Discussion:
D7 IDE
(too old to reply)
SiegfriedN
2008-07-15 12:28:57 UTC
Permalink
Hi,

Sticking my head in a lions mouth, but here goes..

How difficult would it be for Codegear to use the D7 IDE and apply the
current Delphi compiler, packages, VCL, etc. ? (It would be good to get
some editor enhancements as well, but not essential for now e.g. code
folding.) Perhaps then it can be released as Delphi Classic? What a lean
mean IDE machine that will be! heheh

I know it will not happen, but a suitable topic for this newsgroup <g>

Siegfried
Marco Caspers
2008-07-15 12:51:36 UTC
Permalink
SiegfriedN wrote:

<snip>
to get some editor enhancements as well, but not essential for now
e.g. code folding.) Perhaps then it can be released as Delphi
Classic? What a lean mean IDE machine that will be! heheh
I know it will not happen, but a suitable topic for this newsgroup <g>
Well they would have to remove everything that supports .NET.

Basically, you'd end up with.... Delphi 7.
Which, errr.. Is already an existing product.

So, is it difficult, absolutely not? Just churn out some more D7 CD's..
And perhaps provide a hotfix or 2 more, or a service pack.

But like you said, will never happen..

By now i'm so used to the clunkyness and quirks of the new IDE, i'd
hate to go back to the old IDE which has it's own set of problems.


--
Henrick Hellström
2008-07-15 13:03:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by Marco Caspers
Well they would have to remove everything that supports .NET.
You mean "requires .NET" and not "supports .NET", right?
Eddie Shipman
2008-07-15 13:07:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by Henrick Hellström
Post by Marco Caspers
Well they would have to remove everything that supports .NET.
You mean "requires .NET" and not "supports .NET", right?
:-) Not *that's* funny!!!
Marco Caspers
2008-07-15 13:36:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by Henrick Hellström
Post by Marco Caspers
Well they would have to remove everything that supports .NET.
You mean "requires .NET" and not "supports .NET", right?
Both.

I don't see a possiblity for supporting (showing) .NET visual
components without actually using .NET, and therefore requiring .NET.

From that i conclude you must remove it all, and then, basically end up
with what they started with several years ago, D7...

--
Henrick Hellström
2008-07-15 16:40:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by Marco Caspers
I don't see a possiblity for supporting (showing) .NET visual
components without actually using .NET, and therefore requiring .NET.
From that i conclude you must remove it all, and then, basically end up
with what they started with several years ago, D7...
If you strip out everything that is there for .NET support you end up
with just the Delphi Win32 personality, i.e. D2007, which still
/requires/ .NET even though it doesn't /support/ .NET. D2007 contains a
lot of IDE enhancements you didn't have in D7 (at least not without 3rd
party plugins), such as refactoring and code templates, not to mention
that the compiler/language and the VCL/RTL has also been improved.

The only valid reason I see for using D7 instead of D2007 (if you have
both and start a new project), would be if you develop in a VM and are
concerned about the foot print of the installation.
Andreas Dorn
2008-07-15 17:38:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by Henrick Hellström
Post by Marco Caspers
I don't see a possiblity for supporting (showing) .NET visual
components without actually using .NET, and therefore requiring .NET.
From that i conclude you must remove it all, and then, basically end up
with what they started with several years ago, D7...
If you strip out everything that is there for .NET support you end up
with just the Delphi Win32 personality, i.e. D2007, which still
/requires/ .NET even though it doesn't /support/ .NET. D2007 contains a
lot of IDE enhancements you didn't have in D7 (at least not without 3rd
party plugins), such as refactoring and code templates, not to mention
that the compiler/language and the VCL/RTL has also been improved.
As you said: "At least not without 3rd party plugins". With them
I honestly don't see anything in D2007 that's really worth the
drawbacks. I'd really like to make use of improvements, but at the
moment I just don't see them.
Post by Henrick Hellström
The only valid reason I see for using D7 instead of D2007 (if you have
both and start a new project), would be if you develop in a VM and are
concerned about the foot print of the installation.
Therefore:
The only valid reason I see for using D2007 instead of D7, would be if
you are concerned about the foot print of the installation being too small.
Chad Z. Hower aka Kudzu
2008-07-15 18:51:57 UTC
Permalink
The only valid reason I see for using D2007 instead of D7, would be if you
are concerned about the foot print of the installation being too small.
Its not just footprint. Run D7 sometime. Its FAST. Really fast.
Productivity...
--
Keep up to date - read the IntraWeb blog!
http://www.atozed.com/intraweb/blog/
Henrick Hellström
2008-07-15 20:11:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by Chad Z. Hower aka Kudzu
Its not just footprint. Run D7 sometime. Its FAST. Really fast.
Productivity...
Not in my experience. It starts way slower if you got a lot of 3rd party
components and plugins installed.
Chad Z. Hower aka Kudzu
2008-07-15 22:04:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by Henrick Hellström
Not in my experience. It starts way slower if you got a lot of 3rd party
components and plugins installed.
I guess it depends what you load. But out of the box - or out of the box
with only IW and Indy (IW and Indy dont seem to add any noticable
difference) there is a huge difference. D7 loads near instant, and
everything is quick. D2007 is a lot slower, especially on loads.

