scenario who would use this?
1. The Veteran Open Source/Free Software developer. Maybe but only if he has a day job that requires it. His real work will still be done in a plane text editor with GDB and GCC on call.
2. The New OSS/Free developer. Not him either. He hasn't got any money and cares enough about Free software to use KDEvelop.
3. The Commercial developer with eyes on Linux. Yes. They want to deliver salable stuff quickly.
4. The Internal corporate developer ( I.e. Burland's real market ). These people will use this in disproportionately large numbers. They will port legacy apps on limited function desktops to Linux and reduce maintenance headaches. They will develop in Linux and deliver across platforms.
5. Shareware author. Burland hinted at a desire to get it's support libraries included in popular distributions. If this happens then even junior developers will be able to deliver very small applications that are still fairly complex.
Will this make money ? My guess is that Burland will achieve a clear profit on it's Linux venture before even some companies that came before. This includes Corel. However Corel may have larger overal revenue in the long run.
--= Isn't it surprising how badly I spell ?
IT was written...
I assume you meant "You were" - which makes the criticism all the more amusing.
BlackNova Traders
Oh, come on, any big group of people has a few people with unaverage views who make a lot of noise. Don't believe that those are the views of the silent majority of Debian developers.
perl -e 'fork||print for split//,"hahahaha"'
There's not a single page on TDM's website that is around. I get the dreaded 404 error for all pages. And www.drbob42.tdmnet.com is an unknown host. What gives? I'd love to seen some screenshots of Kylix.
'He who has to break a thing to find out what it is, has left the path of wisdom.' -- Gandalf to Saruman
>versus several pass required for C or C++.
Actually, it is possible to write a C compiler that is single pass, if you mean that the input files are scanned only once. GCC will be single pass in the near future.
The one thing that most of the posts I've read fail to understand is that Linux programmers are not the target market. Windows programmers like myself are the target market.
There are a lot of us and we like GUI IDEs. They're not better, just what we are used to. This will open up Linux to Windows programmers. (There goes the neighborhood)
If Linux programmers try it and like it (and they probably will), so much the better.
Qt will be licensed by Borland so we wont have to pay a cent for that
Strangely, I've seen noone comment on licensing issues. From what limited information I've seen, Kylix will produce Qt based code. We already know that pure GPL and Qt don't mix, or at least, I'd prefer not to do it.
I'd be happy to use Kylix, but not if it means I can't release GPLd programs.
--
to the beat j0r
You should have read some of these comments before posting this...
"A fantastic--maybe the best--compiler and GUI development system is coming to Linux and we should ignore it?"
No one said anything tike this but you. It seems like you were just looking to hate someone... I think it's time to rethink your view.
does anyone actually use borland for large projects? i used c++b and delphi for three years, and watched the price skyrocket as they started splitting out "enterprise versions" etc.
i really liked their stuff years ago when it was like $79 for a full version, but the full versions of borland stuff are $1500 or more.
QT is $1550 for commercial work (non-open source). now add on all the borland objects, and you're gonna get a hefty price tag.
nice of all these folks to take advantage of Linus and friends, eh? esp. when you can get VC++ pro and w2k for less than QT alone.
use wxWindows or something. Free cross platform development now.
Treatment, not tyranny. End the drug war and free our American POWs.
See my user info for links.
I don't think there will ever be one dominant widget set.
These are the big ones:
- Motif+LessTif
- Qt
- Gtk+
- Java Swing
- Mozilla XUL
- Xt/Xaw
- Tk (tcl,perl)
Most people run 3-4 of them at the same time.
This really bad for efficiency of the system, even if we ignore the UI consistency problems.
Unfortunatelly I don't see this improving any time soon. Xt would need to be deprecated in X for anything to happen.
Now if only MS would let Visual Studio make executables for other platforms...
MSVC has hardly any forms to fill. It is C++ after all, you can code ( and ussually have to) yourself to death with it.
The visual part comes from dialog editors which are indeed visual in the sense that one can drag and position controls using mouse. But that really saves time. Do you enjoy counting pixels and positions for you buttons ?
Emacs is no better or worse than MS stuff . It is simply different ( one point, it usually requires lots of time to assemble all the modules one might want to have while MS stuff comes ready out of the box.)
After all it matters not. In the end it is the code that counts.
This rocks !!!! The best dev. tool, the best language Delphi, and the best GUI on the best OS brought together !!! I'm probably going to wake up in a few second - but what a dream :)
I could write a version of gcc with essentially zero compile time. The problem is the simple implimentation would produce slow code. Gcc does a okay job of optimization (depends on the platform), and syntax checking. My version would compile minnimally correct code, with no concern for where warnings should be issued.
You're missing the point. Delphi does optimize code, and it does provide very nice warnings and errors (and even hints about things that could possibly be errors, though you can turn this off). You also get range checking for array accesses, if you want it.
Yes, it is also true that Object Pascal is a simpler language than C++. It is easier to parse, and it doesn't include lots of the bloat. But it does have really nice modern features, like exception handling, unlimited length reference-counted strings built into the language, a very nice module system, and so on. Similarly, you could say that Linux has a leaner and cleaner kernel than Windows. Is that a bad thing?
