Slashdot Mirror


Borland Releases Kylix 2

Tal Cohen writes "Borland Kylix 2 is now available. Most new features are geared at Enterprise-level developers; the Open edition is still available for free download. The CLX (cross-platform component library) is covered under both GNU and Borland's license." The new features list is interesting - a fair number of buzzwords, but it also looks like they are supporting a lot of the new stuff. The white papers have some interesting topics - including gcc vs. Kylix.

81 of 227 comments (clear)

  1. Maybe too late by lekter1 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I think it's too late for Borland. Maybe two years before ...

    But now I think it's too late. Kdevelop and the recently released kdestudio 3.0 gold is playing hard.

    --

    greetings,
    lekter
    http://www.hispacluster.org
    1. Re:Maybe too late by the_2nd_coming · · Score: 2

      well considering Borland is trying to sell to delphi shops I don't think there is any compitition from Kstudio or Kdevelop......Kdevelop is cool though :-)

      --



      I am the Alpha and the Omega-3
    2. Re:Maybe too late by uradu · · Score: 5, Insightful

      That's funny in a way. KDevelop is trying hard to emulate Visual Studio, which itself has done its damndest to incorporate any Delphi features it could pilfer (esp. ever since Heijlsberg got on-board), while also introducing a slew of new languages and a new component model. Yet Delphi is still considered the black sheep, because it uses Object Pascal. Well, happy C# coding--never mind that it's a veritable semantic OP clone.

    3. Re:Maybe too late by Junks+Jerzey · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Kdevelop and the recently released kdestudio 3.0 gold is playing hard.

      You've never used Borland's Object Pascal compiler. For all intents and purposes, even going back to the early days of the Pentium, it compiles instantaneously. Give it a large project on a 333MHz PII and--bang--it is compiled and linked before you lift your finger off of the Build key. This is a huge, huge productivity boost.

      Does the compiler do as much optimization as gcc? No. But it's still an optimizing compiler that gets within the "I don't care about the difference" range.

      When I see people talking about needing dual Athlons to get their gcc compile times down to the single digit minutes, then I'm appalled. With Delphi you're at *zero*. That's liberating beyond belief.

    4. Re:Maybe too late by Daath · · Score: 2

      It's not too late, just ...about time ;)

      There are a lot of pretty cool delphi (object pascal) hackers out there, and tons, tons, TONS of Windows apps written in Delphi just waiting, and begging to be ported to linux. And thank god for that :)

      --
      Any technology distinguishable from magic, is insufficiently advanced.
    5. Re:Maybe too late by iplayfast · · Score: 3, Informative

      I've found exactly the same thing. I program in several languages, and Delphi definititly is the fastest compile time. The IDE is also nice and allows quick development time. Also has a good debugger. It's worth the investment of 1 or 2 days to learn pascal.

    6. Re:Maybe too late by bitflip · · Score: 3, Funny

      I don't like it. When am I supposed to take a smoke break?

    7. Re:Maybe too late by Junks+Jerzey · · Score: 3, Informative

      Am I right in assuming that this is due to the equivalent of pre-compiled headers and overall better modularization than C(++) allows? Paraphrased: is it the compiler or the language that gives opportunity for these short compile times?

      Sure, there are some things about Object Pascal that make it simpler to compile than C: no macro preprocessor, module info isn't contained in huge text files that need to be compiled over and over again, syntax is generally cleaner, and so on. But there are clones of Object Pascal and they don't get anywhere near the amazing compile times that Borland gets.

      The big implementation wins, as best I can tell, are:

      1. They removed the need for a traditional, general linker. Modules are written to disk in a very simple format, what seems to be a binary image that just needs a small bit of patching.

      2. The compiler is simple recursive descent, without separate lexing and parsing phases.

      3. Much of the core of the compiler is highly optimized, with much of the critical portion written in finely tuned assembly language.

    8. Re:Maybe too late by zulux · · Score: 2

      I can't stress how haveing a near-zero compile and link time improves your coding speed. You can literally use the Borland's OP compiler as a 'coding spellcheck' - just hit the build button and in a flash, you cursor is at the first error.

      --

      Moneyed corporations, non-working 'poor' and criminal prisoners are turning productive citizens into tax-slaves.

    9. Re:Maybe too late by mikera · · Score: 2

      OTOH, I think that a fast compile time helps you a lot because it encourages testing. Compile early, compile often is my motto.

      Thinking long and hard about a problem is great, but you can still miss something obvious that you would notice in a second if you just ran the damn thing and watched the garbage pour out.

      Deplhi/Kylix was designed very much with a RAD/XP audience in mind so the fast test cycle is very important. If you're doing that properly, you should be putting lots of asserts and sanity checks in your code anyway.

      When people were curious about Delphi, I would often just boot it up, and write a full GUI application with database access in about five minutes, and maybe ten lines of code. The same thing in C++ might take that long just to compile :-)

    10. Re:Maybe too late by uradu · · Score: 2

      > Contradiction here?

      Explain.

      > .Net and mono are not language dependent.

      Where was that implied?

    11. Re:Maybe too late by sg_oneill · · Score: 2

      There is indeed that. I also suspect there is some other voodoo in there. At the office I have a chumpy old p166 hanging around truly being strangled by mandrake 8.1 (must look into reverting to RH. Mandrake is awesome for modern machines, perhaps the best, but it absolutely masacres old machines.)

      Anyway to cut a long story short, kylix really does compile quick, like Delphi on the Pc. the "units" are pre-compiled, and it seems to have some sort of karma where it can grab a previous compile attempt and fix it rather than starting again. Well, that's my suspicion.

