Board index » cppbuilder » Re: Hold onto your hats!!

Re: Hold onto your hats!!


2003-09-18 02:32:12 AM
cppbuilder4
Leroy Casterline wrote:
Quote
Why? I held my tongue until the product was announced.
I think you're actually supposed to keep holding your tongue regarding the
Beta....
(from Gilmers post above...)
The NDA's you signed prohibit you from discussing the field
test. This includes, but is not limited to, the following:
1) The fact that you were involved in the field test.
2) Anything you did or didn't test or discover during the field test.
3) In general, the fact that there even was a field test shouldn't be
discussed publicly, though in this case that was obviously announced in
the open letter.
 
 

Re:Re: Hold onto your hats!!

"Bob" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in message
Quote
It's worked out great for me.
[...]
How complete, robust, and modern is your library?
Dave
 

Re:Re: Hold onto your hats!!

On Tue, 16 Sep 2003 18:29:51 -0600, M
< XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote:
Quote
(2 I think)
Make that at least 3. I'm eager to see the new C++ framework, and I
don't really even care if it's not all that visual/RAD, as long as
it's solid, reasonably complete and extensible.
And no, I'm not a newcomer - I did OWL1,OWL2,OWLNExt and VCL. Several
of my OWL apps never got moved to VCL, and I have even done new OWL
apps since having Builder available because I prefer the all-C++
environment.
OWL is aging and poorly supported now, though. For instance, no one
has figured out how to get OCF working with OWLNExt, making it hard to
do COM/Automation.
I am looking forward to being able to port all of my apps to CBX with
the new framework - hope it's available very soon.
Must note, however, that I am not entirely gruntled with the price...
- Leo
 

{smallsort}

Re:Re: Hold onto your hats!!

"Micha Nelissen" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in message
Quote
[...]
Sorry, what is the difference between 1-way and 2-way
RAD? OTOH, I do know there are a lot of designers
available for wxWindows.

www.wxwindows.org/lnk_tool.htm
1-way means you design your form, and it generates code.
2-way means you can also change the code, and it is
reflected in the form designer. Obviously, 2-way is more
interactive than 1-way.
Dave
 

Re:Re: Hold onto your hats!!

Leroy Casterline wrote:
Quote
"Rudy Velthuis (TeamB)" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote:

>Yes. I understand that many people chose C++Builder because of the VCL.
>But I'm not sure if C++BuilderX is currently meant for them.

Since there is no BCB 7, and there never will be, doesn't that
constitute abandonment?
Depends on how the finished product will look, doesn't it?
--
Rudy Velthuis (TeamB)
"Multitasking /adj./ 3 PCs and a chair with wheels?" -- unknown
 

Re:Re: Hold onto your hats!!

M wrote:
Quote
9 out of the 7 voices in my head say I'm just one person (that does not
exclude multiple personalities tho).
I never said you were that person(s). <g>
--
Rudy Velthuis (TeamB)
"I have never let my schooling interfere with my education."
- Mark Twain (1835-1910)
 

Re:Re: Hold onto your hats!!

On Tue, 16 Sep 2003 02:45:53 -0500, "David B. Held"
< XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote:
Quote
I orginally thought that this was the "pure C++ RAD
framework" everyone was talking about. I'm even
more delighted that it's not!
Did someone (in a position to know) actually state this -
that wxWindows != new pure C++ RAD Framework??
If so, I missed it, and I'm also delighted.
- Leo
 

Re:Re: Hold onto your hats!!

Rudy Velthuis (TeamB) wrote:
Quote
M wrote:


>Rudy Velthuis (TeamB) wrote:
>
>
>
>>To me it looks more as if they looked at the portability issue. Hard
>>to do with a Delphi based framework. Much easier with one written in a
>>standardised language that is available on many platforms.
>
>What? Perl? Python? Ruby? You sure aren't suggesting I get rid of
>'portability issues' when using C++ ?


Huh? AFAIK, C++ is often chosen for its portability, isn't it?

