Board index » delphi » Re: Chrome - competition for Borland?

Re: Chrome - competition for Borland?


2004-11-08 11:24:20 AM
delphi70
Alexander Adam writes:
Quote

Missing some nice-to-have features of C# ;-)
C# is missing some nice to have Delphi features as well.
--
Nick Hodges -- TeamB
Lemanix Corporation -- www.lemanix.com
Read my Blog -- www.lemanix.com/nick
 
 

Re: Chrome - competition for Borland?

"Bob Dawson" <XXXX@XXXXX.COM>writes
Quote
"Chris Burrows" wrote

>[...] Most compilers I have used for development during the past
>five years for Win32, .NET and other work (apart from Delphi)
>were written by companies or groups with a *total* of less than
>10 staff. In most cases the quality is as good as, if not better, than
>the Delphi compiler.

hmm--and what has their survival rate been? Which are still active and
growing?
Exactly. Any fool can write a compiler (or any other complex software). But
it takes a lot of resources to properly MAINTAIN and SUPPORT it.
I wish I had a dollar for every time I heard developers talk as if
programming was the entire product cycle.
 

Re: Chrome - competition for Borland?

"Alessandro Federici" <XXXX@XXXXX.COM>writes
Quote
"Dennis Landi" <XXXX@XXXXX.COM>writes
news:418e90c8$XXXX@XXXXX.COM...
[..]
>RemObject has no responsibilities here.
>Borland does.

Sorry Dennis but I disagree. The only responsability Borland has is to
support what they sold and make smarter "next moves" than they did with
Kylix. Jumping on the 64 bit bandwagon is premature now and might
potentially be damaging to other existing products (i.e. Danny's hours are
not infinite).
I expect the vendor of my development tools to do the logical thing in
maintaining the toolset my code base is dependet on. If I am forced to
rewrite my code, *I* will also make smarter moves in the future.
Danny's hours shouldn't even need to enter into the conversation. If they
need more developers then they should hire more developers. Not rocket
science, but simple management. Redundancy in this context isn't only
crucial, but necessary. And don't hand be that guff that *only* Danny can
do Danny's job.
Balderdash!
-d
 

Re: Chrome - competition for Borland?

"Captain Jake" <XXXX@XXXXX.COM>writes
[..]
Quote
Exactly. Any fool can write a compiler (or any other complex software).
But
it takes a lot of resources to properly MAINTAIN and SUPPORT it.
You're over simplyfing it. Before you get into those two important aspects,
you need to FINISH it which is not something any *fool* can do. Heck, even
newsreaders sometimes don't get finished <G>
--
Best regards,
Alessandro Federici
Chief Architecture Designer
RemObjects Software, Inc.
www.remobjects.com
 

Re: Chrome - competition for Borland?

"Captain Jake" <XXXX@XXXXX.COM>writes
Quote
"Dennis Landi" <XXXX@XXXXX.COM>writes
news:418e97d3$XXXX@XXXXX.COM...
>I have already told Alessandro in this thread, I look forward to using
>64-bit VC++ DLLs with Chrome. I guess you missed that part. I am not
>*happy* about it. I won't have any other choice but to use VC++ for
64-bit
>native compilation on Windows. None of us will.

So what? To hear you go on about VC++ you'd think it was evil incarnate.
All
this anti-C++ stuff really gets tiring. It is a quite capable language and
tool, as illustrated by the fact that most of the shrinkware in existence
is
written in VC++.

Anti-C++? What are you smoking? I am not anti-C++! That isn't the point at
all! The point is having to have to rewrite my code base in another
language, period! I wish to god all my code *was* written on C++!
I should be concentrating on how to apply my existing code to my future
needs, right now; not scrambling to figure out what language I should be
writing my next projects in.
-d
 

Re: Chrome - competition for Borland?

"Dennis Landi" <XXXX@XXXXX.COM>writes
[..]
Quote
I expect the vendor of my development tools to do the logical thing in
maintaining the toolset my code base is dependet on. If I am forced to
rewrite my code, *I* will also make smarter moves in the future.
Danny's hours shouldn't even need to enter into the conversation. If they
need more developers then they should hire more developers. Not rocket
science, but simple management. Redundancy in this context isn't only
crucial, but necessary. And don't hand be that guff that *only* Danny can
do Danny's job.
I understand and I agree with that the fact it *could* be done and,
possibily, *should* (at a certain point in time), but I am challenging the
use of the word "responsibility" here. I believe most customers (which are
those towards which the higher responsibility comes in place) do not ask for
a 64 bit compiler now. Some might, but the majority of customers have first
right.
That said, I understand your point of view and, if it so crucial for you,
then you don't have much choice but to use VC++ for native 64 bit
development. Hoping for something to come along wouldn't be a smart
decision.
--
Best regards,
Alessandro Federici
Chief Architecture Designer
RemObjects Software, Inc.
www.remobjects.com
 

Re: Chrome - competition for Borland?

"Alessandro Federici" <XXXX@XXXXX.COM>writes
Quote
"Captain Jake" <XXXX@XXXXX.COM>writes
news:418ee75b$XXXX@XXXXX.COM...
[..]
>Exactly. Any fool can write a compiler (or any other complex software).
>But
>it takes a lot of resources to properly MAINTAIN and SUPPORT it.

You're over simplyfing it. Before you get into those two important
aspects,
you need to FINISH it which is not something any *fool* can do. Heck, even
newsreaders sometimes don't get finished <G>

Clearly, any fool cannot write and finish something as ... er... complex as
a newreader.
 

Re: Chrome - competition for Borland?

