Board index » delphi » Re: I really hate .NET especially inside Delphi

Nick Hodges (Borland/DTG)

Delphi Developer
 

Re: I really hate .NET especially inside Delphi


2006-10-05 02:35:06 AM
delphi22
Rick Beerendonk writes:
Quote
Is that an excuse? At least C# and VB.NET make it easier than the
other languages to comply with the guidelines
I'll try again, because I really want to know:
Why can not you conform to those guidelines when using Delphi?
--
Nick Hodges
Delphi/C# Product Manager - Borland DTG
blogs.borland.com/nickhodges
 
 
AnnShip

Delphi Developer

2006-10-05 02:46:14 AM

Re: I really hate .NET especially inside Delphi

I have been using .NET for quite a while and have some application with
it.
Just today something has gone wrong with BDS 2006 Pro with such error.
How can VCL.NET works perfectly well but .NET Winform can't compile
with such error.
This is really weird as Delphi VCL.NET suppose to encapsulates .NET to
run perfectly
but the IDE itself comes up with such error.
If I had to remove and install BDS 2006 again I'd move to Turbo
Delphi .NET instead.
Take like 20-30 miniutes for installation.
Ann
"AnnShip" <XXXX@XXXXX.COM>writes
Quote
[Pascal Error] E1026 File not Found:"WinForm.TWinForm.resources'
[Pascal Fatal Error] E2328 Linker error while emitting metadata

What is this error as I have been using .NET for quite a long time and
suddenly
it screws up.
When I use VCL.NET, it works perfectly. What could be wrong ?
Removing and Reinstall BDS2006 Pro Edition, .NET, Pack , Roll up won't
help.

Need to add .NET .bpl at all time as it will not remember next time when
loading IDE.

Any help appreciated.