I also prefer the D7 IDE as well.
--
Keep up to date - read the IntraWeb blog!
http://www.atozed.com/intraweb/blog/
Captain Jake
2008-07-15 23:54:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by Chad Z. Hower aka Kudzu
Post by Henrick Hellström
Not in my experience. It starts way slower if you got a lot of 3rd party
components and plugins installed.
I guess it depends what you load. But out of the box - or out of the box
with only IW and Indy (IW and Indy dont seem to add any noticable
difference) there is a huge difference. D7 loads near instant, and
everything is quick. D2007 is a lot slower, especially on loads.
It takes me several minutes to load D2007 for my newsreader project.
Something like 5-10 minutes. I've got a lot of third-party add-ins and
components obviously, but still. This is one slow loading process.
Post by Chad Z. Hower aka Kudzu
I also prefer the D7 IDE as well.
I don't. I never have liked the VB3 IDE, because I always find myself
accidentally clicking through to another app and thus shifting the focus
away altogether.
Brion L. Webster
2008-07-16 00:10:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by Captain Jake
Post by Chad Z. Hower aka Kudzu
I also prefer the D7 IDE as well.
I don't. I never have liked the VB3 IDE, because I always find myself
accidentally clicking through to another app and thus shifting the focus
away altogether.
See, different strokes for different folks - I click through *on*
*purpose* to bring focus to things in the background.
--
-Brion
There's no such thing as 'one, true way;'
- Mercedes Lackey
Bryce K. Nielsen
2008-07-18 17:52:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by Brion L. Webster
Post by Captain Jake
I don't. I never have liked the VB3 IDE, because I always find myself
accidentally clicking through to another app and thus shifting the focus
away altogether.
See, different strokes for different folks - I click through *on*
*purpose* to bring focus to things in the background.
Agreed. Overlapping windows is so much more efficient real estate wise that
it's worth it over the 1-window-to-rule-them-all IDE.

-BKN
Henrick Hellström
2008-07-16 00:00:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by Chad Z. Hower aka Kudzu
Post by Henrick Hellström
Not in my experience. It starts way slower if you got a lot of 3rd party
components and plugins installed.
I guess it depends what you load.
Obviously, yes. Since D7 doesn't feature delayed package loading like
D2007, it will take minutes to load if you want a decent number of
plugins that provide the same IDE functionality you have in D2007. OTOH,
if you, unlike Andreas Dorn, are satisfied with the default
functionality of the D7 IDE, then you are comparing apples with pears if
you argue the D7 IDE is really fast.
Dennis Passmore
2008-07-16 11:34:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by Chad Z. Hower aka Kudzu
I also prefer the D7 IDE as well.
+1

I was just going thru some old archives of Books and stuff and came across
some stick on posters that Borland was passing out at Borcon 2004 which read

"go .COM yourself" .

They did and look where it took them, into a big bucket of crap which will never be improved
Brion L. Webster
2008-07-16 18:04:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dennis Passmore
Post by Chad Z. Hower aka Kudzu
I also prefer the D7 IDE as well.
+1
I was just going thru some old archives of Books and stuff and came across
some stick on posters that Borland was passing out at Borcon 2004 which read
"go .COM yourself" .
They did and look where it took them, into a big bucket of crap which will never be improved
I remember meeting you there. ;-)

Webvolutionaries was about that time frame too, I think.
--
-Brion
There's no such thing as 'one, true way;'
- Mercedes Lackey
Yogi Yang 007
2008-07-16 08:40:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by Henrick Hellström
Post by Chad Z. Hower aka Kudzu
Its not just footprint. Run D7 sometime. Its FAST. Really fast.
Productivity...
Not in my experience. It starts way slower if you got a lot of 3rd party
components and plugins installed.
Maybe you are right about D7 but then D2006 also becomes unbearably slow
after loading a lot of thirdparty plugins. Let alone loading a lot of
plugins.

Just Install JCL and JVCL and the loading time seems to get doubled!
Mark Tiede
2008-07-17 15:05:49 UTC
Permalink
Yogi,

Just for a data point. My reload of BDS 2006 Architect takes 6 seconds
with JVCL. (don't remember if there were pieces/parts or I did the whole
thing). Still that isn't too bad.

I also have my own components and a couple of other libraries like the
compact framework stuff.
Post by Yogi Yang 007
Post by Henrick Hellström
Post by Chad Z. Hower aka Kudzu
Its not just footprint. Run D7 sometime. Its FAST. Really fast.
Productivity...
Not in my experience. It starts way slower if you got a lot of 3rd party
components and plugins installed.
Maybe you are right about D7 but then D2006 also becomes unbearably slow
after loading a lot of thirdparty plugins. Let alone loading a lot of
plugins.
Just Install JCL and JVCL and the loading time seems to get doubled!
Yogi Yang 007
2008-07-19 05:32:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mark Tiede
Yogi,
Just for a data point. My reload of BDS 2006 Architect takes 6 seconds
with JVCL. (don't remember if there were pieces/parts or I did the whole
thing). Still that isn't too bad.
I also have my own components and a couple of other libraries like the
compact framework stuff.
That is great but in my case I have installed the following :
- ImageEn
- Apprehend
- CnPack
- CnWizards
- AbsoluteDB (Personal Edition)
- DSPack
- LMD (Freeware)
- Gr32
- Instant Objects
- JCL
- JVCL
- TAssist (An Office Assistant component)
- Virtual TreeView (and a few freeware components derived from VT)
- ZeosDB
- GExpert

That is it yet Delphi 2006 is taking ages to load and I have felt that
after installing JCL and JVCL (which I installed just before two days)
the Loading time has doubled.