The bottom line here is that Delphi is very well-engineered. You can compile and link entire applications in the time that it takes gcc to compile one file. You can justify it any way you want to, but it is still (A) true, (B) wonderful, and (C) available right now for Windows ($99 for the personal edition).
I'm not saying you should never use C or gcc, not at all. Just that it would be a mistake to overlook such a nice tool simply because you're afraid it would be better than what you're used to.
But you are right to some degree: this draws a line in the sand. Linux was built by its users for themselves, and those folks have little use for Kylix and similar tools. Commercial use of Linux has little to do with that. So, we really have two separate communities, where the commercial community happens to be using a lot of tools developed by the open source community.
Maybe this is not a stable long term situation and the commercial community will branch off; it's up to them. But either way, traditional Linux users will continue doing what they are doing.
As for being "far far behind", I don't consider Borland's or Microsoft's tools particularly good: they are poor clones of 20 year old technology, they cause lots of software maintenance problems, and they generate user interfaces that rank low on several aspects of usability. It may be what users are used to, but it certainly isn't "good" or "new".
Java Swing is an abomination ( BTW it sits on top of AWT which is Motif I belive )
... I wish Qt would become standard but well ...
Hopefully Xaw, Tk , Athena will die out soon ( they do deserve that) and we will be left with Qt ( my favourite), GTK and possibly Motif.
That shouldn't be too bad
Of course it's linux-only - such thing could only be made for leenocks (or|==) windows.
Ah yes, so refreshing to see more and more windows programs coming to Linux. Of course, having Delphi and C++Builder available on Linux means that even more programs can be ported to Unix. Which means more potential users.
Which means that Unix is doomed.
Every day, we get more and more of these "simple", "point-n-click" "easy-to-use" "interfaces" in programs like WordPerfect, PhotoGenics, and now Kylix. Does Unix still remain, under that pretty candy shell? Isn't this just pandering to the braindead lusers who lack the braincells to become Real Programmers? And if so, is it worth it?
Last I heard, Linux was still for elite Unix gods. So why the attempt to dumb it down? Perhaps Borland is concerned that the average programmer is getting a bit too smart. By forcing their programs to be bundled with Linux, Borland will gain covted mindshare among the "geek" demographic. With a pointy-clicky interface in front of them, the IQ of these programmers will drop, on average, 27 points, forcing them back to a life of Visual Basic programming on Windows 2000, Enterprise Edition.
Okay, so Kylix comes out, everyone with Linux is able to compile their code in it, and wondows people are able to compile their windows code (minus API) on Linux. We can all agree this is fantastic, and anyone who has used any of Borland's fourth generation evnironments should know how good they are.
Question: How many people will just kind of ignore it and continue plodding along with GCC and Make?
-Effendi
-Effendi
Not quite the same thing.
-- Keith Moore
This sig is the express property of someone.
It's not about yet another GUI, it's about an IDE (Integrated Development Environment).
The nicety of it is that they're planning to generate (native) Linux applications from [Borland C++ and Delphi] source originally written to run
on Windoze - we may see even more Linux ports.
This message is provided under the terms outlined at http://www.bero.org/terms.html
I will continue to use Emacs as my IDE with g++ and GNU make. I'm not being elitist---these are the tools which make my job the easiest and fastest to do.
You're missing the point. If you were to write a very GUI-heavy program for KDE or Gnome, would you still use straight g++ and something like GTK? Or would you want to use a very slick package that integrates everything like Delphi?*That's* the kind of thing that we're talking about here, not the Delphi IDE vs. Emacs.
This is one of the key pieces to the Linux puzzle that needs to be put into place for Linux to move up to the next level of acceptance. This will enable many more people to develop applications for linux, which will lead to more people using linux, which will lead to a larger market, which brings more commercial apps, which brings more people, etc...
For those of you complaining that linux is just for the l33t people, let me remind you that no one is talking about taking your precious command line away. You can still gcc to your hearts content. This just lets other people enjoy the stability of linux as well. Sorry if you feel your exclusive little club is threatened.
Of course I use Microsoft. Setting up a stable unix network is no challenge
The compiler is great indeed - but also Pascal is a language you can compile in one pass, versus several pass required for C or C++.
It is also an order of magnitude faster than compilers like Free Pascal. It is extremely well-done.
Glade does this for free, lets you design GUI without having to wrote code. And whats even better is is totally free to use, even for commercial entities. Think the URL is http://glade.pn.org/
Oh come on... Free isn't always better. In the case of development tools, who gives a sh*t? If you want to open source your developed applications, then by all means. The tools themselves are irrelevant. Besides, Borland/Inprise have a tool that is worth every penny they charge, considering the amount of money a developer could make by using it. This attitude of "everything must be free" is a bit more than what open source is all about. People deserve credit for the work they do. Companies deserve the right to sell products. Open source should be about keeping these companies in check - showing them that they need not over-inflate their prices when we can do the same thing for free. Because of this, I say we should welcome commercial applications to our platform. They know as well as we do, that if they bloat the code and bloat the price, there are groups of us that will merrily say "No thanks", and write something equally useful. Thats hard to do under the Windows platform since most of the worthwhile APIs are hidden, and the OS is so obfuscated (sp?) to effectively write for. I say support things like this, don't turn them away.