Ann




 
Brian Moelk

Delphi Developer

2006-10-05 03:24:54 AM

Re: I really hate .NET especially inside Delphi

Allen Bauer (Borland/DTG) writes:
Quote
I agree to a point. However I am not sure I would hold it up as
"revolutionary" and total game-changing. I think that will happen at a
higher level... and it hasn't happened yet. I am afraid that we'll only
*really* know that it has happened when we look back after a couple of
years and realize it.
The more and more I look at .NET the more I do think it's
"revolutionary" from the perspective of what Win32 is. it is certainly
not revolutionary in the context of Java or Delphi or its other obvious
predecessors.
Quote
Saying something is revolutionary doesn't make
it so... it is when the customers come back and start saying that does
it become revolutionary.
Sure and as I look at .NET more in comparison to Win32, it is more
revolutionary than not. The difference is that through Delphi eyes, it
might not appear as revolutionary as I believe it actually is.
Quote
Look at the Segway... Dean Kamen kept saying
it was as revolutionary as walking... now in hindsight, is it? You now
have municipalities banning them from public streets, and it is viewed
as only a "geek" toy.
Sure, there are many more things hyped as revolutionary without
delivering revolutionary results. The difference is that .NET is making
headway into enterprises and organizations
Quote
If the only information I get is from these newsgroups, then you're
right. However, there are *many* other avenues of feedback that we
have, and they are just as vocal.
Fair enough, I hope your .NET strategy works for them. All I know is
that I can not sell myself on it.
Quote
It depends on whether or not they're "sacrifices." Certainly we had to
do things a little differently, but to say that it is rife with
sacrifices and compromises, is a bit of hyperbole.
I believe the differences can be seen pretty clearly when one compares
Delphi for .NET and a clean slate .NET language.
Garbage collection certainly changes things, namespaces and extra IL
stuff have already been mentioned/discussed, but other things like the
security issues with VCL.NET certainly matter.
Quote
You know... I have this love-hate relationship with "with."
Me too, I'd love it more and hate it less if there was a way to
explicitly use a scoped variable *and* the de{*word*81} was aware of it.
Quote
I guess it
could be counted as insanity... You know, doing the same thing over
and over again and expecting a different result ;-)
That is indeed one definition of insanity, although in this case I am not
sure it applies unless you use "with" over and over again and hope that
it works differently than it does.
The only reason why I am nit-picking here is because I am insane and I
believe other insane people will agree with me. ;)
Quote
>I don't think it is like arguing that. We're not talking about
 >preferences like begin/end and {}.
Depends on what we're discussing. For things like generics, iterators,
and other critical features, then absolutely those are more than just
preferences. However there are a lot of things that people latch onto
as being "fact" when they're only opinions and preferences.
Certainly, but we're specifically talking about namespaces.
Quote
This is probably one of those cases where I would have to say is more
opinion. You *can* be very productive and create .NET applications
with Delphi. I don't think physical file coupling precludes that at
all.
I think you can reduce everything down to opinion at some point. I'll
just point back to the "clean slate" argument as I believe that really
indicates what kinds of compromises have been made.
Quote
>There is a way to quantify it empirically and anecdotally. If you
 >had a clean slate what would you do?
Make something completely different than the Delphi language.
Fair enough.
Quote
Mainly
because if it were too close to it, the expectation for high
compatibility would be there and it would be completely unfair to the
customer to provide a sub-solution.
How prophetic. ;)
Quote
>Another question: when you guys were thinking about what Delphi was
 >going to be and pondered "Label.Caption := 'foo';" (or whatever the
 >line of code was), did you guys think a lot about backward
 >compatibility with Turbo Pascal? If not, why did you do so with .NET?
Yes. We introduced a new component/class/exception model while
preserving all the existing language constructs.
True, Delphi preserved a lot of what Turbo Pascal had; but that is not
why people bought it. It was because of the new model, and in
particular Delphi's database connectivity ability that drove sales.
Quote
We were shifting
paradigms... A shift that was far greater than any of the shifts that
occurred in the move to .NET.
That's where I think the problem is; where's the mindset for innovation?
ECO is perhaps the only thing that tried to leverage .NET to make
something better than what could be offered on Win32.
Also, if .NET wasn't a big shift, then why bother to go there with
Delphi. Why not tack on a mixed mode compiler, support C# and be done
with it? Or was it just the incremental costs were minimal it was a no
brainer to build Delphi for .NET and VCL.NET?
Quote
For example, we specifically didn't
retrofit the old "object" syntax to be exception safe because we knew
that there was a lot of existing code out there that had no concept of
exceptions and we'd render a lot of old code useless. In fact, with
Delphi 1, you could recompile all your old OWL code and be none the
wiser about VCL.
That's true, although I don't believe that is what sold Delphi.
Quote
Moving forward, I too want to get back into that position. However, as
everyone here has acknowledged, the environment in which we were in was
not very conducive to doing that. We're all very e{*word*277}d that we've
been given the opportunity to finally change that. It won't happen
overnight and a lot of things are already in motion that we're not
going to derail. However, just recently we've hired another Delphi
compiler engineer and he's got some pretty radical ideas... for .NET
*and* Win32. Be sure to keep watching in the coming months.
Certainly and I hope that you guys get back into a position of technical
excellence, leadership and innovation.
Quote
Hindsight is really good for reflections and introspection... however
brooding on the past is also a fatal paralysis.
Certainly not, and that is exactly what I am saying: learn from hindsight
and make things better going forward.
Quote
It is my passion for the product, the team, and the loyal customers
that has kept me firmly planted here. There's a lot of internal
e{*word*277}ment and commitment on the teams here.
[...]
Sounds great, I just hope that more risks will be taken in the .NET space.
--
Brian Moelk
Brain Endeavor LLC
XXXX@XXXXX.COM
 

John Jacobson

Delphi Developer

2006-10-05 03:28:15 AM

Re: I really hate .NET especially inside Delphi

Brian Moelk <XXXX@XXXXX.COM>writes
<4523e3fe$XXXX@XXXXX.COM>
Quote
.NET 2.0 is certainly part of the equation, but planning future .NET
development, we've got .NET 3.0 and additional things like WPF, etc.
<Sigh>The more things change, the more they stay the same. This is exactly the
same type of argument that was made back in the 90's as to why Visual C++ was
the best choice for windows development.
--
***Free Your Mind***
Posted with JSNewsreader Preview 0.9.4.2722
 
Iman L Crawford

Delphi Developer

2006-10-05 03:30:32 AM

Re: I really hate .NET especially inside Delphi

"Allen Bauer (Borland/DTG)" <XXXX@XXXXX.COM>wrote in
Quote
That would have a negative impact on compiler performance... possibly
to unacceptable levels
I understand. The implicitness of Object Pascal bugs me sometimes.
--
Iman
 
marc hoffman

Delphi Developer

2006-10-05 03:37:17 AM

Re: I really hate .NET especially inside Delphi

Tim.
Quote
Rick, are you seriously saying that we should be writing our language
*compiler* to comply with an Author's (Brad Abrams) application
framework guidelines for reusable librarys? are you winding me up ?
Errrm. if the guidelines in question are *the* de facto standard for the
platform, then... let me think... yes?
--
marc hoffman
Chief Architect
RemObjects Software
www.remobjects.com
 