      The "MADE WITH KYLIX UNDER THE GPL" banner is a little painfull, as it tennds to imply that the GPL is some sort of 'shareware' licence, which it isn't, and I do hope they sorted out the ugly dependency wierdness in V1. It's likely to get a download for me, because other than that, it's a winner for quick and dirty corporate GUI apps.

      --
      Excuse the Unicode crap in my posts. That's an apostrophe, and slashdot is busted.
  2. e-buzz word whip lash... by killthiskid · · Score: 5, Funny

    I just read the "what's new" page and I got e-buzz word whip lash...


    They should put up some damn warnings or something.


    i.e. : Build Web Services-enabled database middleware with DataSnap(TM) that scales and interoperates with your complete e-business solution...


    Ok, now a serious question... is ANYONE out there using this? I've read the reviews, I read some tutorials, and my interest is sparked, but I want to here some testimony.

    1. Re:e-buzz word whip lash... by O2n · · Score: 4, Funny

      That phrase alone is "bingo" for everybody in the audience...

    2. Re:e-buzz word whip lash... by borgboy · · Score: 5, Informative

      Yep. Lots of people are using this. Lots. DataSnap is the new term for what Borland previously branded as their MIDAS technology, but due to trademark collisions, yada yada...

      DataSnap is based around a couple of classes:
      1. a TClientDataset class, which is responsible for representing an in-memory dataset which can be persisted as XML and has the capability to record offline dataset changes and post them back to the data persistence layer when necessary.
      2. a TDatasetProvider, which links a TClientDataset to a persistence layer, such as a RBMS such as Oracle, MySQL, Interbase, DB2, or even (gasp) MSSQL. There is also an TXMLTransformProvider that can act as a 2 way mapping layer from a dataset to an XML document.
      3. A TCustomRemoteServer descendant which supplies the remoting capability - placing the TClientDataSet and the TDataSetProvider on separate machines. These components can provide connections via HTTP, vanilla sockets, CORBA, etc. There are also load balancing helpers to distribute the load.

      And then there are the Web Services. Yep. That works too. It's SOAP, plain and simple.

      We've got a DataSnap app deployed today, handling payroll data for ~1400 retail outlets. Heck, the TClientDataset class itself is worth the investment, even if you never build a n-tier system with it.

      --
      meh.
    3. Re:e-buzz word whip lash... by iplayfast · · Score: 2, Informative

      The followin site has info
      Jedi code

    4. Re:e-buzz word whip lash... by Malcontent · · Score: 2

      Three questions for you.
      1) did you build it in kylix or delphi?
      2) can you build a self contained SOAP server without needing IIS or APACHE?
      3)Are you really telling me that I can use http as a transport layer between client and the server databases? That would be cool as hell.

      --

      War is necrophilia.

    5. Re:e-buzz word whip lash... by Malcontent · · Score: 2

      Cool as hell I am putting in the order right away.

      --

      War is necrophilia.

  3. Delphi? by rbeattie · · Score: 2, Flamebait


    Why doesn't Borland just call this thing Delphi for Linux?

    Notice it doesn't ever say WHAT language it uses on the website? I wonder how many developers downloaded this thing and then said, "What? I have to program in Pascal?!?!"

    -Russ

    --
    Me
    1. Re:Delphi? by DAldredge · · Score: 2, Informative

      Please look at http://www.borland.com/kylix/ and notice the big "Delphi Compatable" button...

    2. Re:Delphi? by Codifex+Maximus · · Score: 3, Insightful

      And just what is wrong with Pascal? I happen to think it's a wonderful language - it can be depended on. I'd rather use Delphi/Pascal ANY DAY rather than program in any version of BASIC.

      --
      Codifex Maximus ~ In search of... a shorter sig.
    3. Re:Delphi? by frleong · · Score: 2

      Why? Because Kylix is supposed to be able to compile C++... in the future... Anyway, sticking to Delphi for Linux limits the compiler to Pascal only, which is no good.

      --
      ¦ ©® ±
  4. Re:Downloaded this a while ago.... by _DMan_ · · Score: 3, Informative

    I spoke to a Borland rep at a trade show 2 weeks ago. She told me the beta would be available early next year.

  5. Kylix 2 Already?? by chas7926 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I just bought Kylix version 1 in July. I thought releasing an entire new product rather than fixing the existing product was a trick that only Microsoft pulled. I guess the economy crunch is getting to Borland as well.

    --
    Linux User #296508 Get Counted!
  6. Re:can KDE threaten to sue? by larien · · Score: 2
    They could only sue if they'd trademarked the name, which I doubt. As that name is derived from 'lyx', they'd be on pretty shaky ground if they tried to in any case.

    Besides, part of Adobe's gripe was that Killustrator was in a similar space to Illustrator; Klyx and Kylix are different products (development vs document processing).

  7. Waiting for C++ by wiredog · · Score: 4, Informative

    I started programming with TurboC and Turbo Assembler. I'm now using Builder 5. The drag'n'drop interface is very nice, as are the make files (which are XML,btw). Borland has always had very good compilers, and the STL they use is quite nice. They also ship printed documentation, for those of us who actually rtfm. As soon as they have the C++ version done (RSN for about a year now), I'll buy it.

    1. Re:Waiting for C++ by conan_albrecht · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I'm sure a C++ product will follow, much like C++Builder followed Delphi. However, I can understand why they didn't implement this for C++ first: their target audience is not C++ programmers.

      Any C++ programmers who are already programming for Linux are probably using gcc and the many tools available. Borland is trying to woo Windows programmers to Linux. Since Delphi already has a large source code base out there, making it source code compatible with the Windows version helps Windows people feel comfortable in Linux. These people would have a much harder time switching if they had to start using gcc and vim.

      Once they feel they've wooed as many Delphi developers to Kylix for Linux/Windows development, I'll bet we see a C++Builder for Linux as well.