My hardware configuration is PentiumD based PC with 512MB RAM and 160 GB
SATA HDD.
Bob S
2008-07-19 06:05:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by Yogi Yang 007
- ImageEn
- Apprehend
- CnPack
- CnWizards
- AbsoluteDB (Personal Edition)
- DSPack
- LMD (Freeware)
- Gr32
- Instant Objects
- JCL
- JVCL
- TAssist (An Office Assistant component)
- Virtual TreeView (and a few freeware components derived from VT)
- ZeosDB
- GExpert
That is it yet Delphi 2006 is taking ages to load and I have felt that
after installing JCL and JVCL (which I installed just before two days)
the Loading time has doubled.
My hardware configuration is PentiumD based PC with 512MB RAM and 160 GB
SATA HDD.
Yogi, can you feed your machine more RAM, even ramping it up to a gig oughta help bunches. Do you /need/ all of those libraries for /all/ of your projects loaded every time Delphi fires up?

If not... Delphi Package Selector by Bayu Prasetio:
http://www.torry.net/authorsmore.php?id=6765

Trimming what you need, when you need it, and doubling your memory would/could make a huge difference.

hth
Henrick Hellström
2008-07-15 20:09:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by Andreas Dorn
As you said: "At least not without 3rd party plugins". With them
I honestly don't see anything in D2007 that's really worth the
drawbacks. I'd really like to make use of improvements, but at the
moment I just don't see them.
That's fine, but that makes me curious what could possibly /ever/ make
you upgrade? There is really nothing Codegear could possibly add to
later releases that it would be impossible for any 3rd party to add to
D7. Since it is possible to use D7 as an editor for FPC, Codegear isn't
even in sole control over language and compiler enhancements.
Chad Z. Hower aka Kudzu
2008-07-15 22:06:33 UTC
Permalink
That's fine, but that makes me curious what could possibly /ever/ make you
upgrade? There is really nothing Codegear could possibly add to
Until Tiburon native code users (who are the majority of Delphi users by
far) have been largely ignored. There have been IDE improvements, but the
things most users want like Generics, Unicode, x64 etc just were not there.
So for many developers, there just wasnt much interesting to move out of
D6/7.

Tiburon starts to change that trend. Generics and Unicode are very big
features, and I hope that CG continues to focus on the language. Sure we
don't want them to forget about the IDE. But lets look at D7. The IDE is
pretty good. The language though is a bit dated.
D7. Since it is possible to use D7 as an editor for FPC, Codegear isn't
even in sole control over language and compiler enhancements.
How integrated is the FPC stuff in D7?
--
Keep up to date - read the IntraWeb blog!
http://www.atozed.com/intraweb/blog/
Henrick Hellström
2008-07-16 00:02:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by Chad Z. Hower aka Kudzu
How integrated is the FPC stuff in D7?
Simon Kissel was working on a CrossFPC plugin. I don't think he ever
released it, but it is most certainly /possible/ to integrate FPC with D7.
Tim Jarvis
2008-07-16 13:50:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by Chad Z. Hower aka Kudzu
Until Tiburon native code users (who are the majority of Delphi users
by far) have been largely ignored.
I think the word "ignored" is incorrect here, There actually has been
quite a bit of work in the native code language features of Delphi in
fact more from D7 -> D2007 than say D5 -> D7, look at things like
Generics, For In loops,Constructors in Records, property getters and
setters in Records. new scoping directive strict protected etc.

So, Ignored? not true, not to your (and some others) required pace and
priority, probably true.

Regards Tim.

--
Chad Z. Hower aka Kudzu
2008-07-16 16:27:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tim Jarvis
I think the word "ignored" is incorrect here, There actually has been
quite a bit of work in the native code language features of Delphi in
fact more from D7 -> D2007 than say D5 -> D7, look at things like
Generics, For In loops,Constructors in Records, property getters and
setters in Records. new scoping directive strict protected etc.
Generics are available in native code before Tiburon?

The other things, while welcome are pretty small. Until Tiburon, the
resources were mostly on the IDE and .NET.
--
Keep up to date - read the IntraWeb blog!
http://www.atozed.com/intraweb/blog/
Tim Jarvis
2008-07-16 17:47:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by Chad Z. Hower aka Kudzu
Post by Tim Jarvis
I think the word "ignored" is incorrect here, There actually has
been quite a bit of work in the native code language features of
Delphi in
fact more from D7 -> D2007 than say D5 -> D7, look at things like
Generics, For In loops,Constructors in Records, property getters and
setters in Records. new scoping directive strict protected etc.
Generics are available in native code before Tiburon?
The other things, while welcome are pretty small. Until Tiburon, the
resources were mostly on the IDE and .NET.
Sure, native generics was held over and not released for D2007, it was
decided that D2007 was to be non breaking but the work for it was done
around that timeframe.

Note, my point was that Native Delphi was not ignored in fact far from
it (BTW Nick is the loudest Delphi Win32 advocate on the planet), there
was just a lot of other things that got done as well, and sure the
priorities may not have suited everyone but that was an artifact of
resourcing and scheduling contstraints it was not an intent to limit or
"ignore" one part of the product.

Chad, don't get me wrong, I am not really disagreeing with you
completely, just with the notion that Win32 was ignored, appearances
can be deceptive.

Cheers Tim.

--
Chad Z. Hower aka Kudzu
2008-07-16 18:05:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tim Jarvis
Sure, native generics was held over and not released for D2007, it was
decided that D2007 was to be non breaking but the work for it was done
around that timeframe.
But you listed Generics as a feature pre tiburon. When you remove generics,
your remaining list is not very significant.
Post by Tim Jarvis
Note, my point was that Native Delphi was not ignored in fact far from
I said "largely ignored."
--
Keep up to date - read the IntraWeb blog!
http://www.atozed.com/intraweb/blog/
Nick Hodges (Embarcadero)
2008-07-16 23:55:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tim Jarvis
, just with the notion that Win32 was ignored,
I won't debate whether "ignored" is the right word -- folks can see for
themselves.

