Board index » cppbuilder » Re: Borland was too late for me.

Re: Borland was too late for me.


2005-03-22 06:07:59 AM
cppbuilder97
"David Erbas-White" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in message
Quote
Leroy Casterline wrote:
>David Erbas-White < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote:
>
>
Arguing that there is too much that is unknown in software doesn't
really cut it anymore. The 'risks' are fairly well known (or can be
estimated/insured against), and the cost of doing business USED to
include a fair amount for support of the product (it doesn't anymore).
Yes, as I mentioned in another thread just recently, Borland's technical
support used to be free for paying customers -- I sorely miss those days,
but practically nobody offers free technical support anymore, and they get
away with it because we as customers have done nothing that forces them to
(such as boycotting the product, etc).
Quote
The software industry will not have anyone else to blame but themselves
when customers finally realize that they're not being supported, and
turn to the courts.
...but they won't get very far down that road. If you look at Borland's
license agreement, which we all agreed to when we bought the software,
you'll see that it specifically states that the product is provided "as-is"
with no warranty about the "quality" of the software, or that it will be
"error-free." You can complain all you want about how they _should_ be
morally responsible enough to fix bugs in their software (which I completely
agree with), but they are under no _legal_ obligation to do so, particularly
since we've agreed with the terms of the license by virtue of the fact that
we use the software. At the same time however, it would be silly for
Borland to ignore and never fix any bugs because that would seriously
jeopardize the marketability of their product. Nevertheless, they certainly
have the right not to and nobody is going to win a legal battle with them to
the contrary.
- Dennis
 
 

Re:Re: Borland was too late for me.

Boian Mitov < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote:
Quote
What drives me crazy is the fact the the RTLs are not compatible with
each other. If you compile a project with a certain version of the RTL
you must make sure that all the libraries are compiled against the same
one. [...]
Now I understand what you complain about.
However, I have no idea /why/ you complain
about it. Of course, Debug/Release or MT/ST
libs aren't compatible. What's strange about
this?
Quote
Delphi and BCB at least allow you to link with zero problems with a
mixture of debug and non debug libraries.
I wonder how they do this. Is this reliable?
Quote
In VC++ it is a real hell.
Just run a search on the newsgroups to see how many reports of bad
linking there are.
There are also many reports of template
error messages. Are templates bad due to
this?
Quote
Cheers,
Boian
[...]
Schobi
--
XXXX@XXXXX.COM is never read
I'm Schobi at suespammers dot org
"The presence of those seeking the truth is infinitely
to be prefered to those thinking they've found it."
Terry Pratchett
 

Re:Re: Borland was too late for me.

Harold Howe [TeamB] wrote:
Quote
It bothers me to see members of this group question Remy's dedication
when behind closed doors, they have had no greater ally.
Harold,
Indeed, Remy has always been one of the most avid BCB supporters and
advocates, in public and in private.
--
Rudy Velthuis [TeamB] rvelthuis.bei.t-online.de
"There's no trick to being a humorist when you have the whole government
working for you." -- Will Rogers (1879-1935)
 

{smallsort}

Re:Re: Borland was too late for me.

tim wrote:
Quote
No offense intended Remy, but you sound EXACTLY like one of my
coworkers. And maybe it's because you're on TeamB or you truly are
this blindly dedicated
We are not on TeamB for our dedication, or dedicated because we are on
TeamB. TeamB chooses new TeamB members on technical merit and social
skills. Yours was a rather insulting remark. Heheh, such remarks are
often made when people start with "no offense intended".
--
Rudy Velthuis [TeamB] rvelthuis.bei.t-online.de
"Am I lightheaded because I'm not dead or because I'm still alive?"
-- Heidi Sandige.
 

Re:Re: Borland was too late for me.

Harold Howe [TeamB] < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote:
Quote
[...]
As Chris pointed out, TeamB has a private communication channel with
Borland. It is there that we air our grievances. Remy is active in that
private forum, and has been an ardent, if not rabid, supporter of BCB
and the VCL over these last few, tumultuous years. The reason you
haven't seen any of these remarks is because... well... you can't see them.
This might well be true, but, as you found
out yourself, we haven't seen that. What we
/have/ seen, is Remy's...now, what do I call
it?...mission telling any complainers that
they rae wrong and Borland always did/does
right.
Quote
It bothers me to see members of this group question Remy's dedication
when behind closed doors, they have had no greater ally.
I can understand that. However, one can only
judge people on what one sees of them. And
while I wouldn't fully agree with tim's
conclusions, I agree with him that what's
memorable about Remy in these discussions
is that he's almost passionate in denying
the obvious. If he's doing the opposite
behind closed doors, then this is arguably
laudable, but, well, only behind those
closed doors -- and as a matter of fact,
most people here are /in front/ of those
doors.
Quote
H^2
Schobi
--
XXXX@XXXXX.COM is never read
I'm Schobi at suespammers dot org
"The presence of those seeking the truth is infinitely
to be prefered to those thinking they've found it."
Terry Pratchett
 

Re:Re: Borland was too late for me.