Grab them here xyu.dhs.org
Because I'll certainly at least try it when it comes out, assuming there's a demo version.
This story, about Borland's upcoming Delphi for Linux, has drawn a very clear line in the sand between introverted Linux zealots and the people who are going to move Linux forward. I see endless responses like "Bah! I can just use gcc!" and "Only fools would use a RAD environment! Real Linux programmers will keep using gcc and an Emacs-based IDE."
A fantastic--maybe the best--compiler and GUI development system is coming to Linux and we should ignore it? We should keep flogging ourselves until we remember that UNIX is The Only Way? What is happening here is that an elitist crowd with a confused agenda is suddenly being confronted with the painful truth that Linux development software is far, far behind what has been available for some other systems. This realization needs to be embraced, or we can never advance. We can only fool ourselves for so long.
And, you know, this may make Linux difficult to differentiate from Windows. But hasn't that been the plan all along? I mean, we could have been devoting energies to desktop environments that aren't re-workings of Windows, right?
And rightly so. Qt is very professional piece of work which was obviously noted by people at Borland. VEry good decision on their part indeed.
How many apps with Visual C ?? ...)
How about 90 % of all Windows software ( MS Office, Photoshop etc, etc
Are you sure we are talking about the same thing here ?
They aren't promising any such thing. Where did you hear/read that? They are saying that apps in Windows will be highly compatible with Kylix, but not "100%"
Yes, we're Linux users. We wouldn't be caught dead using Visual Basic. VB programmers are braindead drooling mouth-breathing idiots who wouldn't know how to code their way out of wet tissue paper.
What's that? A Linux IDE? It looks a lot like VB?
Cool!
Save the whales. Feed the hungry. Free the mallocs.
Thus far, only one person in this thread has understood that when the poster said that the application isn't free, he meant the application doesn't preserve his freedom---and that person was moderated down! No one cares how much the program costs!
This isn't any operating system. We have principles to uphold. GNU/Linux was based on the principle that the users have the same rights to the software as the developer or vendor. This is why community development is possible. This is why Kylix isn't a good thing.
It is here to encourage us to give up what we have.
I suspect that it is a compatability mapping, there is a lot of code that expects the standard windows fonts to be around, not aliasing them you create unnecessary portability hassles.
The AC is absolutely right. Some of you people don't get it at all. :(
Save Maine's economy: write stuff down. All comments are exclusively my own, not my employer.
I would likely be better off getting the Windows tools, developing on Windows, and delivering my code on Linux using one of the free or commercial Windows compatibility libraries for Linux. For those who like that development style, MSDN is a really good deal (incidentally, I'm an MSDN member).
OTOH, those of us who don't like the Windows development style use Linux precisely because the Linux development tools are different from the Borland/Microsoft style tools. In different words, if I thought Windows was better technically or for development, I would already be using it, and so would most other Linux users, I suspect.
I'm one of the ones who got burned (actually just a bit singed) with JBuilder. The box and ads for JBuilder Professional said it had "comprehensive printed documentation" -- which I rely on greatly, despite occasional bouts of tree-killing guilt. The actual box had two slim booklets, and most of the documentation was available only on the CD. You had to buy the $1000-plus Client/Server edition to get real the books.
There was a big kerfuffle over this on the Borland support news-groups. The Borland technical staff who hung out on the support boards (mostly on their own time, I think) were amazingly sensible and helpful. Even the customer support people were helpful -- once you got past the drones who man the phone banks. They eventually shipped me the missing documentation for free. I was happy. Life went on. But when the next version of JBuilder came out, and I couldn't help noticing the ads and the box had exactly the same false claim of "comprehensive printed documentation".
Now, I was very impressed with the product. I was impressed with the documentation (once I got it). I was impressed with the technical staff and the senior customer service people I interacted with. But the disconnect between these impressive people and the polyester suits in the marketting department seems to be growing rather than shrinking. Now the marketting flaks are promising "100% Windows compatibility" for Kylix. I can imagine the techies cringing and dreading the next deluge on the support news-groups.
I'm sure Kylix will be an impressive product. But I'm afraid I'll have to wait for reviews by neutral third parties to find out what it actually does and what actually comes in the box.
Do you think "he" passes the Turing test?
That said, I think it's time I changed my
Yes. Now I can start porting CDWAVE to Linux.
Of course, I have to install Linux first. Then get rid of the ASM code, and probably work around the Win32 API calls...
Anyhow, the future just got better.
GCS/MU d- s+: a- C++$ USH++$ P- L+> E W++$ N o-- K- W++@ O-- M- !V PS Y+ PGP- t+ 5(+) X- R tv? b++++ y++(+++)
Just a correction...the screen shots are from Dr. Bob not Dr Dobbs (magazine).
OK, you *are* being elitist. :)
So now fools will be able to write Linux applications in less time, but anyone will as well. This will not only increase out options but hopefully will allow for better UI's by means of standardizing in well-designed components. Take GIMP for an example, a program with very good potential, but with a horrible (my oppinion) user interface. If it is well written (UI detached from logic) it can be "ported" to a better component library in two months.
Don't assume the problem with what you call "Windows world" is too many options. It works pretty much the other way around.