"Captain Jake" <XXXX@XXXXX.COM>writes
Quote
"Bob Dawson" <XXXX@XXXXX.COM>writes
news:XXXX@XXXXX.COM...
>"Chris Burrows" wrote
>
>>[...] Most compilers I have used for development during the past
>>five years for Win32, .NET and other work (apart from Delphi)
>>were written by companies or groups with a *total* of less than
>>10 staff. In most cases the quality is as good as, if not better, than
>>the Delphi compiler.
>
>hmm--and what has their survival rate been? Which are still active and
>growing?

Exactly. Any fool can write a compiler (or any other complex software).
But
it takes a lot of resources to properly MAINTAIN and SUPPORT it.

No Jake - wrong yet again. See my reply to Bob. I agree that any fool can
write complex software - most fools do as they are incapable of writing
simple software. I disagree that any fool can write a compiler.
Chris Burrows
CFB Software
www.cfbsoftware.com
 

Re: Chrome - competition for Borland?

"Dennis Landi" <XXXX@XXXXX.COM>writes
Quote
You might compare Delphi.NET to Chrome, but that is as far as your
comparisons are valid.

To my knowlege RemObjects hasn't abandoned an entire customer base's
codebase when a clear upgrade path is staring it right in the face.
RO wishes they had Borland's "entire customer base" in the first place. They
can't abandon such a customer base because they don't have it yet.
Futhermore, what clear upgrade path are you talking about? Alessandro has
said here that they have no plans to pursue the same upgrade path (native 64
bit) for which you berate Borland's indifference.
Quote

I won't be entrusting my next code base to the whims of Borland. I *may*
entrust *part* of the the next one to RemObjects...
That's entirely your right, but it has no logical connection to the rest of
your post. Neither Borland nor RemObjects has stated that they plan native
64 bit support. You are not getting your wish granted by either genie.
 

Re: Chrome - competition for Borland?

Quote

I expect the vendor of my development tools to do the logical thing in
maintaining the toolset my code base is dependet on. If I am forced to
rewrite my code, *I* will also make smarter moves in the future.

Problem is Borland aint going to write a 64bit compiler just for you, unless
of course you want to throw them a few mil (probably $10m+ might get them to
look up). There is just not yet enough demand for it. In the future, maybe,
which is why Borland have said they are keeping an eye on the market.
Quote
Danny's hours shouldn't even need to enter into the conversation. If they
need more developers then they should hire more developers. Not rocket
science, but simple management. Redundancy in this context isn't only
crucial, but necessary. And don't hand be that guff that *only* Danny can
do Danny's job.

Problem is good compiler architect's are pretty hard to come by. I haven't
tripped over many recently.
 

Re: Chrome - competition for Borland?

"Chris Burrows" <XXXX@XXXXX.COM>writes
Quote
AFAIK, the Delphi *compiler* development team numbers somewhere between 1
and 10.

The point I am making is that the number of man-hours to develop a
compiler
is not that considerable, particularly with less baroque languages than
Delphi.
Surely you are not suggesting that writing the code for a compiler is the
biggest part of the product cycle? If so you are completely missing the
point here.
 

Re: Chrome - competition for Borland?

"Dennis Landi" <XXXX@XXXXX.COM>writes
Quote
Danny's hours shouldn't even need to enter into the conversation. If they
need more developers then they should hire more developers. Not rocket
science, but simple management. Redundancy in this context isn't only
crucial, but necessary. And don't hand be that guff that *only* Danny can
do Danny's job.
You seem to miss the main point, namely that it is not a good use of their
money. (Ditto for RO)
 

Re: Chrome - competition for Borland?

"Captain Joke" <XXXX@XXXXX.COM>writes news:418eea75
Quote
That's entirely your right, but it has no logical connection to the rest
of
your post. Neither Borland nor RemObjects has stated that they plan native
64 bit support. You are not getting your wish granted by either genie.
That's my point! Since RO doesn't have Win32 compiler there is no issue of
doing the MIND NUMBINGLY OBVIOUS thing of upgrading their compiler to Win64.
That's on Borland's head.
To now say that Borland doesn't have to do it because RO isn't doesn't make
any sense.
-d
 

Re: Chrome - competition for Borland?

"Alessandro Federici" <XXXX@XXXXX.COM>writes
Quote
"Captain Jake" <XXXX@XXXXX.COM>writes
news:418ee75b$XXXX@XXXXX.COM...
[..]
>Exactly. Any fool can write a compiler (or any other complex software).
>But
>it takes a lot of resources to properly MAINTAIN and SUPPORT it.

You're over simplyfing it. Before you get into those two important
aspects,
you need to FINISH it which is not something any *fool* can do.
Well, actually any fool can "do it", he just won't do it well. But that is
not really the intent of the phrase as I used it anyway. My point was that
the really big part of any product cycle is the testing, maintenance and
support part, which can be very expensive for some types of products. I
don't know how RO intends to test Chrome, but it seems to me that any
rigorous regression testing and QA process of a compiler intended to be
professional quality, as developers have come to expect it, would be rather
expensive.
Quote
Heck, even
newsreaders sometimes don't get finished <G>
Newsreaders sometimes don't get finished because the author is fooling
around all the time, even though his wife keeps reminding him of this fact.
 

Re: Chrome - competition for Borland?

"Captain Jake" <XXXX@XXXXX.COM>writes
Quote

Surely you are not suggesting that writing the code for a compiler is the
biggest part of the product cycle?
No - but it is usually proportional to it. My experience over a 25 year
professional software development career involving several complete product
life cycles has been of the order of 10% original development 90% testing,
maintenance and support. What has your experience been in this regard?
Chris Burrows
CFB Software
www.cfbsoftware.com