Dan Barclay

Delphi Developer

2006-10-05 03:44:50 AM

Re: I really hate .NET especially inside Delphi

"Allen Bauer (Borland/DTG)" <XXXX@XXXXX.COM>writes
Quote
I think the tide is begining to turn on that one. However, we're also
looking into what *other* facters there may be that is holding folks
back. So far the results have been surprising. What is interesting is
that many of these reasons we can address immediately and are taking
steps to do just that.
I really hope you are addressing the issue I spent time with Nick on a few
weeks ago. It falls squarely in this category.
Dan
 
Ingvar Nilsen

Delphi Developer

2006-10-05 03:50:07 AM

Re: I really hate .NET especially inside Delphi

Kevin Frevert writes:
Quote

"Ingvar Nilsen" <XXXX@XXXXX.COM>writes
news:XXXX@XXXXX.COM...
>You can link it in instead of copying it. There is no "default"
 >method like you describe. What you describe being a problem is no
 >problem at all.
Copying is the default/prefered behavior. You have to click that
little down arrow to get VS to "link" the file.
Preferred by whom? Not me at least.
Quote
>But, it is extremely easy to have VS output all DLLs, both those
 >release-built and those debug-built to the same folder, see under
 >Project/Properties/Build where you can specify to have all DLLs
 >output to for example the Debug folder.
 >Again, what you describe being a problem is no problem at all.
 A huge problem when 9+ developers scatter assemblies all over
creation. I can only image the chaos on end-users harddrives.
Huh? This I did not get at all, what is a 9+ developer?
And I cannot imagine any chaos at all because of this, the topic in
question here is related to the development machine, not the end user's.
Quote

>>- ASP.Net: I haven't dug deeply into this yet, but you
 >>have to publish .cs files to the target web server (\App_Code
 >>directory). I assume there is some switch/config option, and
 >>during development that is OK, but there is no amount of
 >>convincing that will make me think my source code is safe on a
 >>publicly accessed server.
 >
 >This is not the case at all.
 >To check this, right click the root of a web site project, select
 >Publish Web Site, and after having published your site, you will not
 >find as much as a single .cs file in the destination location.
 >
Like I wrote, I haven't dug into this deeply yet.
No, but then don't say "you have to publish .cs files to the target web
server" because you do not have to as far as I know.
If you know a case where you have to, I'd be very interested to
know, because one of the first products I will market is an application
that synchronises the development machine with the web server, and
knowledge about what files to copy and what to leave on the development
machine is essential for this to function correctly.
Quote
We have 2 'experienced' VS developers (one C# the other VB.Net) and
one ex-Java developer who after seeing what they can do in Delphi,
cannot understand why we haven't upgraded from Delphi 6 to D2006 (more
'modern' ide, refactoring, etc).
BDS 2006 is definitely a superior product. But not for ASP.Net web
development, there VS 2005 is far ahead. .Net 1.1 -->2.0 suffice for
that to be true.
Quote
Almost brought a tear to my eye.
I am a Delphi nostalgic myself, you bet :)
--
Ingvar Nilsen
www.ingvarius.com
 
Brian Moelk

Delphi Developer

2006-10-05 03:50:55 AM

Re: I really hate .NET especially inside Delphi

Nick Hodges (Borland/DTG) writes:
Quote
If I may --the way to "convince" me is to actually point out the
issues, instead of talking about me all the time.
Sure, and some of the issues have been raised before.
On my todo list is to actually compile the set of issues in a way that
DevCo can see them clearly and take action accordingly, but it takes
time and its low on my todo list.
Besides, I am not certain I am the best person to do so because I am not as
confident in my .NET skillz as I'd like to be. Having said that, I
wouldn't mind volunteering to be the central
dumping/collection/compilation/synthesizing hub for the communities
Delphi for .NET woes. So feel free to send those guys to me Nick. ;)
Quote
The other way to "convince" me is to recognize that perhaps I am not the
only one that needs convincing. It may be -- just maybe -- that I have
a valid viewpoint as well, right? ;-)
Of course, but that is not the point.
--
Brian Moelk
Brain Endeavor LLC
XXXX@XXXXX.COM
 
Ingvar Nilsen

Delphi Developer

2006-10-05 03:53:18 AM

Re: I really hate .NET especially inside Delphi

Nick Hodges (Borland/DTG) writes:
Quote
Ingvar Nilsen writes:

>I think you end up in a mess with file names like:
 >
 >mynamespace.myclass.pas
Is that a bad thing?
Giving it a second thought, maybe not!
It is just that I don't do it like that.. yet <g>
--
Ingvar Nilsen
www.ingvarius.com
 
Ingvar Nilsen

Delphi Developer

2006-10-05 03:54:46 AM

Re: I really hate .NET especially inside Delphi

Wayne Niddery [TeamB] writes:
Quote
Ingvar Nilsen writes:
>What about having several classes under the same namespace? This is
 >more the rule than the exception.
Delphi does this just fine.