Speaking of porting and 0ldsk0olness, WWiV would be nice to see on *nix. The source was distributed to registered sysops, and could be modified at will... I can't remember what it was written in, but my guess is Borland Turbo C++ - maybe this is what all of us WWIV junkies have been waiting for? :)
The BBS is dead, long live the BBS.
What good has visual programming environments provided for windows?
Lots.
Just this morning I wrote an app for my boss that lets him generate custom reports from the backend database of a proprietary program we use.
Using C++ Builder, it took me 15 minutes. I could probably have done it in Access in an hour or so. Had I used a non-visual method, and just made API calls to create the GUI, I'd say this one would have tied up the better part of the day.
Visual programming environments make the GUI design simple and let you concentrate on the actual problem you are trying to solve, instead of keeping track of the x,y coordinates of the corners of some button you're putting in a dialog box.
how many useful apps have been made with something like delphi or visual c or whatever?
Heh. Probably the vast majority of useful Windows programs were done in such an environment. Oh, you want a specific example, you say? Try VirtualDub. It's a very high quality, very useful video capture and editing program that is GPL'd and written in, you guessed it, Visual C++.
I think too "easy" tools help help people to
write little "dirty" programs easily,
but that don't help them to learn programming,
instead, it may work just the otherwise.
with those tools it's very easy to make
"gui-hanger"-programs, which are mess and
explode on bigger programs,
when model-controller-view is much better
for "real work"
but anyway, I have to actually *use* Delphi and its pretty debugger, and I've cursed it to the darkest pits of hell more times than I care to remember. example, somewhere memory gets trashed. how do you deal with it with Delphi? you run until it crashes. how far away are you from the actual trashing? I don't know, it could've been on the other side of the application.
now, how do I find the same using those cruddy oldfashioned commandline tools? I link to ElectricFence. I run it with gdb. guess where it craps out? right where I want to be, where the trashing occurred.
guess which I prefer. hint: it's not the one with the cute arrow and pretty buttons.
also note that if I had a thing for cute arrows and pretty buttons, I'd use ddd together with ElectricFence.
One thing that many people seem to have overlooked is that the availability of RAD tools like Delphi on Linux makes it possible for corporate developers to develop in-house apps much more quickly and at less cost. This makes Linux a much more attractive platform for businesses. Even if these apps never see the light of day outside the company that developed them, it means more people using Linux, and that has to be a good thing surely?
Other magazines have taken over for PCMag and Byte in the code talk department. As for my last post, I was just pointing out that component developers do most of their work through old fashioned coding, though they can speed things up by having their component inherit from a component that comes closest in ability to what they are attempting. Good to Great programmers can distill their knowledge into self-sufficent components and earn money from and/or the thanks of lesser programmers.
MS Office for Mac is using MacOS widgets, it doesn't have to look exactly the same as in Windows, but Staroffice and Kylix have to use Windows-like widgets
Perhaps because the Mac has a standard GUI, while Linux does not. If you're porting to the Mac, it's logical to make it look like a Mac app. When you port to Linux, there is no such standard/universal GUI, so it seems that the fallback position is to make the Linux app look like whatever version you've already got done.
Just a thought.
Just look at the find text dialog. It's just like a win98 dialog - only not quite. It looks even more like a wine/winelib window - the font is a bit different from its win98 counterpart. The window is certainly different from the others - the are just ordinary gnome windows.
Seems to me Borland is using winelib (like Corel does) in addition to QT...
-- v --
I'm reposting this since it got buried under a troll, and there is some confusion here with compatibility with regards to windows..
Bero-rh wrote
The nicety of it is that they're planning to generate (native) Linux applications from [Borland C++ and Delphi] source originally written to run on Windoze
Not quite. There is a an interview with Chuck Jazdzewski, the chief architect of Delphi that explains Kylix and how it will or will not work with current Delphi Windows source.
Specifically as far as Kylix and Windows source code compatibility he writes:
Will existing applications that don?t touch the Win32 API just recompile with Kylix? What about components inherited from TCustomXXX classes - will these work ok?
It is impossible to make a blanket statement that if you didn?t use this or did use that you will be compatible. There are too many variables. Our goal is make the porting effort to Linux easy for people who mainly use components to build applications. As for custom visual components, most will require significant changes from the component vendors. The component vendors? porting tasks will be much easier if the component writer neither subclasses Windows controls, nor handles exotic Windows messages, or if they avoid direct calls into the Windows API when a VCL equivalent is present (eg using TCanvas instead of calling GDI directly). Non-visual components, however, are much easier assuming the underlying API they are wrapping exists under Linux. A component wrapping the Berkley socket layer ports easily, but a MAPI component would not port at all.
I anticipate the biggest obstacle people will face when porting their code is not how compatible the Linux VCL is with the Windows version, but collecting an equivalent set of Linux third-party components to replace those that they have been using on Windows. Because we realise how important this is, we have started to work with our third-party vendors early to get them porting their components so our customers will have a wide selection when we ship.
---
So, at least for awhile, Delphi authors who want to work with both platforms will have to fork existing projects to get them to work with both OS's, and new projects will have to have a lot of platform-checking code.
I still can't wait until this is released.
I get that too, with IE but not with Netscape.
