Board index » delphi » Re: Borland is neglecting Delphi for Win32 badly

Re: Borland is neglecting Delphi for Win32 badly


2005-01-17 08:54:01 AM
delphi279
Max writes:
Quote
Very good point! And a very good indicator!
A better indicator would be when Adobe ports Photoshop to .NET. I
suspect we're more likely to see Adobe port Photoshop to AMD64 though..
Will
--
Want a 64-bit Delphi compiler for AMD64 / IA-32e? Vote here--
qc.borland.com/wc/wc.exe/details
 
 

Re: Borland is neglecting Delphi for Win32 badly

Quote
>- new VCL for Win/Linux
means a common layer for both Win32 and Linux (interfaces in sync) plus get
rid of the terrible Q{Unitname}
 

Re: Borland is neglecting Delphi for Win32 badly

Alexander Adam writes:
Quote
Lol what a list. Hey lets crash D25k every ten minutes but thanks it
builds 64 bit that almost no one us using nowadays (except some
niches like sci).
LOL what an attitude.
I think it is a given that people want Borland to fix bugs, but surely
you're not suggesting that that is ALL they can do? I mean, at some
point new work needs to be done or else Borland stagnates.
Quote
New Vcl? Oh sure, and best let all my good old Delphi Code
become incompatible.
I /think/ he meant a Unicode VCL. The VCL is fine, it just needs to be
moved ahead.
Quote
Oh and operator overloading, the most senseless language
feature I have ever seen (and so many peoples mis-using it)
making our code looking worse is a great idea!
Delphi 8 introduced operator overloading for .NET. Maybe you missed it?
What he seems to be suggesting is that the syntax now be exposed for
Win32. Or do you think it is /less/ confusing that code for .NET can
have operator overloading while code for Win32 cannot?
Will
--
Want a 64-bit Delphi compiler for AMD64 / IA-32e? Vote here--
qc.borland.com/wc/wc.exe/details
 

Re: Borland is neglecting Delphi for Win32 badly

On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 01:04:38 +0100, "Alexander Adam"
<XXXX@XXXXX.COM>writes:
Quote
Lol what a list. Hey lets crash D25k every ten minutes
It already does.
 

Re: Borland is neglecting Delphi for Win32 badly

Quote
I think it is a given that people want Borland to fix bugs, but surely
you're not suggesting that that is ALL they can do? I mean, at some
point new work needs to be done or else Borland stagnates.
Got some news for you.. have a look at Delphi 2005. Its new. Its fresh. And
its cool.
Quote
I /think/ he meant a Unicode VCL. The VCL is fine, it just needs to be
moved ahead.
There's a great and perfect working implementation thanks to TNT.
Quote
Delphi 8 introduced operator overloading for .NET. Maybe you missed it?
What he seems to be suggesting is that the syntax now be exposed for
Win32. Or do you think it is /less/ confusing that code for .NET can
have operator overloading while code for Win32 cannot?
No its absolutely *not*. Delphi.NET compiles not to machine code but to IL.
And this provides a common language feature between languages and by that
you can have operator overloading and other things.
Alex
 

Re: Borland is neglecting Delphi for Win32 badly

Quote
>Lol what a list. Hey lets crash D25k every ten minutes

It already does.
<g>That's what I was ment to say by that ;-)
Alex
 

Re: Borland is neglecting Delphi for Win32 badly

Quote
>>- new VCL for Win/Linux
means a common layer for both Win32 and Linux (interfaces in sync) plus
get
rid of the terrible Q{Unitname}
Please not.. that'd mean a lot of IFDEFS in the VCL Code which for now is a
great source to learn and explore.
Alex
 

Re: Borland is neglecting Delphi for Win32 badly

"Will DeWitt Jr." <XXXX@XXXXX.COM>writes
Quote
Max writes:

>Very good point! And a very good indicator!

A better indicator would be when Adobe ports Photoshop to .NET. I
suspect we're more likely to see Adobe port Photoshop to AMD64 though..

Office, Photoshop, or whatever. The main point is that when large,
especially resource intensive applications (not that Office needs a lot of
CPU resources, or at least it didn't at one time), then I will buy into .NET -
however, at the moment I think it has a place for internet based apps, but
for computationaly intensive apps, it just doesn't cut it. And for those
that say that in a few years, when .NET becomes more mainstream, PCs will
have much more power - so what? My clients want to use that extra power to
shorten their processing times, not to compensate for CPU and memory hungry
technology.
 