This article

http://dn.codegear.com/article/34324

show most if not all of the changes. Many are for the .Net side, but
many are for Win32 as well.
--
Nick Hodges
Delphi Product Manager - Embarcadero
http://blogs.codegear.com/nickhodges
Tom Corey
2008-07-16 16:27:44 UTC
Permalink
the things most users want like Generics, Unicode, x64 etc just
were not there.
Hehehe, except for that loud contingent of users who are absolutely
certain that Unicode Will Break Everything And Doom Civilization.
TJC Support
2008-07-16 17:16:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tom Corey
Hehehe, except for that loud contingent of users who are absolutely
certain that Unicode Will Break Everything And Doom Civilization.
Yes it will!!! Just like Y2K did. :^)

Cheers,
Van
Paul Scott
2008-07-17 10:04:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by TJC Support
Yes it will!!! Just like Y2K did. :^)
Van,

I don't know about your situation, but the FTSE-100 company that I was
working for expended a *lot* of time, effort and money in preparation for
Y2K - money which wasn't all wasted :)

We even closed down several products for which upgrading would have been
completely uneconomical.

For me, some of the advantages of the hype were that...

a) It encouraged the developers to investigate early and comprehensively

b) It convinced management to release the budget to allow early
investigation

c) It convinced the customers of the about-to-be-terminated products that
there really was a problem and that they really should investigate
alternatives as a matter of urgency.

(And despite all the efforts, I have been reliably informed that another
FTSE-100 company was unable to process any orders at all on 29-Feb-2000)
--
Paul Scott
Information Management Systems
Macclesfield, UK.
Chad Z. Hower aka Kudzu
2008-07-16 18:04:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tom Corey
Hehehe, except for that loud contingent of users who are absolutely
certain that Unicode Will Break Everything And Doom Civilization.
Forced Unicode causes a lot of compatibility issues yes. I can't comment
further here though yet as I don't know whats public and whats not about
Tiburon's Unicode implementation.
--
Keep up to date - read the IntraWeb blog!
http://www.atozed.com/intraweb/blog/
Paul Scott
2008-07-17 10:20:31 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 16 Jul 2008 17:27:44 +0100, Tom Corey
... except for that loud contingent of users who are absolutely
certain that Unicode Will Break Everything And Doom Civilization.
Tom,

The proposed change of meaning of "string" means that it will allow
Unicode characters to be entered and displayed in every TEdit, TComboBox,
TStringGrid, etc, etc - which is indeed a major advance after a simple
recompile!

Except...

How does this modification in a Delphi front-end application magically
persuade our customer's non-Delphi, flat-record, 1char=1byte, ANSI-only,
widely-distributed database to accept Unicode data?

Either:

a) A Chinese/Russian/... user will be able to enter "char>255" into a
TEdit and see the characters displayed correctly (unlike at present) but
that data will appear "mangled" on subsequent read-back because the data
will not (cannot) be stored correctly in the database.

or b) Each of the several thousand data files worldwide is extended to
handle Unicode data

or c) Each and every Edit1, ComboBox2, StringGrid2143, ... is modified to
filter out all non-ANSI data entry.


The first - "What You See Is NOT What You Get Back" - is completely
unacceptable. (Note - this would also be the effect were the filtering
done in the database interface layer)

The second and third options are completely uneconomic - unless CG are
going to issue some magic class helpers for /all/ data entry controls or
add a "Don't accept Unicode entry" property to the Application and/or
TForm.


FTR I don't recall ever saying this change would "Doom Civilization", but
it certainly won't be good news for the CG CFO if he's expecting any
upgrade revenue from our customer.
--
Paul Scott
Information Management Systems
Macclesfield, UK.
Tom Corey
2008-07-17 14:40:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by Paul Scott
The proposed change of meaning of "string" means that it will allow
Unicode characters to be entered and displayed in every TEdit,
TComboBox, TStringGrid, etc, etc - which is indeed a major advance
after a simple recompile!
Apparently it wasn't much trouble for the folks at RemObjects to get
their very complex SDK code base updated for the Unicode changes, using
Tiburon.

I'm inclined to take their actual experience over newsgroup speculation.
Eric Grange
2008-07-17 15:19:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tom Corey
Apparently it wasn't much trouble for the folks at RemObjects to get
their very complex SDK code base updated for the Unicode changes, using
Tiburon.
Somehow, I don't think they're representative, for two reasons:
1) it's a well-written, well-maintained library
2) it's code that is technically complex, most legacy apps are
extensively complex

I mean that solving "complex" issues on tight code, with a relatively
low line count, that is maintained by a small number of skilled
developpers is on a completely different difficulty scale than solving
(individually) simple issues spread over millions lines of code
maintained by lots of averagely-skilled developpers.

FWIW in our own particular case, I would have no fear about porting the
hundreds of units in our core libs, it's the thousandths of "other"
units and forms I would be worried about ;)

Eric
Chad Z. Hower aka Kudzu
2008-07-17 16:44:18 UTC
Permalink
It depends on the code. Code that was already made ready for .NET tends to
go to Tiburon easily. But there are a lot of libraries and apps that were
never made ready for .NET and will have issues going to Tiburon.
--
Keep up to date - read the IntraWeb blog!
http://www.atozed.com/intraweb/blog/
Post by Tom Corey
Post by Paul Scott
The proposed change of meaning of "string" means that it will allow
Unicode characters to be entered and displayed in every TEdit,
TComboBox, TStringGrid, etc, etc - which is indeed a major advance
after a simple recompile!
Apparently it wasn't much trouble for the folks at RemObjects to get
their very complex SDK code base updated for the Unicode changes, using
Tiburon.
I'm inclined to take their actual experience over newsgroup speculation.
Paul Scott
2008-07-18 11:58:09 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 17 Jul 2008 15:40:54 +0100, Tom Corey
Post by Tom Corey
Apparently it wasn't much trouble for the folks at RemObjects to get
their very complex SDK code base updated for the Unicode changes, using
Tiburon.
I'm inclined to take their actual experience over newsgroup speculation.
Well, they are probably much cleverer than I am!

