Board index » cppbuilder » .Net framework 2

.Net framework 2


2006-05-05 05:58:23 PM
cppbuilder45
Hi all,
Do you know when the next generation of Delphi (or BDS) will be released to
support .Net 2.x? Did Borland selects any exact time to publish the
highlander?
We (programmers who use Borland products) are always using the new
technologies 6-12 month after microsoft programmers. Why?
Shouldn't Borland be more updated?
Mehrdad
 
 

Re:.Net framework 2

"M. Noroozi Eghbali" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in message
Quote
Do you know when the next generation of Delphi (or BDS)
will be released to support .Net 2.x? Did Borland selects any
exact time to publish the highlander?
An earlier roadmap placed Highlander at mid-2006:
homepages.borland.com/davidi/blogpics/DelphiCBuilderRoadmap_lg.jpg
The roadmap shown at a Japenese tradeshow a couple of months ago pushes
Highlander to Q1 2007:
japan.zdnet.com/media/2006/news/03/060303_bdc_03.jpg
www.orderfactory.com/public_docs/060303_bdc_03_c.jpg
There are several reasons that Borland did not ship .NET 2.0 support yet.
According to Danny Thorpe, you can blame Microsoft for one of them:
(quote)
I kind of read into this that Borland is doing lots of waiting on
Microsoft to finish up .NET 2.0, but this could hardly be true. .NET 2.0 has
been stable for some time now.
Borland cannot ship product on .NET 2.0 beta. Microsoft has made that
very clear. We pushed hard to get license to distribute Borland product with
.NET 2.0 beta bits on the CD, but Microsoft flatly refused.
Apparently the only development tools that are allowed to include .NET
beta bits are Microsoft tools.
My snide remark about if and when .NET 2.0 actually ships is in regard
to the many revisions to the .NET 2.0 release date. Originally (2002), .NET
2.0 was scheduled to ship in 2004. In the spring of 2004, Microsoft
announced the ship date had been pushed back to June 2005. In February 2005,
Microsoft announced the ship date for .NET 2.0 had been pushed out to
end-of-year 2005. As we approach end-of-year 2005, it seems very likely they
will finally hit that target, but it's always the case that you should never
bank on Microsoft hitting any date.
We originally intended to release tools for .NET 2.0 in 2005. However,
.NET 2.0 slipped out of our release window, and Microsoft refused to let us
release on .NET beta bits, so we adjusted our priorities to create DeXter on
.NET 1.1.
(end quote)
Quote
We (programmers who use Borland products) are always using the
new technologies 6-12 month after microsoft programmers. Why?
Well, let's see - Microsoft programmers using Microsoft tools to develop for
Microsoft technologies. Do you see a pattern here? Microsoft updates is
tools at the same time that it updates its technology, so the two are in
sync. Borland can't always do that until Microsoft releases the technology
first. It takes time for Borland to then update its tools accordingly.
Gambit
 

Re:.Net framework 2

The .NET 2.0 compiler it's the MS one (there is no other, as remember that
you need to work in C# and not in C++ for making .NET executables).
Also you need the SDK (aka headers.h), the SDK included with BDS2006 is for
.NET1.1
As I know you can call Win32 api from C#.
As I know you can create Win32 .EXE's that call .NET API (in C++ and
Delphi).
As I know the 'managed' C++ (helpme Alistair) allows to create .NET
applications in C++ (and not C#), (but using 'managed extensions').
Saludos
Sebastian
"Andre Kaufmann" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >escribi?en el mensaje
Quote
Remy Lebeau (TeamB) wrote:
>"M. Noroozi Eghbali" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in message
>news: XXXX@XXXXX.COM ...
>
>
>Borland cannot ship product on .NET 2.0 beta. Microsoft has made that
>very clear. We pushed hard to get license to distribute Borland product
>with
>.NET 2.0 beta bits on the CD, but Microsoft flatly refused.

Does that mean that a .NET 2.0 compiler already exists ? If so at least a
preview could have been shipped with BDS 2006 - or did Borland focus on
other things, as it was clear that they couldn't ship .NET 2.0 beta ?