Hendrik Schober wrote:
Quote
I wonder how they do this. Is this reliable?
If only the implementation sides differ, why not? It doesn't matter what
you have inside a .cpp file, as long as the function names and arguments
match, you can link them together. However, you can easily shoot
yourself in the foot if the header file has #ifdef _DEBUG. Obviously
even BCB fails in that case. I'm talking about encosing a member within
an #ifdef:
class Foo
{
private:
#ifdef _DEBUG
int debug;
#endif
int x;
};
If you avoid this type of declarations in not only your own source
files, but in every 3rd party code (including the standard library),
then yes, in BCB you can mix debug and release libs without any problem.
Tom
 

Re:Re: Borland was too late for me.

Tamas Demjen wrote:
Quote
Hendrik Schober wrote:

>I wonder how they do this. Is this reliable?


If only the implementation sides differ, why not?
IMHO itīs not reliable. And i had to learn that lesson too in hard
debugging sessions.
Quote
It doesn't matter what
you have inside a .cpp file, as long as the function names and arguments
match, you can link them together. However, you can easily shoot
yourself in the foot if the header file has #ifdef _DEBUG. Obviously
even BCB fails in that case. I'm talking about encosing a member within
Well and that is the main problem. How to ensure that each lib file is
compiled with the same settings and switches ?
Changing the default packaging size or calling convention hasnīt
an impact on the header file, but on the implementation.
The same applies to single threaded and multithreaded settings.
Another issue is alignment.
Differences in most of these settings will lead to linker errors, but
there are some that will link happily without any problems and will lead
to (at best) crashes at runtime.
IMHO lib files should have much more information inside, so that
the linker will catch more errors caused by different compilation
settings. At least it should be possible for the compiler, to check
if the header file matches the implementation - in any case.
Even better there shouldnīt be a header file necessary at all.
The compiler should be able to extract all the information it needs
from the lib file itself - then we wouldnīt have to mess around
with compiler settings and subtile bugs, because the compiler
used the wrong header file, which doesnīt match the library.
Thatīs why i like the way libraries expose their information in .NET.
I just reference a Dll library written in any language and the
compiler extracts all the information it needs from the Dll itself.
The same could be done in native Win32 code and for C++ lib files.
Quote
[...]
Andre
 

Re:Re: Borland was too late for me.

But you've misunderstood me, truly. I have NO question why Remy was
chosen or whatever for TeamB and that is because he is highly
knowledgeable and an obviously VERY skilled programmer.
What I was trying to say was Remy's OWN personal choice in the matter of
why to be on TeamB. This has NOTHING to do with why someone, as an
individual is chosen to be on TeamB.
Let's be serious guys. Remy, as I stated, has helped clear up several
things in the VCL for me and has helped me with XML several times as
these were all new things to me when I came to this job. There are no
questions in my mind about Remy's capabilities or why he was "chosen"
for TeamB. I was just speaking to his personal "choice". You guys really
do have it wrong. There was no offense intended to anyone. If I did,
then I apologize, profusely.
Now, as to Remy being our, well that is what's left of the BCB users',
greatest allies, it would be nice if everyone once in a while, in public
he stood with us, well them now..
cheers,
tim
Rudy Velthuis [TeamB] wrote:
Quote
tim wrote:


>No offense intended Remy, but you sound EXACTLY like one of my
>coworkers. And maybe it's because you're on TeamB or you truly are
>this blindly dedicated


We are not on TeamB for our dedication, or dedicated because we are on
TeamB. TeamB chooses new TeamB members on technical merit and social
skills. Yours was a rather insulting remark. Heheh, such remarks are
often made when people start with "no offense intended".

 

Re:Re: Borland was too late for me.

Harold,
You are right on all accounts. After I made that statement I was
rereading some literature and XQuery support is not available in VS
.NET, at least out of the box.
As to using xalan, that's also true. But considering, as I mentioned
that I have Altova's XML Suite that generates C# based projects for me
that compile without so much as touching code on my part, the cost of
use is very low. And it will indeed generate other source as well.
But I am essentially a one man team on my project and I need stuff and I
need it fast. I don't have time to track down libraries and build source
packages.
But a lot of it boils down to what I want to look at and use for 8 hours
a day and Builder is not it. I dread working when I have to use Builder.
It's just a shame the Builder personality didn't come a long sooner.
I've used the Delphi IDE trial and I was very impressed. I just can't
wait any longer.
cheers,
tim
Harold Howe [TeamB] wrote:
Quote
tim wrote:

>For one, I need full, advanced XML support. I need XQuery, XPath and
>XSL support out of the box as a minimum.