> Personally - I wish I didn't need to write makefiles.
.h files) and an "implementation" (corresponding to .c files) part. A "uses" clause performs the task that makefiles used to have. Still, makefiles are more flexible - can't run a perl script or serve as an installation program.
But that's exactly one of the great things about Object Pascal. You don't need makefiles (or header files, for that matter) because of the concept of "units". Each unit contains an "interface" (corresponding to
Check the information on the site, and you'll see that Kylix is going to use a new framework, called CLX ("clicks"), and not VCL. They say that a project that ook 6 months to develop with VCL will take a month to convert to CLX. This sounds like a long time, given how much of the "plumbing" that VCL takes off your hands, letting you concentrate on the guts of the program.
True, but the code Delphi produces is actually quite well optimised - definitely smaller and faster than the equivalent C++ code. It's not like Borland haven't had enough time to get it all right is it? :)
Oh I just can't wait for this baby! VCL is a dream to work with. It really is a pretty intelligently designed framework.
I just hope they go full-bore with this project and bring the BDE over as well. Borland's help files and such seem to divide VCL from BDE in subtle ways, and they really are seprate products, but the VCL relies on BDE for all of its ODBC functionality.
Someone was bitching about "yet another framework/widget set". One word: Quitcherbitchen. This is a Good Thing, especially for getting closed source apps ported over.
--Threed
The Slashdot Sig Virus was foiled before it could spread.
Where did you find that information? I've looked at all the links and find no reference to CLX or porting VCL apps to CLX.
The press release says pretty plainly that they're planning on using Qt as the basis for a Linux version of VCL.
Can you post a link to the document you're referencing?
--Threed
The Slashdot Sig Virus was foiled before it could spread.
I guess I would rather teach the lesser programmers than do it for them. I'm not against code reuse; I'd just rather that the person reusing understand exactly what the code does and how.
it's green.
You can get a lot of "coding" done by filling in blanks in wizard generated code these days, and I know people who do. MSVC isn't the best example, but I saw the CD in my closet while I was typing...
it's green.
this is almost the philosophy of python & php & others and even bash for that matter.
;-)
.oO0Oo.
write small objects or programs that perform tasks and then some scripting glue to hold them together.
objects are a great improvement over pipes because they hold state.
but dont think that com was the first or that it's the best. Writing Active X controls for use in IIS is problematic too. The architecture is very complex with different threading models. MS also seem to improve the server every six months. Just when you've learned one way of doing things a bigger more complex version ends up on your machine when you add a service pack to plug the security holes left by the last service pack
Having used NT I think the whole OS is too complex. It tries to do too many things at once. Web Server, Application Server, Terminal Server, File Server, Mail Server, SQL Server, Transaction Server, Proxy and any other services. Want to separatet them on to different machines? You have to buy them all again!
pah, call that user friendly
oops unintended rant but important and true non the less
There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
Trade Wars 2002 owner and programmer John Pritchett has said that he'd release a Linux version when Delphi for Linux comes out... and now it's on its way!
Yipee!!!
Trade Wars 2002 official forum
you're a freakin tool matey
.oO0Oo.
RAD gives people the chance to learn programming in a hand held manner.
Someone else then gives them the chance to share it with the world all in one place which meakes them feel good about themselves.
Other people learning can take a look at the stuff and get inspired to copy & improve.
and you think this is bad?
I bet you would rather they didn't have computers at all!
There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
you need to see a context
.oO0Oo.
Borland has been of interest for a while due to the on/off Corel merger.
Borland has been a respected developer of Windows tools and an early competitor to MS and took a beating for their efforts.
Like it or not there are many Windows users and programmers who would like to move away from Windows. These people vary from people who just like to tinker about writing silly little apps that do simple admisitration tasks to very complex delphi apps that run core parts of thjeir business.
MS's forthcoming "rent your OS" licensing model and the ever growing complexity is going to drive them away from Windows. When they bob their heads up to see what the alternatives are Borlands tools ported to Linux will shine like a star.
OK it may not be world shattering news for you but it's still news and the 250 or so comments show that it must be worth talking about.
btw. You surely know that there is nothing to compare to MS Office on the Linux platform. The power of the office suite in MS is unrivalled for all the efforts of others. Maybe KOffice will come close but until then it will be Word & Excel as the first choice. Not because of any other reason than it's the best. And it's bound to be with so much effort put in to it. They may have dubious marketing but the amount of $ put in to the development of Office is why it's a winner.
There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
Hmmm.... why do I have the feeling you don't write very large applications?
I just can't imagine keeping a 50,000-line program (about the size of my current project) in my head...
--
It's a fine line between trolling and karma-whoring... and I think I just crossed it.
- Sean
It's a fine line between trolling and karma-whoring... and I think I just crossed it.
- Sean
Sorry for the late reply. >I'd just rather that the person reusing >understand exactly what the code does and how. The great thing about Delphi-style components is that the source code can be provided with the components if the creator so desires. Thus, if the user so desires, they can follow the code to discover exactly how the component works. It isn't like VB where any VC++ created components are black boxes.
