Oh, sure, it supports a rather castrated sub-set of Pascal.
None of my platform-clean Delphi code will compile on Free Pascal. Why? I design the code I write. With interfaces (pure virtual base classes, in a sense).
>I came across Gnu Pascal Compiler. >I don't see any reasons for another one
GPC does not seem to serve any useful purpose. It is dog slow to compile, it supports Pascal dialects that were in use a decade ago, but nothing that is up-to-date and modern.
>Pascal is one of those languages that is great >for teaching the basics of programming.
This is a common misconception.
The "old" Pascal you (and most others when they are talking about Pascal) are referring to is plainly dead. It's ugly. It's useless.
Modern Pascal dialects - and Borland's Delphi Pascal is very much up-to-date and modern - are very productive tools and go far, far beyond any basics.
Using (Object/Delphi) Pascal as a beginner language? I wouldn't do that. Python (http://www.python.org/) is the better suited language: Interpreted (hence instant gratification), modern concepts (functional and imperative elements, introspection), readable (can you spell Java?). Of course Python is not the best thing since sliced bread, but the combination of Borland's Delphi Pascal and Python *is*.
>Last time I heard, GUIDs in class interface >declaration are windows-only-registry-dependent >thing
They are not. A GUID is just a unique identifier. Yes, Microsoft use them to distinguish between COM interfaces. But that has approximately zero implications for interfaces and use of GUIDs in interfaces.
>GNOME, in my opinion, is much prettier than KDE >and has about the same functionality, so that is >why I prefer it.
>If KDE would get rid of QT, maybe I might use >it. Sorry, but QT is just ugly.
QT is not ugly. Try KDE 1.91 (that's the current beta). Whoa. Pretty. I have Gnome 1.2 installed, too, and *HAD* been running Gnome 1.x before switching to KDE 1.91.
KDE 1.91 (beta) is functional (for what I do/need). It's stable (!) enough for my needs (essentially konsole + mozilla).
None of these what you call "click-and-drool delphi converts" will ever get into contact with interfaces - because interfaces are only useful for designing.
Oh, wait. You don't know what design is about! It's about maintainability, abstraction, modelling, separation of interface (sic!) and implementation...
You want me to add it? Fine - please send over the food, pay my rent and my Internet access charges. Trust me, I could do that (and much more).
>Delphi web modules can compile to traditional >CGIs or ISAPIs [author forgot that Delphi will do Apache on Win32]
>Kylix web modules will compile to traditional >CGIs or Apache modules
A "CGI" is just a program called by the web server. Your Perl/stuff is a CGI (assuming that you don't use modperl), just not compiled.
An Apache module is something that bundles up intimately with Apache itself. Massive performance improvements result (modperl, modpython etc are all Apache modules)
An ISAPI [DLL] is about the same as an Apache module, just for Microsoft's IIS (which some Fortune 500 companies reportedly are still running )
>Borland intends to give away its command line >compiler (dcc) for free distribution.
Has there been any announcement to this effect?
Sure, this would be a logical extension of the free Borland C++ compiler (one of the most ANSI C++-compliant compilers around) and of the free JBuilder download, recognised as the very best Java IDE around.
>I know pascal,... shouldn't be too difficult to >pickup on the variations in Delphi--
Uhoh. Pascal is like the old Ford Model T. Delphi Pascal is like this year's Ferrari model.
You can't compare these two. Oh, and once you have realised how nice and enormously powerful Delphi Pascal is, you'll *rarely* want to use C++. In a sense, Delphi Pascal has the performance advantages of C and the OO features of Java - a most exquisite cross-breed.
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...
"All the current fast languages suck from a safety standpoint, and all the rigorous ones (the Pascal/Modula/Ada/Eiffel/Sather family) are essentially dead."
Pascal - or rather Object Pascal - is far from being dead. It lives on and prospers in the best Windows development tool as Borland Delphi.
It will prosper under Linux - because producing the finest Linux RAD tool is what Borland's project Kylix is all about.
Amazingly with increasing age (currently just short of 30) I am put off by even the few lax parts of Object Pascal - and am continuously moving into the Eiffel direction: The longer I am writing software, the more I favour "safety" through strong, clean, unambiguous contracts.
>how do economists cope with things that are innately enjoyable?
Short answer: They don't.
Still a short answer (you don't expect a treatise on economics, right?): The underlying assumption in economic theory is that subjects (that is you and me) receive some sort of utility (i.e. pleasure, money, whatever). Subjects are assumed to maximise their utility.
Everyone is free to mix in, say monetary compensation, "joy", "anger", the perception of "freedom" into a utility function - utility is an abstract concept that is, if combined with anything than money, inherently unmeasurable.
>because after a long coding session I feel like I've just played a particularly satisfying game of chess
Economic theory is unable to capture this satisfaction satisfactorily in a model setting. After all, it is only a model.
Scanning the text for keywords, I would say that this is either a vastly simplified version of some ongoing research or plainly a bad, rather incomplete paper.
+3 (educational), IMHO and after just skimming / scanning, is too much - +1 (nice try) appears to be more appropriate.