    2. Re:Waiting for C++ by Daath · · Score: 2

      There will be a beta out in the near future I've heard. IIRC they (delphi and c++builder) use the same backend compiler - so it shouldn't be too long :)

      --
      Any technology distinguishable from magic, is insufficiently advanced.
  8. QT Embedded support? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting
    Does this have support for generating QT Embedded applications?

    If so, then you can write PDA applications for the Sharp device in the previous story using Kylix/Delphi/Pascal++.

    Not that any non-Delphi person would want to, in my opinion ;)

    Of course, I am basing all this on the assumption that Kylix actually currently uses QT as the base GUI component set, via its own intermediary toolkit abstraction. If I am wrong here, please correct me.

    1. Re:QT Embedded support? by StrawberryFrog · · Score: 2
      If so, then you can write PDA applications for the Sharp device

      I very much doubt it - they only target the x86 processors.

      Besides that limitation, you can do anything - commandline aps, roll your own classes to wrap APIs, program procedurally if you wanna. Of course, the less of the class libary you use, the more time you'll spend on framework code.

      --

      My Karma: ran over your Dogma
      StrawberryFrog

  9. Re:Turbo Pascal by LeftHanded · · Score: 2, Interesting

    They went with Delphi/Object Pascal because the compiler technology was familiar to them, because the compiler is simpler, and because they wanted to take advantage of their Delphi market. Although Borland used to kick butt with its Turbo C product Back in the Day, Visual C++ from MS is now killing them in the C++ market. Delphi is a pretty popular RAD tool, not dead at all.

    --
    I think...I think it's in my basement. Let me go upstairs and check. -M.C. Escher (1898-1972)
  10. Never mind that these are the guys... by uradu · · Score: 5, Interesting

    that introduced the $49 IDE back in 84, and have consistently turned out more standards-compliant C++ compilers than you know who. And your tastes obviously don't count for much if they lead you to that opinion about Object Pascal. It's still considered by many one of the most advanced and elegant natively compiled languages around. OTOH Forte is certainly not considered the greatest IDE by many. But then again, those are YOUR tastes.

    1. Re:Never mind that these are the guys... by uradu · · Score: 2

      I'm not saying the Borland products are without warts, but they should be kept in perspective. Regarding g++, it seems Borland currently has the best C++ compiler on (x86) Linux. I think even the OS community hasn't found much to knock about it except the fact that it comes from a for-profit company.

  11. Re:Turbo Pascal by truthsearch · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I don't see much competition among the all-in-one development environments for Linux. Kylix is an attempt to become the MS Visual Studio of Linux. I don't see anything else as broad as this. KDevelop is kind of a Turbo C app. I'm not familiar with KDE Studio, but it seems to be the only real competition.

    Developers, and especially companies, really want the grand development environment that nicely brings everything together. That's exactly why every Windows developer eventually dropped Borland's array of products and went to MS Visual Studio.

    Borland here is trying to keep up with the times and learn from the past. I think this is a great step for Linux.

  12. delphi portability? by juraj · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Has someone of you used this to port Delphi app to
    Linux? I had a nice free LGPL-covered application, that
    I wanted to compile using kylix open edition. But a lot of things are different.I see a lot of units, like QDialog, QForm, etc. under Linux, but they're counterparts in Windows are Dialog, Form, etc. So is there any sourcecode compatibility? Is there a tool for doing this?

    1. Re:delphi portability? by vtechpilot · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Actually it is much easier to write the app in Kylix first and then port to Delphi. This is because Kylix forces you to write CLX (cross platform) code, and Delphi lets you choose between CLX and VCL (cross platform and not cross platform) code.

      --
      Slashdot is an anagram for Has Dolts, and I am Dolt number 468543
    2. Re:delphi portability? by robinjo · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I've ported a pretty big non-gui app. It was pretty easy. Moving from Delphi's old sockets to Indy was the biggest thing. Then I just wrote higher class classes, wrapped all the Windows api stuff in those and made a WinStuff-unit out of them. A similar one for Linux. Then some ifdefs for units and done. Now the project compiles without changes in Delphi 5 and Kylix 1.

      I hear it's even easier with Delphi 6 but haven't felt like upgrading yet.

    3. Re:delphi portability? by MarkusQ · · Score: 2
      Has someone of you used this to port Delphi app to Linux?

      I used K1 to port two smallish apps from D6. I had to do a few small source code changes, but it was mostly painless (much easier, say, than going from T5.5 to D1 w. the class/object change).

      -- MarkusQ

  13. They definitely don't make it easy... by Genom · · Score: 3, Informative

    They definitely don't make it easy to "register" for the download -- first they want all sorts of personal info that really shouldn't be required (phone #, street address, etc...) - THEN, if you don't fill out EVERY field (including those not marked as required), and say "YES" to all of the spam checkboxes at the bottom, their javascript form handler balks at you.

    Not to mention that you *have* to have javascript enabled to even register...

    I was going to check it out -- but I *refuse* to give them free reign to spam me by phone, fax, email, and snal mail for the privilege of doing so.

    1. Re:They definitely don't make it easy... by tweek · · Score: 2

      I have got not ONE bit of spam from Borland yet. I've downloaded and registered Kylix, Interbase AND Delphi Personal Edition.

      You can usually trust the companies like Borland when you UNCHECK the box that says sell my info, that they won't sell your info.

      --
      "Fighting the underpants gnomes since 1998!" "Bruce Schneier knows the state of schroedinger's cat"
    2. Re:They definitely don't make it easy... by tb3 · · Score: 2

      Noticed that, huh? It gets worse; after you fill in all that stuff, download and install it, you have to email Borland for an 'activation key' before you can run it.