For xpath and xsl, you could use apache xalan. For xquery, don't expect
too much in vs 2005.

<quote>
Important amendment: VS.NET 2005 Beta1 does have some XQuery support,
but it's been oficially announced it will be cut in Beta2 and won't be
in VS.NET 2005 RTM.
</quote>

This was written by Oleg Tkachenko [XML MVP] in
microsoft.public.dotnet.xml.

>Also, add to that the desire not to be dependent on the VCL and
>thereby Borland and you have more than enough reasons, in my opinion,
>to switch.


I won't argue this point.

H^2
 

Re:Re: Borland was too late for me.

"Dennis Jones" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote:
Quote
>The software industry will not have anyone else to blame but themselves
>when customers finally realize that they're not being supported, and
>turn to the courts.

...but they won't get very far down that road. If you look at Borland's
license agreement, which we all agreed to when we bought the software,
True, the courts can only speak to the law and the law permits license
agreements that (IMHO) go too far in protecting the software producer.
It will take legislative action to remedy this, but I would hate to see
the balance shifted too far in the direction of the buyer, which could
force small software houses out of business.
 

Re:Re: Borland was too late for me.

"tim" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in message
Quote
I guess what I meant was maybe one of the reasons Remy is on
TeamB is because he is blindly dedicated, not he's blindly dedicated
because he's on TeamB.
I'm on TeamB because I'm technically savvy about BCB and the VCL.
Quote
From Remy, however, I have never heard so much as an
implied belief that Borland has done anything wrong.
On the contrary, I have mentioned Borland's shortcoming on many occasions.
Usually more on the technical side of things, ie "why did they implement
that?" or "I can't believe they did that in this improper manner" kind of
thing.
Gambit
 

Re:Re: Borland was too late for me.

"Harold Howe [TeamB]" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in message
Quote
Remy is on TeamB because of his technical abilities and because of his
devotion to the BCB community. To suggest that Remy is on TeamB
because he is a blind, Borland zealot is an insult to both him, and the
members of TeamB that elected him to the group.
Indeed.
Quote
As Chris pointed out, TeamB has a private communication channel
with Borland. It is there that we air our grievances. Remy is active in
that private forum, and has been an ardent, if not rabid, supporter of
BCB and the VCL over these last few, tumultuous years. The reason
you haven't seen any of these remarks is because... well... you can't
see them.
Which is a shame really that some of that private information can't be
released publically. It is no secret that Borland holds back more than it
should. Which is funny considering that not that long ago, it was saying
that it was going to dedicate itself to publicizing information more openly
and frequently. I guess that hasn't really taken hold yet.
Quote
It bothers me to see members of this group question Remy's dedication
when behind closed doors, they have had no greater ally.
Amen.
Gambit
 

Re:Re: Borland was too late for me.

"Hendrik Schober" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in message
Quote
This might well be true, but, as you found
out yourself, we haven't seen that. What we
/have/ seen, is Remy's...now, what do I call
it?...mission telling any complainers that
they rae wrong and Borland always did/does
right.
If you are going to make such statements, then please quote specific
discussions rather than make rough generalizations.
Gambit
 

Re:Re: Borland was too late for me.

"tim" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in message
Quote
What I was trying to say was Remy's OWN personal
choice in the matter of why to be on TeamB.
I chose to accept TeamB's invitation for membership for a multitude of
reasons. Direct access to Borland is certainly a plus.
Quote
I was just speaking to his personal "choice".
Unless you know me personally (which you don't), please don't make
uninformed assumptions about what you think my personal choices are.
Gambit
 

Re:Re: Borland was too late for me.

Tamas Demjen < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote:
Quote
Hendrik Schober wrote:
>I wonder how they do this. Is this reliable?

If only the implementation sides differ, why not? [...]
Because they might use different heaps or
use the same heap differently. MS' RTL
does a lot of magic in the debug libs to
help you catch (de)allocation bugs. There
doubtless are other things that I cannot
think of right now.
Quote
Tom
Schobi
--
XXXX@XXXXX.COM is never read
I'm Schobi at suespammers dot org
"The presence of those seeking the truth is infinitely
to be prefered to those thinking they've found it."
Terry Pratchett