Board index » kylix » Boland should create a "Cross Platform C++ Run Time"

Boland should create a "Cross Platform C++ Run Time"

2005-12-11 05:29:23 PM
The best IDE Borland has is JBuilder. It might be still the best Java IDE,
but the freebie, Eclipse is slowly killing JBuilder. I feel Borland will no
longer invest any more on compiler/IDE/debugging tools. Eclipse will become
#1 Java development tool in the future. It is just like Visual Studio .net
is the #1 development tool under Windows. I sometimes wonder why Borland
even want to develop c# or C++ Builder for Windows. It is total a waste of
time. I don¡¦t know who is going to use that. I actually know Borland¡¦s IDE
tools since Turbo Pascal 3.0. I liked Borland¡¦s products a lot (until
recently¡K). I just feel a little sad about the Borland.
I think Borland might need to create a ¡§Cross Platform C++ Run time¡¨. This
run time will fully support ANSI C/C++/STL. It should also define some
¡§thread/events/sockets/GUI/¡K library¡¨. These libraries can be based on
VCL or borrow from Linux/ Win32 library. In this case, Borland owns the
¡§Cross Platform C++ Run Time¡¨ just similar as Sun owns ¡§Java VM¡¨ (I
think you know what I mean). Also, Borland should submit the ¡§Cross
Platform C++ Run Time¡¨ to the STANDARD COMMITTEE. It just like Microsoft
submits C++ CLI to the standard committee.
The only IDE/compiler that can support ¡§Cross Platform C++ Run time¡¨ is
C++ builder (or Kylix). ¡§Cross Platform C++ Run¡¨ will not support Visual
studio, GCC, Intel C++ compiler and so on. However, Microsoft, GNU
organization or other compiler provider can support the ¡§Cross Platform C++
Run Time¡¨ if they have this plan. Also, the ¡§Cross Platform C++ Run time¡¨
will not support MFC. It will not support COM and DCOM. The problem of C++
Builder X is it just tried to support all different compilers (GCC/MSVC and
so on). It seems that if you want to make everyone happy. Eventually,
everyone will be unhappy at you. I bet tons of people are not happy about
C++ CLI. However, Visual C++ .NET is still very popular.
Borland can also provide a guarantee such as ¡§write your c++ once and run
every where¡¨ (Linux/Windows/Mac and so on). I think there are still tons of
companies having the code written in C++ and they want port code to Linux or
other platform. There is no way they can port these code to Java. (Since
year 2000, I was thinking how could I port our company¡¦s C++ code to Java.
In this case, I can make our software run on Linux. But I concluded it is
not possible unless we double our engineer team and QA team). I think C++ is
not dead yet.
Borland can even put something in the adverti{*word*224}t --- ¡§If you want your
C++ program that can only runs on Windows. Go ahead to use C++ .NET. If you
want your C++ program that can run on different platform, then use the
¡§Cross Platform C++ Run Time¡¨.
So how about the GNU C++? Aren¡¦t they cross platform? Yes, they are.
However, they are not really that productive compare to Java. Why? Java have
the exactly the same IDE (like Eclipse, JBuilder) in Linux, Windows and Mac.
In 99.9%, when the developer writes a Java program in Windows, they don¡¦t
really need to retest and recompile in Linux and Mac OS. Even the ¡§project
file¡¨ or ¡§make file¡¨ are also cross platform. On the other hand, GNU C++
don¡¦t really have a good C++ IDE. CDT for Eclipse under Windows is really a
Why not just follow Microsoft C++ CLI standard? Well, if you follow
Microsoft, you are doomed. Do you forget how Borland C++ die? On the other
hand, Microsoft will not compete with ¡§Cross Platform C++ Run Time¡¨.
Nobody will believe Microsoft is going to release a cross platform IDE at
How about the relationship between ¡§Cross Platform C++ Run Time¡¨ and Java?
Well, I think they can be friends. Also, I think still tons of developer
knows C++ very well and they are not necessity want to give up on C++.
One problem I see is after the ¡§Cross Platform C++ Run Time¡¨ become very
popular, Eclipse CDT may want to support it. In this case, it might kill C++
builder in the future. However, I guess you guy should be smart enough to
find a way to make some money from the ¡§Cross C++ platform¡¨.

Re:Boland should create a "Cross Platform C++ Run Time"

I think Borland can re-package wxWidget, Qt or so on. They just need to pick
the best one. Or they can develop their own. C++ is NOT a CROSS PLATFORM
LANGAUGE in my defnitation. If it is, I don't want to even use Java at all.
Why Java is better than C++ in sence of cross platform?
As a developer, I can just write Java code and test them in Windows. The
image can be run on Linux, Mac and so on. For C++, you cannot really do
that. You need to maintain differnt project file in differnt OS. That's
really a big burden for a company like to support mulitple OS.
Also, like Eclipse, JBuilder and other JAVA IDE. They can run on different
platform. In case, if there is a problem can only reproduce in Linux.
Developers can quickly run the IDE in Linux machine and trouble shoot it.
C++ is not really have a very good cross platform environment.
I think C++ Builder X is good, but it try to support too many compilers and
libraries. I think serious developers who want develop cross platform C++
will learn cross platform C++ development is not that easy. They just want
to have better a solution. I think if I can get a very sophisticated cross
platform C++ solution. I don't really care if it use wxWidget, Qt or VCL. It
just need to be as good as VC ++ 6.0.
I think Microsoft once like to use C# to kill C++. After a few years, even
as powerful as Microsoft, they might realize they may not be able to port
the existing software from C++ to C#.
I just feel if Borland can provide a sophisticated cross platform C++ run
time that is as good as Java. They can just try to move Kylix or C++ Builder
X to that direction. I think Borland still has a shot.
Pascal should be dead long time ago. However, because of the Delphi, it
still lives in Borland. If borland can do the samething to C++ as they did
to Pascal..........
Why should Borland develop something that already exists in multiple ways?

wxWidget, Qt, gtk+, ...


Andreas Hausladen

Re:Boland should create a "Cross Platform C++ Run Time"

Why should Borland develop something that already exists in multiple ways?
wxWidget, Qt, gtk+, ...
Andreas Hausladen