      And, I went through the feature set and only one of the new features is available in the open verison.

      I went through that crap once, but I won't bother going through it again. Borland are certainly going against the spirit of free software, if not the letter of the law.

      --

      www.lucernesys.comHorizon: Calendar-based personal finance

    3. Re:They definitely don't make it easy... by tb3 · · Score: 2

      Sorry, but I have to disagree with you. I had to register (on their website, not by email, I got that part wrong) and get the activation key emailed to me. I still have the archived email in case I want to re-install the thing, which I probably won't.

      If the open editon of Kylix is *really* open they should just let you download it, not hassle you for your email address and other information. That just sucks.

      --

      www.lucernesys.comHorizon: Calendar-based personal finance

  14. Kylix isn't Klyx by Tha_Zanthrax · · Score: 3, Interesting

    They won't be sued. Kylix and Klyx are completly different apps. The name Kylix isn't stolen from Klyx. Like Delphi is also the name of a greek goddess, a Kylix is a greek fruitbowl of some sort.

  15. Stop this stupid discussion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Hey, what's wrong with you people over there?? Complaining about Kylix being dead and all that. Do you guys have any idea what 'normal' developers want from a development environment? No, they don't need pointers and that bullshit. They want an easy to use ide where they can build forms and make stuff work. And they don't need C++, Pascal will do perfectly. Most apps aren't that difficult (lot of databases, etc.) and digging in the OS is therefore not necessary. And you surely don't want to spend three weeks finding out how to make gcc work.

    I've tried Kdevelop and honestly, I didn't figure out how to compile the bloody thing so I dropped it. Next thing I did was installing Kylix (wow, at last an easy installation procedure) and it worked. I've build the little app I wanted in a minute and it compiled flawlessly.

    So, unless you're a nerd (no negative connotation, just indicates that you want to spend a lot of time finding out the smallest details of your system), Kylix is an easy to use and nice ide.

    You guys should be glad that Borland did some effort for the Linux community but no, nothing but criticism. So, cut the crap and admit that Kylix is a great tool for rapidly developing apps.

    1. Re:Stop this stupid discussion by marcovje · · Score: 2, Insightful


      Most pascal bashers can't even tell why C/C++ is more
      superior than an advanced dialect like Delphi.

      One of the major things is templates, which I'd love to
      see in Delphi

  16. Measuring developer use of OSS by pubjames · · Score: 4, Interesting

    It has always been common knowledge that a key to Microsoft's dominance is making things easy for programmers so that they develop for the Windows platform. Is it just me has there been a real drop-off of interest by developers in all things Microsoft?

    I remember there was a time about five years ago when most developers wouldn't even consider developing for anything other than Windows technologies and developer's magazines reflected that. These days, however, I see very little excitement about Microsoft technologies, for instance, I don't see lot of enthusiasm amongst developers about .Net and C#. Surely with Windows being the dominant platform, and .Net being Microsoft's new technical strategy, you'd expect some excited discussion about it amongst developers, but it's just not happening.

    This is just a feeling I have, and I have been trying to think of a way to quantify it, if nothing else to prove to myself that this sea-change is actually occurring and not just because I now take my information from different sources. The simple metric I have come up with is this - the number of times a word occurs on Google:

    Linux - 30,100,000
    Microsoft - 20,100,000

    This crude metric seems to suggest that Linux has 10m more pages than all of Microsoft's products put together. Seeing as Microsoft has such a dominant position in the desktop space and is still much more of a household name than Linux, I think this is quite a clear demonstration that there is a lot more material about Linux out there than about Microsoft's products.

    This came as a suprise:

    "Linus Torvalds" - 640,000
    "Bill Gates" - 649,00

    I would have expected Bill Gates (who's a household name) to occur a lot more than Linus.

    This is also suprising:

    "Internet Explorer" - 2,730,000
    Mozilla - 2,730,000

    "Linux developer" - 20,600
    "Windows developer" - 12,200

    Is it just me, or do these figures suggest that Microsoft should be very worried indeed?

    1. Re:Measuring developer use of OSS by gorillasoft · · Score: 2, Interesting

      That is interesting, but so is this:

      The numbers fluctuate.

      Here are the ones I came up with -

      Linux: 33,700,000
      Microsoft: 21,700,000

      Linus Torvalds: 610,000
      Bill Gates: 997,000

      Mozilla: 3,060,000
      Internet Explorer: 3,030,000

      Linux developer: 1,410,000
      Windows developer: 1,720,000

      I wouldn't take those numbers or yours too seriously as absolute totals, but they do make an interesting point.

      Also, one thing to note may be that by necessity there could be more documentation about Linux online than there is about MS products (lack of paper manuals for ISO downloaders, etc. could be reasons), which would lead to more hits for Linux-related pages. Still, it's interesting.

    2. Re:Measuring developer use of OSS by kin_korn_karn · · Score: 3, Interesting

      It's not so much a lack of interest in windows as a focus on the web. The majority of software development nowadays (judging by job postings, which indicate growth) is 2 or 3 tier client-server stuff with a web interface.

      MS has the worst web server technologies, period. Nobody in their right mind wants to run IIS for a large commercial site, it's too vulnerable to DoS/hacks. Apache on Win32 would fix this but people who are timid enough to run Windows as an internet server are going to be scared to death of the prospect of software that doesn't give them the option of running to mommy (read: tech support) when it breaks.

      Also, NT/2k x86 machines don't scale enough to handle the load of a high traffic web site. Load balancing (LocalDirectors, etc.) helps, but why fool with a room full of 1 or 2 processor Xeons when you can buy one really expensive Sun chassis and have room to grow for years without going to the trouble of integrating a new server into the network? Not to mention that x86 machines don't run so well when you try to implement failover stuff like redundant power supplies and hotswap drives on their bus.