But unless they're using Quantum Computing, I would still bet that even
they could not take "N" (extended) characters which Tiburon will now allow
to be entered into, say, a TEdit and losslessly store them in an N-byte
field in an existing record !

Go on, marc. Amaze me!
--
Paul Scott
Information Management Systems
Macclesfield, UK.
Paul Dolen
2008-07-15 14:16:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by Marco Caspers
Basically, you'd end up with.... Delphi 7.
Which, errr.. Is already an existing product.
No, there have been compiler, RTL, VCL, database, etc., improvements
since D7.
Andreas Dorn
2008-07-15 16:31:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by Paul Dolen
Post by Marco Caspers
Basically, you'd end up with.... Delphi 7.
Which, errr.. Is already an existing product.
No, there have been compiler, RTL, VCL, database, etc., improvements
since D7.
I think improvements is the wrong word. There have been "changes".
Mike Dixon
2008-07-15 18:06:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by Andreas Dorn
Post by Paul Dolen
Post by Marco Caspers
Basically, you'd end up with.... Delphi 7.
Which, errr.. Is already an existing product.
No, there have been compiler, RTL, VCL, database, etc., improvements
since D7.
I think improvements is the wrong word. There have been "changes".
fwiw, 'strict private' and 'strict protected' have let me catch several
bugs. And that's just off the top of my head; I'm sure there are other
things that I'd miss if I went back.

-Mike
Andreas Dorn
2008-07-15 19:26:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mike Dixon
Post by Andreas Dorn
Post by Paul Dolen
Post by Marco Caspers
Basically, you'd end up with.... Delphi 7.
Which, errr.. Is already an existing product.
No, there have been compiler, RTL, VCL, database, etc., improvements
since D7.
I think improvements is the wrong word. There have been "changes".
fwiw, 'strict private' and 'strict protected' have let me catch several
bugs. And that's just off the top of my head; I'm sure there are other
things that I'd miss if I went back.
Those changes are somewhat useful, but I often have only one class per
file, so I have only little need for them. Also thanks to naming
conventions it's really unlikely that I accidentally use the internal
data of a class.
Donald Shimoda
2008-07-15 23:36:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by Marco Caspers
<snip>
to get some editor enhancements as well, but not essential for now
e.g. code folding.) Perhaps then it can be released as Delphi
Classic? What a lean mean IDE machine that will be! heheh
I know it will not happen, but a suitable topic for this newsgroup <g>
Well they would have to remove everything that supports .NET.
Basically, you'd end up with.... Delphi 7.
Which, errr.. Is already an existing product.
Actually don't. He ask for something valid. New vcl, new compiler, etc
in old delphi IDE.

I dont saying it have sense, just is wich he ask for. ;)
--
Donald Shimoda

http://donaldshimoda.blogspot.com
http://blogs.remobjects.com/blogs/donald
Eduard S
2008-07-15 16:35:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by SiegfriedN
How difficult would it be for Codegear to use the D7 IDE and apply the
current Delphi compiler, packages, VCL, etc. ? (It would be good to get
some editor enhancements as well, but not essential for now e.g. code
folding.) Perhaps then it can be released as Delphi Classic? What a lean
mean IDE machine that will be! heheh
Turbo Delphi Explorer 2006 can work without .NET, and it's a lean mean
IDE :D
I use it for simple apps (without COM, TypeLib, ActiveX) and various
database front-ends.
Chad Z. Hower aka Kudzu
2008-07-15 17:07:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by Eduard S
Turbo Delphi Explorer 2006 can work without .NET, and it's a lean mean
IDE :D
I use it for simple apps (without COM, TypeLib, ActiveX) and various
database front-ends.
Run D7 sometime - then really be amazed at lean and mean.
--
Keep up to date - read the IntraWeb blog!
http://www.atozed.com/intraweb/blog/
Pieter Zijlstra
2008-07-19 01:31:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by Chad Z. Hower aka Kudzu
Post by Eduard S
Turbo Delphi Explorer 2006 can work without .NET, and it's a lean
mean IDE :D
I use it for simple apps (without COM, TypeLib, ActiveX) and various
database front-ends.
Run D7 sometime - then really be amazed at lean and mean.
How about using Win3.x and D1, that's really fast on current desktops,
OK it might a problem to get the drivers needed for the hardware... but
once you've got it running it "rocks" ;-)
--
Pieter
Chad Z. Hower aka Kudzu
2008-07-19 01:47:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by Pieter Zijlstra
Post by Chad Z. Hower aka Kudzu
Run D7 sometime - then really be amazed at lean and mean.
How about using Win3.x and D1, that's really fast on current desktops,
OK it might a problem to get the drivers needed for the hardware... but
once you've got it running it "rocks" ;-)
Win 3.1 seems snappy too - but the difference between D1 and D7 in features
is huge, but in perf D7 is still quite good. But D200x, ie post D7, the
IDE's are a lot slower.
--
Keep up to date - read the IntraWeb blog!
http://www.atozed.com/intraweb/blog/
Pieter Zijlstra
2008-07-19 02:35:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by Chad Z. Hower aka Kudzu
Post by Pieter Zijlstra
Post by Chad Z. Hower aka Kudzu
Run D7 sometime - then really be amazed at lean and mean.
How about using Win3.x and D1, that's really fast on current
desktops, OK it might a problem to get the drivers needed for the
hardware... but once you've got it running it "rocks" ;-)
Win 3.1 seems snappy too - but the difference between D1 and D7 in
features is huge, but in perf D7 is still quite good. But D200x, ie
post D7, the IDE's are a lot slower.
Starting first time D2007, 43 seconds and closed it
Starting first time D7, 20 seconds and closed it.
Restarting D2007, 11 seconds and closed it.
Restarting D7, 6 seconds and closed it.