I've heard theories that many new users are using Linux not for the ideals of {free|open source} software or even because they like Unix, but just are tired of Windows
And what's wrong with that? If it is the "freedom" that matters, we should encourage them to come over for their own good. But if you start imposing morality tests to ensure that new users think the same way you do, you have made a complete mockery of freedom.
Hmmm, if they were able to choose to abandon Windows in favor of Linux, maybe they already had freedom to begin with?
A Government Is a Body of People, Usually Notably Ungoverned
WWJD? JWRTFM!!!
I was wondering about that too. I remember when Visual Basic 3.0 first became really popular. There was a woosh of small apps everywhere, doing all sorts of stupid things. One positive though will be giving a lot of people experience at Linux programming, although at a high level. Once people see they can get it to what they want, and in a nice flash GUI program, then businesses might be more inclined to trial it, and hopefully start using it.
Alas gallinaceas de urbe bovis volo
What I am trying to say is that do we really need this kind of functionality? What good has visual programming environments provided for windows? This is not an obnoxious question, I'm actually just making through now as an intern, and can get my jobs done faster by just using a commmand line anyways.
Maybe the prob I have with it is this. The Linux solution to a graphical environment as far as I'm concerend is something along the lines of TCL/TK. Just put a wrapper around some decent code that already exists. I'm into systems progamming, but how many, really, how many useful apps have been made with something like delphi or visual c or whatever?
Lemure, wtf! Don't you mean Lemur?
But Free Pascal is based on GCC, meaning that it can target any platform that GCC can target, I believe. How portable is Borland's compiler?
-- Ed Avis ed@membled.com
Yes you idiot I am the dude that wrote the frigging VCL clone for linux that uses GTK for it's rendering. So the answer is yes I know each and every GTK, GDK, and GLIB call. Casting shit via macro is not object oriented. Every single problem we have is due to the inflexibility of the supposed class (struct layout). Take for instance this situation, I wish to place a label inside of a text box how do I do this cleanly. Oh guess what you cannot. Now why can't I do this. It is because you do not have a common ancestor. Now prove to me that GTK is object oriented, it is about as object oriented as VB.
Got Code?
http://www.drbob42.com/kylix/hotshots.htm
it's people like you that will force linux out of the mainstream. Not using such tools makes you an idiot and a complete dumbass in my mind.
Whey they say Linux, do they mean Linux i386 only or is there any hope to see it for other architectures too?
I think any new compiler for linux right now would be a good thing, because, gcc hasn't been doing to well for me lately. gcc right now is one of the only(if not the) only C/C++ compiler for Linux. Given, a lot of work has been done on gcc, but Borland's compiler is faster, produces smaller code, and produces faster code. (I have seen benchmarks in windows that prove this, but cannot remember where they are right now.)
With Borland's new compiler, gcc will have some more competition, and I *hope* that means more people working on it, or a new wave of development going into it.
Hopefully Borland will release the basic compiler for free(as in beer), like they did on windows, and we can see how a distribution compiled with Borland's compiler, will fair against other distributions in memory usage/speed.
Ahh yes I ubnderstand what you mean....
.c file.
But what I was meaning is that I've a terrible habit of working much more quickly when all the code is in a single
Sometimes it takes a bit longer to compile... but then again I don't recompile very often
My personnal hope is that it may simplify developping CORBA components. Hpefully, the IDE will be extendable so that someone can make a Bonobo wizard or something.
The precise same application using the precise same graphical toolkit shown with TWO different window managers! Hooray!
They are so equaniminious... equinimanize... equanimininious....
FAIR!
KDE forever.
DontBlow.com is an absolute good.
As this product is neither open source nor free by any standards, I will most definitely not be using it. Further, it is built on QT, which continues to go against the productive nature of the open source community. If anyone ends up using this at all, I will be severely disappointed.
It is NOT another GUI, it is a visual developpement tool that lets you develop apps for KDE (and Gnome ?) in the blink of an eyes. Want a button here and a tab there ? clic and clic and it's done! Want access to something thru HTTP or FTP ? Drop the HTTP or FTP component on your app and now you can. Delphi is the best thing ever made for the programmer since the invention of assembler to replace machine code. Now it is coming to Delphi !!!
I want to be the first to pedantically point out that this is not going to be a compiler, but rather a Develpment Environment, or, as Borland puts it, a "Rapid Application Development (RAD) development tool".
-Jan
-- "Tradition is the illusion of permanence."
Other stories you may soon see:
- You can now check your mail in a completely hassle free environment known as outlook.
- Use linux but want the power of office, try Sun's StarOffice
- New technology GUI developed, this time its for Linux! Download X11 here
Actual, don't knock me off as a troll. I'm trying to say, why should I bother with Borland when I can use gcc/g++ and any ol' IDE (sorry about that obscure pun) that I want. I just don 't make sense. I already got dem toolsBut you for you windows boys, yes now you too can write programs for Linux!
Lemure, wtf! Don't you mean Lemur?
This is quite old actually, and has been discused here and other place numerous times. Borland have some shares in Troll Tech, and there seems to be some ties to Qt in Kylix, my guess is that Delphi (Pascal) is implemented as some sort of Qt wrapper.
And it is not Dr. Dobbs it is Dr. Bobs.
At least that's what I thought when i read the name at first...
a Bit Like E-Music, which makes me think of music that you have to take E to like. After enough MDMA most people would dance to a car alarm and enjoy it.
