Board index » delphi » c++ builder vs. Delphi

c++ builder vs. Delphi

I've been playing around with C++ Builder. It's pretty nice, but I
noticed that the executables are considerably larger than Delphi's
(compile a blank form app and you get a 250k executable).   Also, it's
considerably slower; about forty seconds on my 90 Mhz Pentium  for
that same do-nothing blank form app. However, once you've created an
executable once, everything speeds up quite a bit after that because
of the incremental linker.
Of course, C++ has a number of substantial advantages over Delphi
(templates, function overloading, etc.), but I suppose the chief
advantage is that knowing C++ makes you a lot more employable.  My
wish list for Delphi:  function overloading, templates, and
especially, Delphi on other platforms.

just a few thoughts.

Mark McGlone
dmcgl...@san.rr.com

 

Re:c++ builder vs. Delphi


Quote
In article <332de946.2990600@news-server>, mark...@ix.netcom.com (Mark McGlone) wrote:
>I've been playing around with C++ Builder. It's pretty nice, but I
>noticed that the executables are considerably larger than Delphi's
>(compile a blank form app and you get a 250k executable).   Also, it's
>considerably slower; about forty seconds on my 90 Mhz Pentium  for
>that same do-nothing blank form app. However, once you've created an
>executable once, everything speeds up quite a bit after that because
>of the incremental linker.
>Of course, C++ has a number of substantial advantages over Delphi
>(templates, function overloading, etc.), but I suppose the chief
>advantage is that knowing C++ makes you a lot more employable.  My
>wish list for Delphi:  function overloading, templates, and
>especially, Delphi on other platforms.

The *ONLY* advantage C++Builder has over Delphi is that it is C++.

For the market that is a huge advantage. C++Builder will almost certainly
leave Delphi in the dust when it comes to sales.

John

------------------------------------------------
Big Brother is watching and keeping track of what
you post. I have removed my personal information
from the header and moved it here.

EMail Address:
|miano @    |
|worldnet . |
| att . net |

Full Name:
------------
-John?Miano-
------------

Re:c++ builder vs. Delphi


The whole concept of function overloading seems to me to be horribly bad
programming practice, which offers a little bit of power but a lot of
obfuscation, that I hope Delphi never includes such a "feature". God
almighty multiple functions with the same name...Sounds like a recipe for
disaster to me...

Brad Miller
Timeoil...@aol.com

Re:c++ builder vs. Delphi


Quote
In article <19970318192700.OAA03...@ladder01.news.aol.com>, timeoil...@aol.com (TimeOilMIS) wrote:
>The whole concept of function overloading seems to me to be horribly bad
>programming practice, which offers a little bit of power but a lot of
>obfuscation, that I hope Delphi never includes such a "feature". God
>almighty multiple functions with the same name...Sounds like a recipe for
>disaster to me...

I would agree with this whole heartedly. Operator overloading as well.

These were horrible concepts that were mainly introduced to eliminate the need
for built in I/O and string handling.

John

------------------------------------------------
Big Brother is watching and keeping track of what
you post. I have removed my personal information
from the header and moved it here.

EMail Address:
|miano @    |
|worldnet . |
| att . net |

Full Name:
------------
-John?Miano-
------------

Re:c++ builder vs. Delphi


Quote
s...@signature.below.b wrote:

> ------------------------------------------------
> Big Brother is watching and keeping track of what
> you post. I have removed my personal information
> from the header and moved it here.

I don't think he is.  Last time I checked he didn't even own a
computer.  And even if he did watch what I posted, what's he going to
do, tell my Mommy on me? :)

Re:c++ builder vs. Delphi


Although you can use functions without overloading,
multiple-inheritance is still very nice.. Delphi 3 is going to include
the "Interface" of it...

Althgouth I also think Borland should put Delphi into other Platforms..
maybe XWINDOWS or OS/2 or something like that...

Quote
TimeOilMIS wrote:

> The whole concept of function overloading seems to me to be horribly bad
> programming practice, which offers a little bit of power but a lot of
> obfuscation, that I hope Delphi never includes such a "feature". God
> almighty multiple functions with the same name...Sounds like a recipe for
> disaster to me...

> Brad Miller
> Timeoil...@aol.com

Re:c++ builder vs. Delphi


Quote
In article <332F049D.5...@interaccess.com>, Mark Bracey <mbra...@interaccess.com> wrote:
>I don't think he is.  Last time I checked he didn't even own a
>computer.  And even if he did watch what I posted, what's he going to
>do, tell my Mommy on me? :)

AUTHOR PROFILE: Mark Bracey <mbra...@interaccess.com>

------------------------------------------------------------------------

?281 unique articles posted.
?Number of articles posted to individual newsgroups (slightly skewed by
cross-postings):

?126 comp.lang.pascal.delphi.misc
 ?34 comp.lang.c++
?28 comp.lang.pascal.delphi.components.writing
?18 comp.lang.pascal.delphi.advocacy
?14 alt.lang.delphi
?13 comp.lang.pascal.delphi.components.misc
?11 alt.comp.lang.borland-delphi
?10 comp.lang.pascal.delphi.components.usage
?4 comp.lang.java.advocacy
?4 comp.lang.pascal.borland
?4 comp.lang.pascal.delphi.components
?3 comp.arch.embedded
?2 comp.compilers
?2 comp.lang.java.programmer
?2 comp.realtime
?2 comp.sys.m68k
?1 comp.lang.c
?1 comp.lang.pascal.ansi-iso
?1 comp.lang.pascal.delphi.databases
?1 rec.food.preserving

"Food Preserving", I'm gonna have to start spreading some rumors about you
then. :-)

------------------------------------------------
Big Brother is watching and keeping track of what
you post. I have removed my personal information
from the header and moved it here.