Both Environments are roughly the same (packages and such).
In both cases the IDE is undocked and I'm not using the embedded form
designer, that's just the way I like it!

So yes, a restart takes 5 seconds more, but that is still not enough
time to smoke a cigaret. I'm really in need of a slow IDE, make that
you're priority Emba... CodeGear!!! I need a compiler where, like in
the good ol' days, a rebuild takes at least 5 minutes (a bit more would
be appreciated)!!! Please help the addicted to have an excuse to walk
outside to enjoy our nicotine break!!!

;-)

On a more serious note I had to restart the D7 IDE a lot more while
debugging than the 2007 IDE.
--
Pieter
Chad Z. Hower aka Kudzu
2008-07-19 02:48:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Pieter Zijlstra
Starting first time D2007, 43 seconds and closed it
Starting first time D7, 20 seconds and closed it.
Restarting D2007, 11 seconds and closed it.
Restarting D7, 6 seconds and closed it.
Are you on Vista? I'm using Delphi in VM's.

For me:
Delphi 7 is 7 seconds to load.
Delphi 2007 is 38 seconds to load
Visual Studio 2008 is 4 seconds to load

All in VM's with 512 MB RAM allocated to them. The host is fairly peppy:
http://www.kudzuworld.com/PowerfulPortable/Mark03/
--
Keep up to date - read the IntraWeb blog!
http://www.atozed.com/intraweb/blog/
Chad Z. Hower aka Kudzu
2008-07-19 02:50:59 UTC
Permalink
BTW for each of these tests I fresh booted a VM. One has D7, one has D2007,
one has VS2008, they are separate VMs but all identical in specs, all are XP
SP3 and built off the same core.

Then I waited for all disk activity to halt on guest and host before
launching each. They were not booted at the same time.
--
Keep up to date - read the IntraWeb blog!
http://www.atozed.com/intraweb/blog/
Post by Chad Z. Hower aka Kudzu
Post by Pieter Zijlstra
Starting first time D2007, 43 seconds and closed it
Starting first time D7, 20 seconds and closed it.
Restarting D2007, 11 seconds and closed it.
Restarting D7, 6 seconds and closed it.
Are you on Vista? I'm using Delphi in VM's.
Delphi 7 is 7 seconds to load.
Delphi 2007 is 38 seconds to load
Visual Studio 2008 is 4 seconds to load
http://www.kudzuworld.com/PowerfulPortable/Mark03/
--
Keep up to date - read the IntraWeb blog!
http://www.atozed.com/intraweb/blog/
Pieter Zijlstra
2008-07-19 03:14:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by Chad Z. Hower aka Kudzu
Post by Pieter Zijlstra
Starting first time D2007, 43 seconds and closed it
Starting first time D7, 20 seconds and closed it.
Restarting D2007, 11 seconds and closed it.
Restarting D7, 6 seconds and closed it.
Are you on Vista?
Nah, at home on a four year old, P4 Northwood 2.8GHZ with 2GB RAM, XP
box.
Post by Chad Z. Hower aka Kudzu
I'm using Delphi in VM's.
Delphi 7 is 7 seconds to load.
Delphi 2007 is 38 seconds to load
If I ran fast, I could make it to the coffee machine and back in 38
seconds, but my cup would still be empty ;-)
Post by Chad Z. Hower aka Kudzu
Visual Studio 2008 is 4 seconds to load
Curious if *everything* is loaded or does it just looks like everything
is loaded?
Post by Chad Z. Hower aka Kudzu
All in VM's with 512 MB RAM allocated to them. The host is fairly
peppy: http://www.kudzuworld.com/PowerfulPortable/Mark03/
That's a heavy "lap-top" ;-)
--
Pieter
Chad Z. Hower aka Kudzu
2008-07-19 03:30:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by Pieter Zijlstra
Nah, at home on a four year old, P4 Northwood 2.8GHZ with 2GB RAM, XP
box.
I was curious about your reload times. Vista's superfetch can affect things
(usually in a positive way, but throws of benchmarks)
Post by Pieter Zijlstra
Post by Chad Z. Hower aka Kudzu
Visual Studio 2008 is 4 seconds to load
Curious if *everything* is loaded or does it just looks like everything
is loaded?
Its ready to go. Menus respond, I can type in the editor, etc. If I go into
options it will load that dynamically, but I dont go in there most sessions,
and a 4 second load time.. Well I'm willing to make some sacrifices against
a 38 second one...
Post by Pieter Zijlstra
Post by Chad Z. Hower aka Kudzu
All in VM's with 512 MB RAM allocated to them. The host is fairly
peppy: http://www.kudzuworld.com/PowerfulPortable/Mark03/
That's a heavy "lap-top" ;-)
I dont carry it on "normal" travel. On normal travel I take a small tablet
PC. But when I go somewhere for a few weeks or move between summer and
winter location, etc.. it goes. :)
--
Keep up to date - read the IntraWeb blog!
http://www.atozed.com/intraweb/blog/
Pieter Zijlstra
2008-07-19 23:35:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by Chad Z. Hower aka Kudzu
Post by Pieter Zijlstra
Nah, at home on a four year old, P4 Northwood 2.8GHZ with 2GB RAM,
XP box.
I was curious about your reload times. Vista's superfetch can affect
things (usually in a positive way, but throws of benchmarks)
I got a new vista laptop with D2006, to compare here are the numbers of
the old XP box again.