Andre

 

{smallsort}

Re:.Net framework 2

"Andre Kaufmann" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in message
Quote
Does that mean that a .NET 2.0 compiler already exists ?
Not from Borland, no.
Quote
did Borland focus on other things, as it was clear that they
couldn't ship .NET 2.0 beta ?
Yes.
Gambit
 

Re:.Net framework 2

At 19:39:32, 06.05.2006, Andre Kaufmann wrote:
Quote
>Borland cannot ship product on .NET 2.0 beta. Microsoft has made
>that very clear. We pushed hard to get license to distribute Borland
>product with .NET 2.0 beta bits on the CD, but Microsoft flatly
>refused.

Does that mean that a .NET 2.0 compiler already exists ?
No. That is what they are targetting now, in the next release (code named
Highlander), for Delphi for .NET.
Quote
If so at least
a preview could have been shipped with BDS 2006 - or did Borland focus
on other things, as it was clear that they couldn't ship .NET 2.0 beta ?
Yes. Well, knowing them, one or two of them probably already took a
thorough look at what had to be done to implement the new .NET 2.0 stuff
well before the launch of BDS2006, but AFAIK, it is more or less as you
expected.
--
Rudy Velthuis [TeamB] rvelthuis.de/
"A model is done when nothing else can be taken out." -- Dyson
 

Re:.Net framework 2

At 20:41:39, 05.05.2006, Sebastian Ledesma [Solidyne Labs] wrote:
Quote
As I know the 'managed' C++ (helpme Alistair)
1. It's Alisdair.
2. It's C++/CLI. <g>
--
Rudy Velthuis [TeamB] rvelthuis.de/
"Multitasking /adj./ 3 PCs and a chair with wheels?" -- unknown
 

Re:.Net framework 2

Thank's for both tips.
I've found an intersting article :
www.25hoursaday.com/BalkanizationCPlusCPlus.html
Saludos
Sebastian
"Rudy Velthuis [TeamB]" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >escribi?en el mensaje
Quote
At 20:41:39, 05.05.2006, Sebastian Ledesma [Solidyne Labs] wrote:

>As I know the 'managed' C++ (helpme Alistair)

1. It's Alisdair.
2. It's C++/CLI. <g>

--
Rudy Velthuis [TeamB] rvelthuis.de/

"Multitasking /adj./ 3 PCs and a chair with wheels !" -- unknown
 

Re:.Net framework 2

At 00:39:07, 06.05.2006, Sebastian Ledesma [Solidyne Labs] wrote:
Quote
Thank's for both tips.
I've found an intersting article :
www.25hoursaday.com/BalkanizationCPlusCPlus.html
Interestng read, indeed.
--
Rudy Velthuis [TeamB] rvelthuis.de/
"The right to swing my{*word*128}ends where the other man's nose begins."
- Oliver Wendell Holmes (1841-1935)
 

Re:.Net framework 2

Remy Lebeau (TeamB) wrote:
Quote
"M. Noroozi Eghbali" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in message
news: XXXX@XXXXX.COM ...


Borland cannot ship product on .NET 2.0 beta. Microsoft has made that
very clear. We pushed hard to get license to distribute Borland product with
.NET 2.0 beta bits on the CD, but Microsoft flatly refused.
Does that mean that a .NET 2.0 compiler already exists ? If so at least
a preview could have been shipped with BDS 2006 - or did Borland focus
on other things, as it was clear that they couldn't ship .NET 2.0 beta ?
Andre
 

Re:.Net framework 2

Andre Kaufmann wrote:
Quote
Does that mean that a .NET 2.0 compiler already exists ? If so at least
a preview could have been shipped with BDS 2006 - or did Borland focus
on other things, as it was clear that they couldn't ship .NET 2.0 beta ?
He's probably referring to the Delphi use of .Net.
Look, Borland has lots and lots of stuff to do to their C++ compiler just to make it
compliant with existing ISO C++ and with Boost. Borland's latest C++ compiler 5.8.2
fails about 20 more Boost tests than 5.6.4 does.
bcbboost.sourceforge.net/test/1_33_1-5_8_2-0.4/cs-win32.html
I'd rather they improve their C++ compliance before supporting C++/CLI.
Quote

Andre