      Last but not least, NT doesn't run EJB very well. If you want to get performance out of EJB, which is the current buzzword-compliant technology for large-scale software projects, you need a Sun box, period. I'm convinced that Sun and IBM are conspiring to cripple Java on Windows, which is just fine with me.

      In most cases, the only necessary MS-based piece I've seen in recent software development is the browser.

      MS may have the browser market tied up (with good reason, IE is nice now and XP, I hate to say it, is a great desktop OS), but they've already written a browser and have said under penalty of perjury that they'll give it away for free. They're in the process of eating their lunch on the server side in the big-ticket markets, which is where all the important stuff happens anyway.

      Stop worrying :)

    3. Re:Measuring developer use of OSS by platypus · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Also, one thing to note may be that by necessity there could be more documentation about Linux online than there is about MS products (lack of paper manuals for ISO downloaders, etc. could be reasons), which would lead to more hits for Linux-related pages. Still, it's interesting.

      Yes it is, but I doubt that it's clear that there is more documentation for linux than for MS products.
      What we should consider is the linux howtos are mirrored a bazillion times throughout the internet, while in MS's case a lot of documentation is concentrated at support.microsoft.com or other microsoft sites.

      A search for "linux networking howto" yields 2770 hits for instance.

  17. There will be a Kylix 1 update by robinjo · · Score: 2

    Borland has told in their newsgroups that there will be a Kylix update. So no need to buy Kylix 2 if you just want a bugfix.

  18. Re:Turbo Pascal by bradintheusa · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Are you nuts. This product kicks butt compared to all the other IDE wannbes. Borland is the only alternative to Microsoft and doing a great job producing the best tools. It's revenues and share price (and profits) are all up up up.
    What is there not to like?

  19. Re:Wine and Kylix by stewart.hector · · Score: 3, Informative

    Kylix used WineLibs, not wine - which are different.
    Wine is to run windows applications
    winelibs are to link against winelibaries during compilation - ie, you have a windows application, and you want to compile it under linux - easier porting.

    Yes, in Kylix 1 the IDE was sluggish.

    Kylix 2 has less dependecy on WINELIBS, but it is still there. You can see postings on borlands news server - http://newsgroups.borland.com .

    Hopefully K2 IDE will be alot faster.

    --
  20. Good for business by gorillasoft · · Score: 3, Insightful


    I don't see where anyone has mentioned that this should be good for some businesses. In the case of a shop with split MS/Linux computers, they can write one internal business app in a RAD environment that will run on both of their systems. This allows for the good productivity of a RAD tool with the portability of Java, C, etc.

    It could also be an incentive to switch over to Linux - they could have their apps written in Delphi on Windows, and then move as slowly/quickly as they want when converting to Linux without necessitating major code porting. In a slow economy, cost savings are of more obvious importance to management.

    Of course, all previously MS-only code (VB, etc) would still need to be reworked, but there are benefits to be had for businesses looking at Kylix.

    If Kylix takes off, it could really be a boon for Linux.

  21. Still lacking features.. by rasjani · · Score: 2

    Still no support of postgresql.

    Still no support of GTK. (Wtf is that gnome icon even doing in there in kylix page ?)

    And is the beast still compiled against wine libs ? (Yes, the first version was compiled against wine, no matter what you say. It was, and it is)

    --
    yush
    1. Re:Still lacking features.. by DAldredge · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yet there is support for PostgreSQL/RedHat Database. Just look at the feature matrix...

    2. Re:Still lacking features.. by Micah · · Score: 2

      What gets me is that the FAQ says PG drivers are only in the Enterprise version, while the feature matrix says they're in Enterprise and Pro. I asked in the Borland newsgroups and no one has clarified. Do you know?

      That will make the difference of whether I upgrade or not, I think. I'm not paying for Enterprise, nor do i need it.

  22. Re:Borland again... by Ronin+Developer · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Alas, you are equating apples to oranges.

    First, I am not a Java developer. But, I am aware that one of the biggest problems facing the JBuilder team was the diversity of Java VMs (i.e. some worked and some don't). JBuilder allows you to target multiple Java VMs with ease and that was a bane to releasing a "stable" product. They worked with the various Java VM teams (Blackdown is one that comes to mind) to make it compatible. JB3 was a blacksheep product. JB4 fixed many issues and JB5 is now the current product.

    After having coded in C, C++, the forsaken VB and a slew of other languages, I discovered Delphi in 1994. I haven't looked back since.

    Why? Because it has enabled me and my teams to develop applications in a fraction of the time that C++ would have required and substantially more stable and reliable than VB has ever been. My Delphi apps came in on or ahead of schedule and don't crash. IMO, Delphi is a secret weapon when you need to get high quality, database applications out to the market place when under a tight schedule.

    Yes, Delphi has had its bogus releases (Delphi 4 in particular). D3 was very stable and D5 fixed D4. D6 now offers cross platform development capability (if you use the CLX library) via Kylix. The language, Object Pascal, is not the same as Pascal just as C++ is not C. I suggest you take a few hours and learn the differences between Object Pascal and Pascal. The only real downside to Object Pascal is it is more verbose than the equivalent C/C++ code. But, then again, it's also a lot easier to understand and maintain (a side benefit of its Pascal roots).

    Kylix has bugs (just as any major new tool does). Blame that on both errors in the Kylix tool itself as well as buggy Linux distros (RH in particular). To me, the only bug that really affects me in Kylix is the fact that TThread is broke. Did they fix it in K2? Let's hope so.

    My point being, is that you had a bad experience with a single Borland tool. Never mind the fact that many other development shops gave it high praise...you had a bad experience.