XPsp3 desktop (P4 Northwood 2.8 GHZ 2GB RAM)
============================================
boot restart
D5 11 3
D7 19 5
D2006 46 14
D2007 35(1) 11


Vista Laptop (Dell Vostro 1700, Core 2 duo T7500 2.2GHZ 2GB RAM)
================================================================
On batteries:
boot prefetch restart
D2006 45(2) ?? 16

Net adapter plugged in:
boot prefetch restart
D2006 32 14(3) 9


(1) First start after reboot, don't know why it was 43 seconds for
D2007 yesterday, maybe Alt.Binz was just unrarring a file.

(2) On the Vista laptop the first (boot) measurement was as soon as I
could start Delphi after the OS has booted.

(3) The prefetch measurement was after a reboot when the HDD LED
settled down, which took about 6! minutes.
--
Pieter
Chad Z. Hower aka Kudzu
2008-07-22 01:37:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by Pieter Zijlstra
(3) The prefetch measurement was after a reboot when the HDD LED
settled down, which took about 6! minutes.
One of the many reasons I dont run Vista. But I'm experimenting with 2008
server as a "workstation", and so far its GREAT!!!

http://www.win2008workstation.com
--
Keep up to date - read the IntraWeb blog!
http://www.atozed.com/intraweb/blog/
Pieter Zijlstra
2008-07-22 23:16:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by Chad Z. Hower aka Kudzu
Post by Pieter Zijlstra
(3) The prefetch measurement was after a reboot when the HDD LED
settled down, which took about 6! minutes.
One of the many reasons I dont run Vista. But I'm experimenting with
2008 server as a "workstation", and so far its GREAT!!!
Just for the record the lap-top can be used within a minute, this super
fetch is not really slowing it down, as it looks.

My fellow developers and I are being used as a "guinea pig" for Vista
before it will be introduced in the company.
Post by Chad Z. Hower aka Kudzu
http://www.win2008workstation.com
Bookmarked, thanks!
--
Pieter
Nick Hodges (Embarcadero)
2008-07-19 11:28:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by Chad Z. Hower aka Kudzu
Visual Studio 2008 is 4 seconds to load
To be completely fair, you should mention that VS does delayed loading
of most functionality.
--
Nick Hodges
Delphi Product Manager - Embarcadero
http://blogs.codegear.com/nickhodges
I.P. Nichols
2008-07-19 12:47:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by Nick Hodges (Embarcadero)
Post by Chad Z. Hower aka Kudzu
Visual Studio 2008 is 4 seconds to load
To be completely fair, you should mention that VS does delayed loading
of most functionality.
Who said anything about being completely fair - the is the non-tech
newsgroup! ;-)
Chad Z. Hower aka Kudzu
2008-07-19 15:08:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by Nick Hodges (Embarcadero)
Post by Chad Z. Hower aka Kudzu
Visual Studio 2008 is 4 seconds to load
To be completely fair, you should mention that VS does delayed loading
of most functionality.
We've already mentioned it. But its a huge help.......It should not take
more time to load my IDE and "get to work" than it does to boot my OS.
--
Keep up to date - read the IntraWeb blog!
http://www.atozed.com/intraweb/blog/
Dave Nottage [TeamB]
2008-07-22 11:14:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by Chad Z. Hower aka Kudzu
Post by Nick Hodges (Embarcadero)
To be completely fair, you should mention that VS does delayed
loading of most functionality.
We've already mentioned it. But its a huge help.......It should not
take more time to load my IDE and "get to work" than it does to boot
my OS.
Cripes.. Vista takes way longer to start on our machines than RAD
Studio. Is there something we can do to improve the load time?
--
Dave Nottage [TeamB]
Chad Z. Hower aka Kudzu
2008-07-22 12:29:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dave Nottage [TeamB]
Cripes.. Vista takes way longer to start on our machines than RAD
Studio. Is there something we can do to improve the load time?
Hopefully the two of them won't see it a competition to be the longest in
future versions.

Solutions:

1) There are some pages on the net describing how to tweak them. They
generally help, but in all my tinkering I was never able to "fix" Vista. One
major boot up problem is super fetch, you can try turning that off.

2) Go back to XP. :) I'm still running XP and XP64 everywhere.

3) Go 2008 and configure as a workstation. Quite a few RD's have done this
and rave about it. I'm experimenting with this now and results so far are
stellar.
--
Keep up to date - read the IntraWeb blog!
http://www.atozed.com/intraweb/blog/
John Jacobson
2008-07-19 14:34:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by Chad Z. Hower aka Kudzu
Delphi 7 is 7 seconds to load.
Delphi 2007 is 38 seconds to load
Visual Studio 2008 is 4 seconds to load
Yeah, but VS2008 doesn't offer as much functionality. It's refactoring is
lame, and on my work PC, the database explorer doesn't even work at all
after a recent update.
Chad Z. Hower aka Kudzu
2008-07-19 15:09:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by John Jacobson
Yeah, but VS2008 doesn't offer as much functionality. It's refactoring is
lame, and on my work PC, the database explorer doesn't even work at all
after a recent update.
Straw man... We are comparing even against D7. I could list all kinds of
features VS has the Delphi does, but thats not the point.