FWIW, I have about 6 MB of texts on OSS and economics, all obtained from the 'net - some of that has fewer buzzwords, but definitely more content. Perhaps the audience (supposedly economists) simply wouldn't be able to appreciate a more formal model due to lack of familiarity with the economics (sic!) of OSS.
There are quite a few other ways to tackle this topic other than "career concerns". I personally do not think that this is the right approach.
Slashdot Mirror
Oh, sure, it supports a rather castrated sub-set of Pascal.
None of my platform-clean Delphi code will compile on Free Pascal. Why? I design the code I write. With interfaces (pure virtual base classes, in a sense).
You are still plainly wrong.
>I came across Gnu Pascal Compiler.
>I don't see any reasons for another one
GPC does not seem to serve any useful purpose. It is dog slow to compile, it supports Pascal dialects that were in use a decade ago, but nothing that is up-to-date and modern.
>Templates - It is unlikely this will ever be
>included in Delphi for the simple reason of
>compilation speed.
That reasoning is wrong and that reasoning has been ripped apart often enough.
You think of templates in terms of C++. Templates are "just" a form of genericity - and compiling for genericity doesn't HAVE to be slow.
>One of the major strengths in Delphi is that it
>doesn't have to conform to a committee
Well, it's the in-house commmittee, and that committee is very much committed to a clean, productive language.
>Pascal is one of those languages that is great
>for teaching the basics of programming.
This is a common misconception.
The "old" Pascal you (and most others when they are talking about Pascal) are referring to is plainly dead. It's ugly. It's useless.
Modern Pascal dialects - and Borland's Delphi Pascal is very much up-to-date and modern - are very productive tools and go far, far beyond any basics.
Using (Object/Delphi) Pascal as a beginner language? I wouldn't do that. Python (http://www.python.org/) is the better suited language: Interpreted (hence instant gratification), modern concepts (functional and imperative elements, introspection), readable (can you spell Java?). Of course Python is not the best thing since sliced bread, but the combination of Borland's Delphi Pascal and Python *is*.
>it is less productive,
Hmmm. I am much more productive with Delphi Pascal than with C or even C++. The reason?
It compiles faster. I find problems earlier.
>and you are limited
Limited? The only thing that I haven't done with Delphi Pascal is write a Windows NT (or Windows 2000) kernel mode device driver.
Sorry, but for me there is no limit (neither in C, C++, or Delphi Pascal).
>Last time I heard, GUIDs in class interface
>declaration are windows-only-registry-dependent
>thing
They are not. A GUID is just a unique identifier. Yes, Microsoft use them to distinguish between COM interfaces. But that has approximately zero implications for interfaces and use of GUIDs in interfaces.
>GNOME, in my opinion, is much prettier than KDE
>and has about the same functionality, so that is
>why I prefer it.
>If KDE would get rid of QT, maybe I might use
>it. Sorry, but QT is just ugly.
QT is not ugly. Try KDE 1.91 (that's the current beta). Whoa. Pretty. I have Gnome 1.2 installed, too, and *HAD* been running Gnome 1.x before switching to KDE 1.91.
KDE 1.91 (beta) is functional (for what I do/need). It's stable (!) enough for my needs (essentially konsole + mozilla).
Sorry, but on my system Gnome 1.2 lost.
Yeah, interfaces are so much click-and-drool.
None of these what you call "click-and-drool delphi converts" will ever get into contact with interfaces - because interfaces are only useful for designing.
Oh, wait. You don't know what design is about! It's about maintainability, abstraction, modelling, separation of interface (sic!) and implementation...
You want me to add it? Fine - please send over the food, pay my rent and my Internet access charges. Trust me, I could do that (and much more).
>There is no garbage collection, and no reference
:->
>counting.
It seems as if reading up on "interfaces" would help you out. Interfaces *are* reference-counted, interfaces are garbage collected.
Hop over to the excellent Borland newsgroups on
nntp://forums.borland.com/
nntp://newsgroups.borland.com/
[you do need to connect to either of these two]
and bring that up in, say,
borland.public.delphi.objectpascal
You will be surprised what features Delphi has to offer which you haven't found yet
>A Turbo Pascal and Delphi compatible compiler
Free Pascal does not support the notion of "interface"s, something that Delphi has had for more than four years now.
Sorry, but interfaces are such an important design concept that I won't use FPC - at least until they are implemented.
>I hope they release a trial version first
>however, so I can see if I want to buy it
>(all software makers should do this IMNSHO)
Look at what Borland are doing on Windows.
* Free C++ command-line compiler
* Complete C++Builder Enterprise trial edition
* Free Java IDE (recognised as the best in the industry)
* Complete Delphi Enterprise trial edition
Realise that Borland do understand the concerns of the Open Source community.
Realise that the Borland community centers around component and utility source code, not around binary don't-touch-me nightmares.
What does that tell you about the future of Delphi for Linux and C++Builder for Linux?