    Before you blast Borland for putting out "inferior products at insane prices", I suggest you learn more about their products, read some serious critical reviews and then try the products yourself. You may come to realize just how far off base your statements really are.

    As for the high prices...well, I can't dispute that. They did it to keep pace with Microsoft. Why? Because how can a product be good when it costs so little? Surely that other product that costs twice as much must be twice as good. Right? By that reasoning, I guess that means that Open Source and Free software must really suck. We know that's not true. FWIW, Borland now appears to be reviewing their pricing structure.

  23. borland has released Kylix by donabal · · Score: 2, Funny

    yea. i hear about this EVERY TIME I START UP BORLAND C++BUILDER. [since last year...]

    man... if only i cared.

    --donabal

    --
    Safety First Day?
  24. C++ is too a priority by fm6 · · Score: 3, Informative
    However, I can understand why they didn't implement this for C++ first: their target audience is not C++ programmers.
    Not true. Most programmers are like you -- they like Borland's RAD technology, but they want to program in C++. Obviously Borland has to cater to them. The thing is that all of Borland's RAD products are based somehow on Delphi. (This even includes early versions of JBuilder, though the current version is 100% Java.) You don't need to know Delphi to use C++Builder, but all the core software -- the IDE, the object framework, etc. -- is implemented in Delphi. So major upgrades to C++Builder are always implemented in Delphi first. The same goes for porting the whole schmeer to Linux!
  25. -1 Troll on the MQR standard by MarkusQ · · Score: 2
    I just bought Kylix version 1 in July. I thought releasing an entire new product rather than fixing the existing product was a trick that only Microsoft pulled. I guess the economy crunch is getting to Borland as well.

    1. For any active product, someone will have bought it just before each new version is announced, so the date you bought it isn't relevant.

    2. There is very little wrong with K1, and there is a patch for that, so "fixing the existing product" isn't an issue.

    3. Since it isn't a "trick" comparing it (the non-existent "trick") to MS is either silly or flamebait.

    -- MarkusQ

  26. Borland is a no-spam company by MarkusQ · · Score: 3, Informative
    I was going to check it out -- but I *refuse* to give them free reign to spam me by phone, fax, email, and snal mail for the privilege of doing so.

    I've been using Borland products since the early eighties, and the most I've gotten is a few mailings telling me about events in my area, product updates, and an occasional bit of free stuff. I typically tweek my address to catch/track spammers (e.g. misspell my name), and I've never had anyone else send me something using the address I gave Borland. In short, I'd trust them.

    -- MarkusQ

  27. Unplanned portability by fm6 · · Score: 2
    Yikes. The resourcefulness of Delphi programmers never ceases to amaze me.

    The way it was supposed to work was that both Delphi (6 and up) and Kylix come with CLX, a cross-platform component library for both Windows and Linux. So making an app cross-platform meant porting it to CLX (which is very similar to the existing VCL), then compiling it twice. But you've managed to achieve this without access to the Windows version of CLX. Pretty impressive.

    Incidentally, there's an open source version of CLX. Currently only runs on Linux, but...

  28. sdl cross platform game development by iplayfast · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I use Kylix and Delphi 5 to code games under Linux and Windows, using the SDL code. Same code for 2 different OS (OpenGL to boot)

    Jedi code

    For a great reference and good tutorials check out The great nehe site!

  29. Object Pascal Rules! by jackjumper · · Score: 2, Funny

    *that* ought to get some people to comment.

    We've been using Delphi since version 1, and our flagship software (which controls a semiconductor manufacturing tool) is about 200,000 lines of Delphi 5 code. It takes about 30 seconds to compile.

    We also do C++ development, with CBuilder. Our largest C++ program, about 30,000 lines, takes 10 minutes.

    We've found that our object pascal code is more reliable, maintainable, and understandable than the C++ code we've developed. Even the most diehard c++-heads in our group admit that there is really no technical reason to prefer C++. The only reason they give is that it "looks better on our resume" (to that argument I reply we should be using Java).

  30. The secret to the speed by vtechpilot · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Borland's Object Pascal compiler is a single pass compiler. The trick is in the way everything is declared first, this allows the compiler to run through once and know ahead of time that a certain procedure or function does exist before it gets to any code that calls it.

    You can make C compile in a single pass if you put main() at the bottom, and all procedures and functions above all the other procedures and functions that call them. This way the compiler can compile FuctionA and then when it gets to main() FunctionA is already compiled. When done the other way, the compiler reads through main() then compiles FunctionA and then comes back and finishes main(). Its all that jumping around that slows down compiling.

    I've heard but haven't seen for myself that aranging the procedures and functions like this can also result in a smaller binary. YMMV.

    --
    Slashdot is an anagram for Has Dolts, and I am Dolt number 468543
    1. Re:The secret to the speed by mikera · · Score: 3, Informative

      Actually, single pass compilation makes sod all difference. A pass to scan a parsed file for declarations might take 1% of your time if that. Putting all the declarations at the top is more of a Pascal convention for declaring your interfaces than anything else.

      The main compilation-time advantages Pascal has over C/C++ are a simple, elegant langauge syntax, no complex preprocessor, general avoidance of header files, and the fact that modules ("units" in OP-speak) are almost always pre-compiled into a format that makes linking quick (these also double as pseudo-header files). Add to all that the fact that Borland are simply very good compiler writers.

      Of course, you lose stuff from C++ that some people (including myself) use a lot such as macros, templates, multiple inheritance etc. Whether you actually need these is debatable, but their exclusion certainly makes for a clean language that is pretty beginner and maintainer friendly.

      Last time I used Borland Pascal, it was also pretty good at stuff like dead-code elimination - not sure how GCC compares there.

