Board index » cppbuilder » Delphi 2005 is a pain...

Delphi 2005 is a pain...


2005-05-10 08:23:03 PM
cppbuilder76
Borland *must* change their ways. They cannot keep releasing buggy software,
even if the underlying paradigm is really "clever". If it does not work
properly, then it doesn't matter how "smart" the environment seems to be - you
will not produce results, and that's what gets us programmers paid. Case in
point here is the brilliant free webserver application called BRS WebWeaver at
www.brswebweaver.com/modules.php
where you will see a change log (all good apps have one of these available for
public use), and in it, it says :-
Apr, 16, 2005 - Version 1.31
<snip>....
* Compile with D7 - seems to be a bug in D2005, that causes listviews on
the options page to delete all entries mysteriously
....</snip>
He has had to return to Delphi 7 in order to make the app functional!
Absolutely naff, if you ask me.
Come on Borland - I know you are under pressure to produce new things, but can
you make sure they work properly before you ship them out of the door?
TIA,
--
Mark Jacobs
www.dkcomputing.co.uk
 
 

Re:Delphi 2005 is a pain...

Hi Mark, firstly you are right, working with buggy software can be a
pain in the you know where. God forbid that the environment you have
choosen, is just not workable and you cannot be productive or meet your
deadlines.
But I do not think that Borland intentionally released buggy software. I
am a developer too and right now, as I type, I have a guy in Barbados
trying really hard to figureout some software I designed realizing there
may be a bug or two in it - this is his third trip by the way - and he
has not been on the beach.
Also we live in a world of instant gratification, everyone wants
something and they want it NOW! We want Delphi 2006 NOW! and without
bugs - Only in a perfect world my friend.
Anyway here are my three golden rules. This is all based on the fact
that no one is perfect.
1. Choose a development language, learn it well, know what features will
make you productive and try to avoid or work around problematic features
or issues.
2. Choose an operating system, learn it well, know what features will
make you productive and try to avoid or work around problematic features
or issues.
3. Choose a development environment, learn it well, know what features
will make you productive and try to avoid or work around problematic
features or issues.
 

Re:Delphi 2005 is a pain...

"Colin B Maharaj" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in message
Quote

3. Choose a development environment, learn it well, know what
features will make you productive and try to avoid or work around
problematic features or issues.
Can't one just go to the Borland site and download a couple patches
that completely fix D2005 ? I think I read somewhere that Borland did
release D2005 under pressure, but very quickly fixed it up through a
couple of patches.
Jonathan
 

{smallsort}

Re:Delphi 2005 is a pain...

Yes. Quality is a top priority for the next version of Delphi (and its
C++Builder personality).
Tim
"Mark Jacobs" <www.jacobsm.com/mjmsg.htm?mj@critical>wrote in
message news:4280a783$ XXXX@XXXXX.COM ...
Quote
Borland *must* change their ways. They cannot keep releasing buggy
software, even if the underlying paradigm is really "clever". If it does
not work properly, then it doesn't matter how "smart" the environment
seems to be - you will not produce results, and that's what gets us
programmers paid. Case in point here is the brilliant free webserver
application called BRS WebWeaver at

www.brswebweaver.com/modules.php

where you will see a change log (all good apps have one of these available
for public use), and in it, it says :-

Apr, 16, 2005 - Version 1.31

<snip>....
* Compile with D7 - seems to be a bug in D2005, that causes listviews
on the options page to delete all entries mysteriously
....</snip>

He has had to return to Delphi 7 in order to make the app functional!
Absolutely naff, if you ask me.

Come on Borland - I know you are under pressure to produce new things, but
can you make sure they work properly before you ship them out of the door?

TIA,
--
Mark Jacobs
www.dkcomputing.co.uk
 

Re:Delphi 2005 is a pain...

Tim Del Chiaro (Borland) wrote:
Quote
Yes. Quality is a top priority for the next version of Delphi (and its
C++Builder personality).
And hopefully we will NOT need to load .NET in order to get it working?
--
Lester Caine
-----------------------------
L.S.Caine Electronic Services
 

Re:Delphi 2005 is a pain...

Lester Caine wrote:
Quote
And hopefully we will NOT need to load .NET in order to get it working?
Good question. Does one need a .NET framework installed on the PC that runs
the IDE for D2005? Does one need a .NET framework installed on the PC that
runs the programs compiled and linked by D2005? Do the patches released by
Borland for D2005 address the disappearing ListView problem?
--
Mark Jacobs
www.dkcomputing.co.uk
 

Re:Delphi 2005 is a pain...

Mark Jacobs wrote:
Quote
Lester Caine wrote:

>And hopefully we will NOT need to load .NET in order to get it working?


Good question. Does one need a .NET framework installed on the PC that
runs the IDE for D2005?
Yes, if you use the .Net parts, and during the installation as well.
This has been discussed numerous times in delphi.non-technical.
Quote
Does one need a .NET framework installed on the
PC that runs the programs compiled and linked by D2005?
Not if they are pure Win32 exes
Quote
Do the patches
released by Borland for D2005 address the disappearing ListView problem?
I don't know.
 

Re:Delphi 2005 is a pain...

Mark Jacobs wrote:
Quote
Lester Caine wrote:

>And hopefully we will NOT need to load .NET in order to get it working?