>Delphi web modules can compile to traditional
>CGIs or ISAPIs
[author forgot that Delphi will do Apache on Win32]
>Kylix web modules will compile to traditional >CGIs or Apache modules
A "CGI" is just a program called by the web server. Your Perl/stuff is a CGI (assuming that you don't use modperl), just not compiled.
An Apache module is something that bundles up intimately with Apache itself. Massive performance improvements result (modperl, modpython etc are all Apache modules)
An ISAPI [DLL] is about the same as an Apache module, just for Microsoft's IIS (which some Fortune 500 companies reportedly are still running )
>I really wish Borland/Inpise had donated a tool
>the whole community could use
How can they donate a tool that is not done yet?
Perhaps it's time to wait for the tool to be released and then see whether it is fit for GPL, LGPL, QPL, or whatever-else-OSS licence development?
I have very good reason to be convinced that Borland fully understand the concerns of the Open Source community.
I have very good reason to speculate that the Open Source community will be happy with what Borland delivers - *once the tool is ready for release*.
>Borland intends to give away its command line
>compiler (dcc) for free distribution.
Has there been any announcement to this effect?
Sure, this would be a logical extension of the free Borland C++ compiler (one of the most ANSI C++-compliant compilers around) and of the free JBuilder download, recognised as the very best Java IDE around.
>I know pascal, ... shouldn't be too difficult to
>pickup on the variations in Delphi--
Uhoh. Pascal is like the old Ford Model T. Delphi Pascal is like this year's Ferrari model.
You can't compare these two. Oh, and once you have realised how nice and enormously powerful Delphi Pascal is, you'll *rarely* want to use C++. In a sense, Delphi Pascal has the performance advantages of C and the OO features of Java - a most exquisite cross-breed.
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...
... slightly off-topic.
"All the current fast languages suck from a safety standpoint, and all the rigorous ones (the Pascal/Modula/Ada/Eiffel/Sather family) are essentially dead."
Pascal - or rather Object Pascal - is far from being dead. It lives on and prospers in the best Windows development tool as Borland Delphi.
It will prosper under Linux - because producing the finest Linux RAD tool is what Borland's project Kylix is all about.
Amazingly with increasing age (currently just short of 30) I am put off by even the few lax parts of Object Pascal - and am continuously moving into the Eiffel direction: The longer I am writing software, the more I favour "safety" through strong, clean, unambiguous contracts.
Let me put it this way: Object Pascal *is* the standard Pascal by virtue of market power.
Your "TP4Linux" explicitly wants to be TP compatible - it is FreePascal at
http://www.freepascal.org/
Personally, I will use Delphi for Linux, originating from the Kylix project.
Excellent question.
.de and the .com variant - good move )
I currently have a USD 1 bn company knocking on the door since they want my domain (I own both the very relevant
The domain has the magic "e" at the very beginning, it's short and crisp, AFAICT no trademarks anywhere.
Personally, I don't need that very name, though I have a small business running over it. Cashing in therefore would be nice.
What's the "right" amount? $20,000 (that was my initial thought, too)? $200,000?
Yes, I know - find the sweet spot, what they are prepared to pay... It would be nice to be able to point up to them what has been paid...
>how do economists cope with things that are innately enjoyable?
Short answer: They don't.
Still a short answer (you don't expect a treatise on economics, right?): The underlying assumption in economic theory is that subjects (that is you and me) receive some sort of utility (i.e. pleasure, money, whatever). Subjects are assumed to maximise their utility.
Everyone is free to mix in, say monetary compensation, "joy", "anger", the perception of "freedom" into a utility function - utility is an abstract concept that is, if combined with anything than money, inherently unmeasurable.
>because after a long coding session I feel like I've just played a particularly satisfying game of chess
Economic theory is unable to capture this satisfaction satisfactorily in a model setting. After all, it is only a model.
Scanning the text for keywords, I would say that this is either a vastly simplified version of some ongoing research or plainly a bad, rather incomplete paper.
+3 (educational), IMHO and after just skimming / scanning, is too much - +1 (nice try) appears to be more appropriate.
FWIW, I have about 6 MB of texts on OSS and economics, all obtained from the 'net - some of that has fewer buzzwords, but definitely more content. Perhaps the audience (supposedly economists) simply wouldn't be able to appreciate a more formal model due to lack of familiarity with the economics (sic!) of OSS.
There are quite a few other ways to tackle this topic other than "career concerns". I personally do not think that this is the right approach.
Try
http://www.people.hbs.edu/jlerner/publications.
for the free download of the working paper.
Dear moderator(s),
please pay a visit to your nearest McDonalds and get yourself a nice clue with a lot of ketchup.
Mmhhh. Fantastic. No thinking required.
Censors! Nazis! Holocaust!
/. This is not news for nerds. You provided a soapbox for a clueless xenophile full of hatred.
I am left speechless. What a piece of rubbish.
Let me recommend one thing: Before you ever again post such a piece of uninformed rubbish, look at what that rubbish contains.
Good-bye
If you want to be taken seriously, grow up.
>Can't you see developers getting stuck?
No. The VCL is all about openness.
Any decent developer will never get stuck.