Nah, the only time you have a good chance at easy portability is when
you use the same compiler on multiple platforms (e.g., gcc). A lot of
the source out there from Linux/ia32 won't compile properly w/ the
vendor compilers on Solaris/Sparc or IRIX. Irrespective of there being a
standard (and standard libraries) for it it's not much easier in
comparison w/ other languages. There are lots of assumptions before C++
is 'easily' portable that one needs to head off at the beginning. I'll
admit one can bicker about the degree of portability, but it's never
been easy for me. My perl scripts run on everything tho.. and correctly.
I have no expectation on seeing a VB apps on Linux (even tho I heard
someone was working on it.. back some time).
C++ might have a standard (ehh-hmm, cough), but that std. is hardly
implemented in any of the vendor products on any of the platforms. C'est
la vie. I once wrote a small utility for myself with perl/tk and it ran
on both windows98/2000, linux and IRIX 6.5.somthing without a hitch.
Easy portability is 'take source to other computer, [compile&] run it'.
If it involves swearing it's not easy. :)
 

Re:Re: Hold onto your hats!!

On Wed, 17 Sep 2003 10:31:08 +0200, "Peter Agricola"
< XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote:
Quote
So my native Win32 app will call a API. This API calls a .NET function. This
function calls an (same-named old) API to actually let happen something?
Hmm, souds very MS-ish
Ummm, you forgot about the 8 bit cp/m core underlying it all.
- Leo
 

Re:Re: Hold onto your hats!!

"Remy Lebeau (TeamB)" wrote:
Quote
That depends on what you are referring to by "same-named old API". My
take
is that .NET will be the actual implementation, not that it will call into
something else even lower down.
I thought .NET was written using the normal WIN32 API, but I don't know
where that idea comes from.
Quote
But then, I know nothing about how .NET actually works, so I'm just
speculation.
All I heard what that Win32 was being re-written to use .NET internally,
and for
performance purposes new apps once Longhorn is released should be written
in .NET directly, since Win32 will be deprecated to a compatibility layer
for
backwards support.
This makes more sence, especially because every new API contains a Sleep,
the only old API wich made it unmodified into the new API-layer. But this is
also (mean) speculation <g>.
Thanks for your information.
Peter
 

Re:Re: Hold onto your hats!!

Rudy Velthuis (TeamB) wrote:
Quote
M wrote:


>9 out of the 7 voices in my head say I'm just one person (that does not
>exclude multiple personalities tho).


I never said you were that person(s). <g>

Original quote came from me, so I^Hwe was^H^H^Hwere forced (!!) to
respond. :)
I would like to apologize for the remark, Rudy.
 

Re:Re: Hold onto your hats!!

David B. Held wrote:
Quote
"Micha Nelissen" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in message
news:3f67fe70$ XXXX@XXXXX.COM ...

>[...]
>Sorry, what is the difference between 1-way and 2-way
>RAD? OTOH, I do know there are a lot of designers
>available for wxWindows.
>
>www.wxwindows.org/lnk_tool.htm


1-way means you design your form, and it generates code.
2-way means you can also change the code, and it is
reflected in the form designer. Obviously, 2-way is more
interactive than 1-way.
Ah, thanks. I assume DFM,XFM can also be interpreted as 'code'?
Micha.
 

Re:Re: Hold onto your hats!!

"Rudy Velthuis (TeamB)"
Quote

But we are getting off-topic in this C++ group. We could continue this in
borland.public.delphi.netpreview.non-technical, or in
borland.public.csharpbuilder.non-technical.
--
I think it is a important topic for BCB/VCL coders too. I think we have to
decide to go .NET or to leave windows with CBX. Not an easy decision because
it means a rewrite from the existing code, and when going .NET adopting a
new language.
Peter
 

Re:Re: Hold onto your hats!!

Peter Agricola wrote:
Quote

"Rudy Velthuis (TeamB)"
>
>But we are getting off-topic in this C++ group. We could continue
>this in borland.public.delphi.netpreview.non-technical, or in
>borland.public.csharpbuilder.non-technical.
>--

I think it is a important topic for BCB/VCL coders too. I think we have
to decide to go .NET or to leave windows with CBX.
Why would you have to leave Windows with CBX?
--
Rudy Velthuis (TeamB)
"Education is a progressive discovery of our own ignorance."
- Will Durant
 

Re:Re: Hold onto your hats!!

Leroy Casterline wrote:
Quote
So does this mean that there will be support for VCL development to the
same extent that there is in the current BCB line?
I have already answered this question as thoroughly as I can on this
newsgroup.
--
John Kaster, Borland Developer Relations, bdn.borland.com
$1280/$50K: homepages.borland.com/jkaster/tnt/thanks.html
Make a wish: qc.borland.com * Get source
codecentral.borland.com