Good question. Does one need a .NET framework installed on the PC that
runs the IDE for D2005? Does one need a .NET framework installed on the
PC that runs the programs compiled and linked by D2005? Do the patches
released by Borland for D2005 address the disappearing ListView problem?
It would not install D2005 until it had {*word*81}ed up the rest of the
windows stuff ;)
--
Lester Caine
-----------------------------
L.S.Caine Electronic Services
 

Re:Delphi 2005 is a pain...

Lester Caine wrote:
Quote
It would not install D2005 until it had {*word*81}ed up the rest of the
windows stuff ;)
From Francois at XXXX@XXXXX.COM :-
"The code writing is painless with very little changes necessary (coming from
D7). From D5 you still have the variants problem to solve though.
We have been using D2005 from Christmas and to put it bluntly: upgrade your
hardware to the best you can afford, as much memory as you can afford. Be
prepared to spend more time fighting the IDE than programming for about the
first month. I can see where they are going and it will eventually be a very
good system but for now it just borders on the usable.
So unless you need it urgently (we got Enterprize for the Starteam version
control which is excellent) I think you might be sorry in the short term. To
me D5 was always the most reliable and quickest and with GExperts it has much
of the new functionality anyway."
--
Mark Jacobs
www.dkcomputing.co.uk
 

Re:Delphi 2005 is a pain...

In article <4281dc07$ XXXX@XXXXX.COM >, OBones wrote:
Quote
>Good question. Does one need a .NET framework installed on the PC
>that runs the IDE for D2005?

Yes, if you use the .Net parts, and during the installation as well.
That's not going to be acceptable for a lot of potential users.
Many people have taken a conscious decision not to install .NET, and a
development tool that requires it to be installed even for non .NET
development will find little favour.
It's bad enough that VS200x requires .NET. One might hope that
3rd-party vendors would make a point of not doing so.
Cheers,
Daniel.
 

Re:Delphi 2005 is a pain...

Daniel James wrote:
Quote
That's not going to be acceptable for a lot of potential users.

Many people have taken a conscious decision not to install .NET, and a
development tool that requires it to be installed even for non .NET
development will find little favour.

It's bad enough that VS200x requires .NET. One might hope that
3rd-party vendors would make a point of not doing so.
Borland staff have made a point of saying parts of the IDE are done in
.NET because it was the most efficient tool around.
blogs.borland.com/stevet/archive/2004/11/22/1902.aspx
-Brion
 

Re:Delphi 2005 is a pain...

"Daniel James" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in message
Quote
Many people have taken a conscious decision not to install .NET, and a
development tool that requires it to be installed even for non .NET
development will find little favour.

Other than wasting some hard disk space, what is the problem with installing
the .NET framework even if you don't want to use it? If not called from
managed code, does it actually do anything? I thought it was just a bunch of
assemblies waiting to be called by code written for .NET. Am I being naive?
 

Re:Delphi 2005 is a pain...

In article <4283c15e$ XXXX@XXXXX.COM >, Brion L. Webster wrote:
Quote
Borland staff have made a point of saying parts of the IDE are done
in
..NET because it was the most efficient tool around.

blogs.borland.com/stevet/archive/2004/11/22/1902.aspx
No, what they say there is that using .NET for the IDE made sense
because the IDE includes a WinForms designer and WinForms is a .NET
technology.
My answer to that is that people who only want to use native code apps
don't need a WinForms designer ... or anything else specific to .NET.
The IDE should have been built using native-code tools with optional
plug-ins for WinForms and other things specific to .NET. The plugins
could use .NET code (that does make sense) but the IDE should be able
to be run without them.
The J# bits are optional (with a bit of arcane registry hacking), all
the .NET bits should be.
Cheers,
Daniel.
 

Re:Delphi 2005 is a pain...

In article <4284328c$ XXXX@XXXXX.COM >, Ack wrote:
Quote
Other than wasting some hard disk space, what is the problem with
installing the .NET framework even if you don't want to use it?
It's one more thing to have to manage, to have to keep up-to-date with
security (and other) patches, to have to persuade IT support to allow you
install on your machine (yes, I've worked in places where that was an issue).
One more thing to get in the way and waste time and energy when there's work
to be done.
.. and it's completely unnecessary when no .NET code is being written.
Cheers,
Daniel.
 

Re:Delphi 2005 is a pain...

Mark Jacobs <www.jacobsm.com/mjmsg.htm?mj@critical>wrote:
Quote
We have been using D2005 from Christmas and to put it bluntly: upgrade your
hardware to the best you can afford, as much memory as you can afford. Be
prepared to spend more time fighting the IDE than programming for about the
first month. I can see where they are going and it will eventually be a very
good system but for now it just borders on the usable.
According to John Kaster's blog, D2005 SP3 will address the performance
issues (blogs.borland.com/johnk/archive/2005/05/07/4215.aspx).
By the time BDS w/BCB is released I expect that the IDE will be much
snappier and lots more usable. That said, I have been very impressed
with D2005. I really didn't expect to like the IDE at all, but find the
I like it much better than BCB6.
 

Re:Delphi 2005 is a pain...

Colin B Maharaj < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in message
<4281382a$ XXXX@XXXXX.COM >
Quote
1. Choose a development language, learn it well, know what features will
make you productive and try to avoid or work around problematic features
or issues.


2. Choose an operating system, learn it well, know what features will
make you productive and try to avoid or work around problematic features
or issues.


3. Choose a development environment, learn it well, know what features
will make you productive and try to avoid or work around problematic
features or issues.
Completely superb advice.
--
***Free Your Mind***
Posted with JSNewsreader-BETA 0.9.4.672