Re: Borland is neglecting Delphi for Win32 badly

How about just fixing some old boring bugs? Like the TLB editor (yeah,
that's my pet peeve).
Dmitry Streblechenko (MVP)
www.dimastr.com/
OutlookSpy - Outlook, CDO
and MAPI Developer Tool
"Max" <XXXX@XXXXX.COM>writes
Quote
Since the ridiculous .Net hype Borland is neglecting Delphi for Win32
badly.
This is annoying me. There are hardly new language features since Delphi
4.

I would suggest a Urgent Requirement List:

- announce a 64 bit compiler for Win/Linux
- new VCL for Win/Linux
- new language features: Generics, Operator overloading, etc.





 

Re: Borland is neglecting Delphi for Win32 badly

"Alexander Adam" <XXXX@XXXXX.COM>writes
Quote
Got some news for you.. have a look at Delphi 2005. Its new. Its fresh.
And
its cool.
And it has more bugs than a bait store.
 

Re: Borland is neglecting Delphi for Win32 badly

I am sticking with compiled Object Pascal. I hope Borland keeps
perfecting compiled Object Pascal, otherwise I will stick with Delphi32
for several years, then look and see what the Free Pascal organization
is doing. If Borland puts all their eggs in the .NET CLR basket, they
might end up with Free Pascal taking away some of their customers.
Granted, it would take years for Free Pascal to match what Delphi
currently offers, but the Free Pascal compiler is steadily improving...
Let's see what things look like 5 years from now.
 

Re: Borland is neglecting Delphi for Win32 badly

Dave White writes:
Quote
Office, Photoshop, or whatever. [...] (not that Office needs a
lot of CPU resources, or at least it didn't at one time)
This was why I brought up the distinction of Photoshop vs. Office--
we're far more likely to see Office ported to .NET and perform
relatively close to the native Win32 editions out now than we are to
see Photoshop ported to .NET and maintain it is performance.
I agree with everything else you've said. =)
Will
--
Want native support in Delphi for AMD64/EM64T? Vote here--
qc.borland.com/wc/qcmain.aspx
 

Re: Borland is neglecting Delphi for Win32 badly

Alexander Adam writes:
Quote
Got some news for you.. have a look at Delphi 2005. Its new. Its
fresh. And its cool.
Fascinating.. the IDE has been rewritten, while the Delphi language
itself languishes (at least as far as Win32 is concerned). Yes, Delphi
2005 has the most additions in a long while, but it left a lot of
things unfinished (operator overloading is missing, for example).
Quote
There's a great and perfect working implementation thanks to TNT.
No disrespect to Troy, but Borland customers seem to want Borland to
provide an out-of-the-box solution and not have to rely on 3rd party
efforts.
Quote
No its absolutely not. Delphi.NET compiles not to machine code but to
IL. And this provides a common language feature between languages
and by that you can have operator overloading and other things.
Again I must be missing something here-- what does this have to do with
the Delphi syntax being out of sync from Win32 ->.NET? How does this
justify the .NET implementation of Delphi having operator overloading
while excluding the Win32 inplementation?
I'm afraid your argument(s) doesn't address this.
Will
--
Want native support in Delphi for AMD64/EM64T? Vote here--
qc.borland.com/wc/qcmain.aspx
 

Re: Borland is neglecting Delphi for Win32 badly

Quote
My clients want to use that extra power to
shorten their processing times, not to compensate for CPU and memory hungry
technology.
and your clients are not unique in this aspect.
 

Re: Borland is neglecting Delphi for Win32 badly

Will DeWitt Jr. writes:
Quote
This was why I brought up the distinction of Photoshop vs. Office--
we're far more likely to see Office ported to .NET and perform
relatively close to the native Win32 editions out now than we are to
see Photoshop ported to .NET and maintain it is performance.
But, you see, all these companies have to comply! Microsoft is
clear that their API's after .NET (certainly for 64 bit environs)
will not be supported the way the current 32 bit was.
If you're an ISV and want to write *native* Windows(tm) applications,
.NET is your only legal option when Microsoft "breaks" the API's.
In some ways, it may not be surprising that Microsoft keeps direct
(unmanaged) API's for itself... and perhaps a few bedfellows that
they can easily manage if API's "break". But for the rest of the
mere mortals, I guess the .NET porridge will have to do. :)