  31. Just a guess.. by mindstrm · · Score: 2

    but would it make sense that.. yes, MS made it easy to develop apps for a while. But after a while... the same libraries and things that made it easy also constrained programmers.. people had new ideas and new ways of doing things, and just couldn't implement them in Windows very easily.. wheras unix offered a more easy way to bring those ideas to light.

  32. Give me C++ any day by UnknownSoldier · · Score: 4, Interesting

    > And just what is wrong with Pascal?

    Not trolling or meaning to start a "holy war", as this is just a personal opinion:

    - Declarations are backwards, due to the awkward grammer: name type
    Compared to the more logical C/C++ way: type name

    - The distinction between functions and procedures (the language sports an artifical difference.) The lack of parenthesis in the declaration make it difficult to quickly visually spot functions.

    - Operators, or the lack of them (no bit shifts, scope operator, namespaces?) i.e. := for assign? Just give me the dam equal sign already! :)

    - Too wordy. { } are don't clutter my code whitespace, like 'begin' 'end' do.

    In short, I just hate how the language looks.

    It's the same as a person liking one spoken language over another. Sure they both can explain concepts, but which one is more compact, and is "fluent" for the person?

    Pascal is a great teaching language, and Delphi is very impressive (Borland has always had lightning fast compiles on their Pascal languages, due to the grammar.) But I'd rather take a language I hate less (C/C++) then one that gives me a grammer that I hate (Pascal & sons.)

    I like the multiparadigm support of C++.
    i.e. procedural, object orientated, and generic programming paradigms.

    For me, Pascal++ is just plain wrong, but if you're productive at using it, hey, more power to you!

    Cheers

    1. Re:Give me C++ any day by CaptJay · · Score: 3, Informative

      - The distinction between functions and procedures (the language sports an artifical difference.) The lack of parenthesis in the declaration make it difficult to quickly visually spot functions.

      That's not actually an artificial difference. The choice behind two reserved words for procedures and functions allows the language's grammar to keep its LALR form, which means you can compile it much much faster. The form of Pascal's grammar is one of the biggest reason it compiles so damn fast compared to C++: there is no operator ambiguity. The same goes for the ":=" operator.

      - Operators, or the lack of them (no bit shifts, scope operator, namespaces?)

      bitshifts operators: "shl" and "shr". You can apply "and", "or", "not", etc to bits as well.

      Namespace: You can delimit namespace by prefixing the name of the unit. Example: MyUnit.TMyClass.Create works perfectly.

      Language preference is just that, a preference, but I just wanted to explain some of the features which you seemed to dislike. =)

      Regards,

      --
      "I remember Y1K, every abacus had to get another bead"
    2. Re:Give me C++ any day by mikera · · Score: 2

      Just curious as to why you think the declarations are more logical one way than the other....

      Is that just personal choice/comfort or a more fundamental difference?

      a: integer;

      int a;

      dim a as Int

      my $a (who cares about types anyway! :-)

      All seem to convey pretty much the same logic to me.

    3. Re:Give me C++ any day by UnknownSoldier · · Score: 2, Interesting

      > Just curious as to why you think the declarations are more logical one way than the other....
      > Is that just personal choice/comfort or a more fundamental difference?

      Functionaly, there is no difference.

      Personal comfort w/ respect to formatting, white space, and not needing superfluous tokens.

      I like to arrange variables in a "table" format.
      i.e.

      intnWidth ;
      intnHeight;
      char*pTexels;


      Now you can do the same thing in Pascal, but the C/C++ just seems more compact and unclutted:

      var
      nWidth :Integer;
      nHeight:Integer;
      pTexels:^Texture;


      I find this more readable too:

      void foo(
      intfoo
      , floatfoo2
      , char*foo3 )
      {
      }


      I guess it's the same reason I like my HP calc -- RPN just seems more natural.

      *shrugs*

    4. Re:Give me C++ any day by mikera · · Score: 2

      Fair enough. I don't mind either way, though it always seems to take a day or two to switch my mind from one convention to another.....

      Still, my favourite langauges have to be the pure functional ones like Haskell. Type inference is a godsend, and who needs mutable variables anyway :-)

  33. Not fruit by fm6 · · Score: 2

    A kylix is a wine bowl. Believe it or not, that name has nothing to do with Codeweavers. There are various stories, but the one I believe is that somebody saw a picture of a bull painted on a kylix, and thought that kylix was Greek for "bull". Anyway, an "-ix" name works well for this product!

  34. Re:Turbo Pascal by mikera · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Having used both Visual Studio and Delphi, I can honestly say that Borland is way aheead in the Visual development stakes. If anything, it has been MS playing catch up in terms of tool quality.

    Borland lost out to Visual Studio because of that little thing called the OS monopoly. Companies wanted the assurance that their tools are very closely tied to the OS. Borland's products are still IMO much better, and given the much leveller playing field on Linux I really hope they can succeed.

    Basically, if you haven't played with Delphi/Kylix before I seriously suggest you give it a shot. It's free to try, goddamit, and I'm sure most good coders can suspend their disdain for Pascal for long enough to realise that it's actually pretty damn good.

  35. Re:Open Edition also updated? by nowt · · Score: 2

    Currently it seems 2.0 is not available in the Open edition.

    --
    A strange game. The only winning move is not to play. How about a nice game of chess? - Joshua (Wargames)
  36. Looking for a good tutorial / learning environment by Nailer · · Score: 2

    Kdevelop and the recently released kdestudio 3.0 gold is playing hard.

    I think I'm a fairly experienced Linux user, on the systems administration and end user level. I think I was one of the first non programmer types to be seriously interested in the OS a few years ago when I started.