Damn So much for staying on topic.
But seriously, How many people feel that their programming would benefit from an IDE to help them keep track of variables and function names. I grwew up with assembly language and can't get my head around these environments which can end up second guessing the user. If I can't keep te whole of a project in my head I tend to get bored with it. That's the way i've always been...
Personally - I wish I didn't need to write makefiles.
;-)
I just can't understund why all apps ported to Linux have to look like Windows. MS Office for Mac is using MacOS widgets, it doesn't have to look exactly the same as in Windows, but Staroffice and Kylix have to use Windows-like widgets. By using yet-another-widget we never can get a consistent looking user interface in X. I think a user cares more about a consistent system than an application that looks exactly the same on all platforms.
Personally I reckon databound controls suck for anything except quick disposable utilities, but there's big demand for such things in corporate circles - people forget that the S Q L spinning around Athena's head back in 1995 signified one of the major reasons for Delphi's success: it is dynamite for GUI intensive database apps. Delphi's visual IDE is far more productive than C++, and it's ObjectPascal language and blazing fast compiler are vastly superior to interpreted script for performance and maintainability.
Delphi and C++Builder aren't for everyone or everything, but for those like me who find that GUI design and error handling end up being 90% of their code, Delphi's productive form design environment, extensible GUI component library, RTTI/exception support and blinding compiler speed provide exactly the solutions I missed when having to use C++ (which I really like too, but not for GUI-heavy applications).
If you don't know what's going to be so cool about Kylix, here's an explanation from the author of "Delphi in a nutshell".
--
"Oppression and harassment is a small price to pay to live in the land of the free." -- Montgomery Burns.
I start with the assumption that Borland aren't going to develop their products for any platform other than i386 and in due course ia64, and even if they do produce an Alpha port that will still leave people like the ARM and m68k folk out in the cold. At the end of the day, it boils down to whether the source that comes out of products like this can be compiled with gcc, or whether it is going to need to link with some i386 only libraries.
My first area of forboding is that this will just give companies another excuse for not porting their products to the Alpha "Well, we'd like to port to your platform, but until Borland support it we are stuck". Still, very few software houses are likely to move outside the Intel/AMD monopoly anyway, so I think that issue is probably fairly neutral.
My big problem is the use of products like these to develop open-source apps. Obviously, an application which cannot be compiled unless you have a commercial compiler is not a lot of use to anyone. But suppose that Borland allow people to download the libraries and compiler for free, but you have to pay for the development environment. We would end up with quite a lot of open source projects being written against i386 binary only libraries, and those with other platforms would lose out.
On the other hand, is this product simply makes it easier for authors to build projects which compile using gcc against open source libraries such as Qt (rather like a souped up KDevelop) then I am all for it.
Regretably, I haven't been able to gather enough details from the press-release etc to answer these issues, but I may have missed something. Can anyone else shed any light and tell me whether I should be happy or glum?
good has visual programming environments provided for windows?
Well, giving people who wouldn't otherwise be bothered to code something the impetus to do it afterall - since it takes a hell of a lot less time using Delphi than direct API calls, you're more likely to start that program. And while you will get a lot of half-baked programs from "weenies" you'll also get quality programs that wouldn't have otherwise been written.
This is not an obnoxious question, I'm actually just making through now as an intern, and can get my jobs done faster by just using a commmand line anyways.
What kind of program though? Sure I wouldn't use Delphi for anything non-GUI based, but you can knock out a useful mini-application in quarter of an hour with Delphi once you're used to it.
The Linux solution to a graphical environment as far as I'm concerend is something along the lines of TCL/TK. Just put a wrapper around some decent code that already exists.
What do you think the VCL is? It's a framework which is going to be based around the underlying GUI, wrapping it up in a consistent and useful way. And the VCL framework is a real pleasure to use, especially after most GUI frameworks (especially MFC, ugh).
I'm into systems progamming, but how many, really, how many useful apps have been made with something like delphi or visual c or whatever?
Loads, Goldwave is one which someone mentions above, a good soundwave editor with a lot of useful tools, I've used it a lot when doing music. Lots of companies use Delphi - I'm here at work using it at the moment :) You'd be suprised how many people use it - I know here in the UK Delphi 3 has been out on magazine cover discs for free.
Have you ever used it yourself? If not, I really suggest you try it with an open mind. Delphi is a great tool, and what platform it runs on should be irrelevent.
One thing I haven't seen mentioned very much yet is the benefit of Delphi/C++Builders debugger. Their debugger is very similar to MSVC's and *shudder* VB. You can compile and run your apllication and step through the code line by line watching all your variables values as they change or add conditional breakpoints or just wait untill the app crashes and debug from there. From what I've seen on the linux side (and admittedly it's been a while since I looked for a graphical IDE with a well integrated debugger for Linux) nothing else come close to that level of debugging under Linux.
And please don't say that xgdb is any comparison. Unless you've used Delhpi, C++Builder, MSVC or VB for debugging then you can't quite compare. I have used all of those (includding xgdb).
-Zane
This sig is worse than my last.
ROTFLMAO. You can't be serious.
In the time it takes gcc to compile *one* source file, Delphi will build and link your complete project.