Winwright.Common.pas
Winwright.Data.pas
Winwright.VCL.pas

Will all compile into the Winwright namespace.
Yep, see my reply to Nick, it looks better on-screen than in my mind <g>
--
Ingvar Nilsen
www.ingvarius.com
 
John Jacobson

Delphi Developer

2006-10-05 03:56:39 AM

Re: I really hate .NET especially inside Delphi

marc hoffman <XXXX@XXXXX.COM>writes
<4523e30d$XXXX@XXXXX.COM>
Quote
I merely wanted to point out that declaring features that all other .NET
language stake for granted as "useless" can be quite short-sighted...
I suppose it depends on one's needs. I have yet to see any actual NEED for
anything in software development since the invention of the fundamental
programming constructs all programming languages need to be of any use at all.
But I have seen some very nice candy in the mean time.
--
***Free Your Mind***
Posted with JSNewsreader Preview 0.9.4.2722
 
Ingvar Nilsen

Delphi Developer

2006-10-05 03:58:59 AM

Re: I really hate .NET especially inside Delphi

Allen Bauer (Borland/DTG) writes:
Quote
The good thing is that this person has hung out around here
Chad?
--
Ingvar Nilsen
www.ingvarius.com
 
Brian Moelk

Delphi Developer

2006-10-05 03:58:59 AM

Re: I really hate .NET especially inside Delphi

John Jacobson writes:
Quote
>.NET 2.0 is certainly part of the equation, but planning future .NET
 >development, we've got .NET 3.0 and additional things like WPF, etc.
<Sigh>The more things change, the more they stay the same. This is exactly the
same type of argument that was made back in the 90's as to why Visual C++ was
the best choice for windows development.
I disagree.
Even if I accept your rebuttal, it doesn't change the fact that it is a
valid argument. The difference is that things *have* changed. Most
notably the similarities between VS.NET and Delphi for .NET are a more
numerous and deeper than they were between Delphi and VC++. IOW, MS has
leveled the playing field and VS.NET is quite good in its own right.
--
Brian Moelk
Brain Endeavor LLC
XXXX@XXXXX.COM
 
Jan Derk

Delphi Developer

2006-10-05 04:15:38 AM

Re: I really hate .NET especially inside Delphi

Allen Bauer (Borland/DTG) writes:
Quote
>>..However, just recently we've hired another Delphi
 >>compiler engineer and he's got some pretty radical ideas... for
 >>.NET and Win32. Be sure to keep watching in the coming months.
 >cool!
 The good thing is that this person has hung out around here and has
even posted quite a few gems.. no I won't tell you since this person
asked to remain anonymous for now ;-) How's that for really sparking
your curiosity :-)
Wow, you guys actually hired Pierre Le Riche? Smart move. He single
handedly added more value to Delphi in his free time than all of
Borland in the last 5 years.
Jan Derk
 
Mark A. Andrews

Delphi Developer

2006-10-05 04:16:21 AM

Re: I really hate .NET especially inside Delphi

Allen Bauer (Borland/DTG) writes:
Quote

I think the tide is begining to turn on that one. However, we're also
looking into what *other* facters there may be that is holding folks
back. So far the results have been surprising. What is interesting is
that many of these reasons we can address immediately and are taking
steps to do just that.

Allen,
I can tell you why I still use Delphi 7.
1). I bought Delphi 2005 (sight unseen; leasson learned). It didn't
really become useable until all the major bugs were fixed. It was then
renamed Delphi 2006 and I was asked to pay for it again.
2). By all accounts and by my own experience, Delphi 2006 is a fine
product. However, it realistically does nothing more *for me* than
Delphi 7 does. Delphi 7 is still supported by all the major component
developers and it still produces Win32 apps that work fine on Windows XP
and down.
I think you will find many others in my position as well. Now, if
Borland were to see clear to give us a /financial/ reason to upgrade to
2006 or even Turbo, that might work. I already paid for Delphi 2006, its
just that when I bought it, it was called Delphi 2005 (or Delphi 2006 Beta).
Mark