    I can onviously do shell scripting, and I can also seem to read most C pretty easily. O used to do Pascal and Quattro Pro (!) programming in HS but that's a while ago and I bet I'm rusty. I'd like to get into programming proper.

    a) Visually oriented. I'd like to work on both Open and Closed source apps and I think there's much more of a need for GUI apps than yet another CLI text processing tool. I could write the world's first XFree86 setup program which doesn't suck! I'd like to churn out lots of widgets and menus and a RAD tool is desoigned for this purpose. That there's free (beer) versions of these tools makes them appropriate for use on OSS projects.

    b) QT based. As an end user my experience of QT apps has been they they are responsive, quick and the APIs are much more stable than their counterparts. I like the speed and crossplatformability of QT, and I'd like to be able to keep a common codebase across Linux, OSX, and Win32. My understanding is that the GTK+ port for Win32 is highly beta and quite limited in ts capabilities. QT, OTOH, works well nad has been used for a number of serious business apps - eg, TOra.

    c) Easy to learn and pick up. Enough said.
    It seems Kylix offers me what I want, but KDevelop and KDEStudio can, IIRC, also create pure QT apps than should easily work across platforms (correct me if I'm wrong).

    Problem: where to start.
    * Can I get courses in Kylix aimed at those with a fair amount of computer knowledge?
    * Are there any books that anyone here would recommend on the subject of Kylix which? Kylix has only been around a short while.
    * Anyone recommend any on line tutorials or web sites with same code I can load into them and get a feel for the various environments?

  37. Re:Looking for a good tutorial / learning environm by Paul+Komarek · · Score: 2

    I'll put in a plug for Python. It's clean, cross-platform, easy to learn (a core focus of the language is making things easy for nonprogrammers), and has support for QT, GTK, Tk, and some other widget libs. There are good books available for learning Python, and the Python community is fiarly strong.
    Python is interpreted, so you'll won't see a lot of speed from it. Most applications don't actually need much speed, especially gui apps. However, you wouldn't want to built the SETI-at-home back end in Python, for example.

    -Paul Komarek

  38. Re:Borland again... by Ronin+Developer · · Score: 3, Interesting

    You truly are clueless, aren't you? This isn't about the average slashdotter. The need for a high productivity development environment for Linux is essential to move Linux into the mainstream and for its widespread acceptance in the business world supported by the IT community.

    While the argument that there are powerful, free tools for Linux holds. The generally accepted Open Source model for development tools simply will not cut it in a real IT shop. Tools used by IT shops need to be stable, robust, and supported. I like knowing that I can pick up the phone and get somebody when there is a problem that I don't have the immediate time or resources to solve. That's what I pay for.

    Users (business and home) want their favorite applications (or a strong competitor) available for an OS before they will accept it. These two areas are the niches where Delphi 6 and Kylix fill. D6 and Kylix do deliver what they promise. I can attest to that.

    Pascal as a language is generally dead. The modernized Object Pascal is an OOP language that meets many of the requirements of C++ programs. Object Pascal is far from dead. On the Windows platform, it is very viable. Because of the type safety inherent in the language, it's pretty hard to screw up development of simple apps. Yes, for pointers you need to do a few odd things. That's why we have class refernces. These are basically smart pointers. But, the object model is quite robust and capable.

    The underlying language is not dependent upon the visual elements you seem so quick to condemn. However, when a Delphi 6 or Kylix developer can sit down, write, test and deploy a SOAP service in under 10 minutes (yes..it was canned..but demonstrated at Borcon 2001)....well that's pretty amazing. Even more amazing is that with little effort, you have CGI, DSO, or ISAPI modules to fit almost any web server.

    These services have all the native support of Delphi's (and Kylix's) database and internet connectivity, a highly interactive development environment and a fully capable and visual debugger.

    Okay..I sound like a sales person. But, I'll tell you. After working with C, C++, VB, Powerbuilder and a slew of other languages, Delphi kicks butt on the Windows platform. The advent of Kylix and CLX on Linux will enable those same high powered productity and business apps developed using Delphi to be run on Linux. That's what it's all about...it's not a language war...it's about viability.

  39. Using google for measuring popularity by Per+Abrahamsen · · Score: 2

    I have been using google to measure popularity for some time, the most relevant page here is my free software celebricies page. Google has some problems when used this way, the largest is that the hit count are very unstable. I have seen entries in my list go from 200 to 15.000 and back to 200 in a week, for no obvious reason. Another problem is that it is often hard to find a term that is specific enough, but not too specific. For example, Bill and Gates are both English words.

  40. Re:Borland again... by Ronin+Developer · · Score: 2

    Funny. I haven't heard that. My copy ran just fine on my Windows machine. But, since I am not a Java developer, I surely didn't push it to its limits.

    What platform did you install it on? What kind of HW did you have in that machine? Did you address this on the JBuilder support group? Any responses to your inquiry?

  41. Re:Borland again... by Ronin+Developer · · Score: 2

    What support people? Did you have a paid corporate support plan with them or did you just use the NG? The NG is run by a group known a "TeamB". They are not paid support staff but volunteers. While they try to do their best, sometimes their answers leave much to be desired. Same thing goes with general NG questions. I've always found that questions that go answered are almost always a result of nobody knowing the answer rather than not giving a damn.

    A statement like "We've fixed that in v.4 sounds like an NG response or from a dumbshit help desk person. If it came from the paid support staff, you'd expect them to offer you an upgrade or tell you how to acquire v.4". Did you ask to speak to their supervisor? In any event, if it came from their staff, a letter to Dale Fuller or David Intersimone may be in order. Believe it or not, they do answer their own e-mail.

    And yes...v3 did suck. But I suggest you grab an evaluation copy of J5. I think you'll be pleasantly suprised.

    Disclaimer -- no...I do not work for Borland and I am NOT on TeamB.