EMail Address:
|miano @    |
|worldnet . |
| att . net |

Full Name:
------------
-John?Miano-
------------

Re:c++ builder vs. Delphi


Quote
timeoil...@aol.com (TimeOilMIS) wrote:
>The whole concept of function overloading seems to me to be horribly bad
>programming practice, which offers a little bit of power but a lot of
>obfuscation, that I hope Delphi never includes such a "feature". God
>almighty multiple functions with the same name...Sounds like a recipe for
>disaster to me...

>Brad Miller
>Timeoil...@aol.com

Right{*word*106}head, that's why the real pros use pascal...and AOL...

--
Mason Storm <mst...@nym.BITE_ME.alias.net>
The National Storm-Warning Newsletter

Re:c++ builder vs. Delphi


Quote
timeoil...@aol.com (TimeOilMIS) wrote:
>The whole concept of function overloading seems to me to be horribly bad
>programming practice, which offers a little bit of power but a lot of
>obfuscation, that I hope Delphi never includes such a "feature". God
>almighty multiple functions with the same name...Sounds like a recipe for
>disaster to me...

Humm like Read and Write and the + operator that Delphi already has?

Cheers Terry...

Re:c++ builder vs. Delphi


I can see the value of multiple inheritance, and am glad to see that
delphi3 will have the "interfaces" deal working. Often I will find that I
want just a bit of the functionality of more than one class, so this
should help, but what can you do with function overloading in C++ that
can't be done in another way? Although the concept of overloaded
constructors have got my mind working a bit, that's about all I can think
of...

Brad Miller
Timeoil...@aol.com

Re:c++ builder vs. Delphi


No real pros call other people{*word*106}heads i guess???

Brad Miller
Timeoil...@aol.com

Re:c++ builder vs. Delphi


In article <199703190801.DAA05...@dhp.com>, luci...@dhp.com (lucifer Anonymous Remailer) wrote:

Quote
>timeoil...@aol.com (TimeOilMIS) wrote:

>>The whole concept of function overloading seems to me to be horribly bad
>>programming practice, which offers a little bit of power but a lot of
>>obfuscation, that I hope Delphi never includes such a "feature". God
>>almighty multiple functions with the same name...Sounds like a recipe for
>>disaster to me...

>>Brad Miller
>>Timeoil...@aol.com

>Right{*word*106}head, that's why the real pros use pascal...and AOL...

>--
>Mason Storm <mst...@nym.BITE_ME.alias.net>
>The National Storm-Warning Newsletter

Wow! Someone got up on the wrong side of the bed this morning.

------------------------------------------------
Big Brother is watching and keeping track of what
you post. I have removed my personal information
from the header and moved it here.

EMail Address:
|miano @    |
|worldnet . |
| att . net |

Full Name:
------------
-John?Miano-
------------

Re:c++ builder vs. Delphi


luci...@dhp.com (lucifer Anonymous Remailer) wrote:

Quote
>timeoil...@aol.com (TimeOilMIS) wrote:
>>The whole concept of function overloading seems to me to be horribly bad
>>programming practice, which offers a little bit of power but a lot of
>>obfuscation, that I hope Delphi never includes such a "feature". God
>>almighty multiple functions with the same name...Sounds like a recipe for
>>disaster to me...

>>Brad Miller
>>Timeoil...@aol.com
>Right{*word*106}head, that's why the real pros use pascal...and AOL...

'Real pros' and 'Real men' program in C/C++???  I always thought a
language was merely a tool.  Using the best language for the best
situation.  

Whether or not 'real pros use pascal,' is independent of the fact that
the operator overloaded in C++ is a cluster-fluck.  

BTW, real programmers write their own languages and compilers.  Some
even do it in Delphi.  :).

Jay Cole

Re:c++ builder vs. Delphi


Quote
Xiao Luo wrote:

> Although you can use functions without overloading,
> multiple-inheritance is still very nice.. Delphi 3 is going to include
> the "Interface" of it...

> Althgouth I also think Borland should put Delphi into other Platforms..
> maybe XWINDOWS or OS/2 or something like that...

> TimeOilMIS wrote:

> > The whole concept of function overloading seems to me to be horribly bad
> > programming practice, which offers a little bit of power but a lot of
> > obfuscation, that I hope Delphi never includes such a "feature". God
> > almighty multiple functions with the same name...Sounds like a recipe for
> > disaster to me...

> > Brad Miller
> > Timeoil...@aol.com

I agree borland would be much better off if they made their develoment
tools for other plattforms than microsofts. I belive microsoft would not
be as strong as it is today without the god development tools borland
made over the years. I beleive good development tools are the key to
success for a new operating system. Its sad borland didnt make Delphi
for os/2, if they did, they would no more be on the mercy of microsoft
as they have end up to today.

Mikael Norrman

Re:c++ builder vs. Delphi


Quote
s...@signature.below.c wrote:

> "Food Preserving", I'm gonna have to start spreading some rumors about you
> then. :-)

Just trying to get in touch with my feminine side!

Mark

Go to page: [1] [2]

Other Threads