Java? Isn't that a synonym for slow?
Look, I am building (incl linking) a project of roughly 80 kloc in about two seconds on a Celeron 433 with a "slow" SCSI disk. The Delphi compiler is I/O bound, not CPU bound - and the faster you get your disks churning (striped RAID, anyone?) the better your build times will be.
Whether going 2 seconds -> 1 second build times is worth it is up to you...
Maybe it's just my imagination, but doesn't the Trolltech's QT logo look a bit too much like the sign of a former communist superpower? :-)
I guess this means that Tradewars 2002 will be ported to linux then... i was written in borland turbo pascal, and the current owner of the code said that he would port it over as delphi was available for linux.
BlackNova Traders
Well as much as we may hate to admit it, this is one thing Linux NEEDS from the big boys (Borland/Inprise, Microsloth, etc) is a RAD system. Having Delphi for Linux, VB for Linux, etc would bring a crap-load of more applications to the platform. Im just wondering when someone will come out with a VB compatible development package for Linux/KDE. C/C++ is ok, but it does limit the number of potential developers out there. Bringing Delphi to Linux is a *very* good thing for Linux, and I hope to see more RAD tools come our way.
I'm pretty happy simply because I've been hoping for a Goldwave port to Linux. I contacted the author a couple weeks ago and he said that the Linux port was largely dependent on the Kylix project. Goldwave is a lightweight
Hopefully this will lead to a lot more Linux ports by other authors. Kylix is good for Linux.
numb
Why do they always have to invent new widget sets?
Check out the search window...
It's just bloatware to invent another widget set, just like StarOffice. Blah!
Borland developers, there's something called GTK and QT... hello?
And what's wrong with that?
Nothing, that's just a theory some people have that I've heard. Did I say those people are in the wrong? Sheesh, calm down.
But if you start imposing morality tests to ensure that new users think the same way you do, you have made a complete mockery of freedom.
People can do what they like. OTOH, I'm probably not likely to be using a crappy shareware app, no matter what OS it's running on.
Microsoft thinks that anything that requires you to actually think about programming is the past and that their dumbed-down wizards are the future. I happen to like to actually write my own code, thank you. It seems to me that a VC++ clone running under WINE is exactly what I want to avoid.
Maybe I'm just old fashioned, but I like to write code, not fill in forms. What do you think?
it's green.
IMHO not necessarily, but they help. By allowing the programmer to focus on its thing - actually programming, not fiddling around with "strange" commands in "strange" editor like emacs - these tools are actually excellent programmer-aids. I've been using Delphi since version 2. I have used all kinds of kinky compilers and RAD tools. Some are rotten, some are good, but I habve NEVER, EVER, seen anything like Delphi. I can scarsely contain my anxiety to see Kylix.
"Some people see things as they are, and ask why. I dream things that never were, and ask why not."
Why is the Property of the font name "MS Sans Serif" in the second screenshot with KDE? Could be something like Winelib there?
Trust me, there's enough of it already. Start clicking on random things on freshmeat and you'll see what I mean. Yeah, there's lots of good stuff, but OTOH there's a lot of bad stuff too.
Of course. Sturgeon's Law: Ninety percent of everything is crap.
Linux has been above the curve for some time now; I don't think we can expect it to stay there forever. Fortunately, the really good Open Source/Free Software that is out there now will still be out there when the signal-to-noise ratio drops.
dragonhawk@iname.microsoft.com
I do not like Microsoft. Remove them from my email address.
The nicety of it is that they're planning to generate (native) Linux applications from [Borland C++ and Delphi] source originally written to run on Windoze
Not quite. There is a an interview with Chuck Jazdzewski, the chief architect of Delphi that explains Kylix and how it will or will not work with current Delphi Windows source.
Specifically as far as Kylix and Windows source code compatibility he writes:
Will existing applications that don?t touch the Win32 API just recompile with Kylix? What about components inherited from TCustomXXX classes - will these work ok?
It is impossible to make a blanket statement that if you didn?t use this or did use that you will be compatible. There are too many variables. Our goal is make the porting effort to Linux easy for people who mainly use components to build applications. As for custom visual components, most will require significant changes from the component vendors. The component vendors? porting tasks will be much easier if the component writer neither subclasses Windows controls, nor handles exotic Windows messages, or if they avoid direct calls into the Windows API when a VCL equivalent is present (eg using TCanvas instead of calling GDI directly). Non-visual components, however, are much easier assuming the underlying API they are wrapping exists under Linux. A component wrapping the Berkley socket layer ports easily, but a MAPI component would not port at all.
I anticipate the biggest obstacle people will face when porting their code is not how compatible the Linux VCL is with the Windows version, but collecting an equivalent set of Linux third-party components to replace those that they have been using on Windows. Because we realise how important this is, we have started to work with our third-party vendors early to get them porting their components so our customers will have a wide selection when we ship.
---
So, at least for awhile, Delphi authors who want to work with both platforms will have to fork existing projects to get them to work with both OS's, and new projects will have to have a lot of platform-checking code.
I still can't wait until this is released.
"Michael Swindell"
brought to you by the law offices of Dewey, Cheatham and Howe.
WWJD? JWRTFM!!!