Delphi 2007 is SLOW to load. Exceptionally slow compared to other commonly
used IDE's.
--
Keep up to date - read the IntraWeb blog!
http://www.atozed.com/intraweb/blog/
Kevin Powick
2008-07-19 19:50:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by Chad Z. Hower aka Kudzu
Delphi 2007 is SLOW to load. Exceptionally slow compared to other
commonly used IDE's.
Haven't used D2007, but is loading time really an issue? How many
times per day must one fire-up their IDE? I would hope the answer is
once.
--
Kevin Powick
Chad Z. Hower aka Kudzu
2008-07-19 19:53:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by Kevin Powick
Haven't used D2007, but is loading time really an issue? How many
times per day must one fire-up their IDE? I would hope the answer is
once.
Depends how many times you crash it. Developing OTA stuff in native code
sometimes it crashes a lot - not because of its instabilty, but because its
native code.

But load time also is a users "first impression". I dont say that it has to
match VS2008 at 4 seconds, but 38 seconds is really excesssive. I cannot
think of any other app on my system that takes that long to load up - ok
well except maybe Adobe reader - but I've long since removed Adobe reader.
:)
--
Keep up to date - read the IntraWeb blog!
http://www.atozed.com/intraweb/blog/
Kevin Powick
2008-07-19 21:49:28 UTC
Permalink
Chad Z. Hower aka Kudzu wrote:

- ok well except maybe Adobe reader - but I've
long since removed Adobe reader. :)
Same here. Switched to Foxit Reader a while ago. Love it.
--
Kevin Powick
Henrick Hellström
2008-07-20 10:01:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by Chad Z. Hower aka Kudzu
Depends how many times you crash it. Developing OTA stuff in native code
sometimes it crashes a lot - not because of its instabilty, but because its
native code.
Not exactly. OTA packages are debugged by launching a second instance of
the IDE. While design time packages with /bugs/ indeed might make the
IDE unstable, that is not really the reason for the need for frequent
restarts. Even if this code was written in managed code, you would have
to debug it using a second instance of the IDE, so the number of
restarts would most likely be the same either way.
Marco Caspers
2008-07-21 08:56:36 UTC
Permalink
Henrick Hellström wrote:

<snip>
Post by Henrick Hellström
Not exactly. OTA packages are debugged by launching a second instance
of the IDE. While design time packages with bugs indeed might make
the IDE unstable.
<snip>

That in and of itself points out a design flaw in the IDE imo.
Nothing you install or run inside the IDE must be able to crash the IDE.
It might show an exception of some sort, but it must never be able to
crash the IDE and/or make it so unstable/slow that it becomes
impossible to use.

But don't worry, the Rad Studio 2007 IDE itself is very capable of
crashing on itself without even any third party stuff installed (none
of it mind you, no Indy, no IBX, no samples, no nothing, just plain
delphi vcl components).

Just make one or more typing errors when auto complete is active...


Fortunately the IDE is limited to the use of one CPU core so it is only
able to hang itself and not the OS...
That is, if you have more than 1 core...

--
Chad Z. Hower aka Kudzu
2008-07-22 01:36:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by Henrick Hellström
Not exactly. OTA packages are debugged by launching a second instance of
the IDE. While design time packages with /bugs/ indeed might make the
If you are doing an attached debug, there are other ways as well. But either
way, its a lot of starting and restarting.
Post by Henrick Hellström
restarts. Even if this code was written in managed code, you would have to
debug it using a second instance of the IDE, so the number of restarts
would most likely be the same either way.
Depends how you debug. :) You don't always need a full debug - but no matter
which way we do it, 40 seconds versus 4 makes a big difference in the
equation.
--
Keep up to date - read the IntraWeb blog!
http://www.atozed.com/intraweb/blog/
Chad Z. Hower aka Kudzu
2008-07-19 19:53:51 UTC
Permalink
Think of boot time - you could say the same about Windows.. But then why do
people care about boot time? And why is it a benchmark?
--
Keep up to date - read the IntraWeb blog!
http://www.atozed.com/intraweb/blog/
Post by Kevin Powick
Post by Chad Z. Hower aka Kudzu
Delphi 2007 is SLOW to load. Exceptionally slow compared to other
commonly used IDE's.
Haven't used D2007, but is loading time really an issue? How many
times per day must one fire-up their IDE? I would hope the answer is
once.
--
Kevin Powick
Kevin Powick
2008-07-19 22:06:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by Chad Z. Hower aka Kudzu
Think of boot time - you could say the same about Windows.. But then
why do people care about boot time? And why is it a benchmark?
I guess it's a benchmark because there was a time when rebooting
Windows was more common than it is now. XP has been very solid for me.
I would say I rarely reboot it for anything more than as required by
some of the updates.

Regardless, when is an OS considered fully booted? Just like with an
IDE, there are many "tricks" one can employ to give the impression of a
fast boot/load.

As mentioned, I've never used D2007, though Nick H. has suggested to me
more than once that I should. For me, a snappy feel when using it is
more important than the initial load time, providing that the stability
is such that I'm not always needing to reload it. :-)
--
Kevin Powick
Donald Shimoda
2008-07-19 22:25:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by Kevin Powick
Post by Chad Z. Hower aka Kudzu
Think of boot time - you could say the same about Windows.. But then
why do people care about boot time? And why is it a benchmark?
I guess it's a benchmark because there was a time when rebooting
Windows was more common than it is now. XP has been very solid for me.
I would say I rarely reboot it for anything more than as required by
some of the updates.
I use Delphi 7 in Ubuntu 8.04.1 (wine 1.0 version)
Hopefully, theres not win xp boot time there. ;)
BTW, the debugger works now.:)
--
Donald Shimoda

http://donaldshimoda.blogspot.com
http://blogs.remobjects.com/blogs/donald
Marco Caspers
2008-07-21 09:01:14 UTC
Permalink
Kevin Powick wrote:

<snip>
Post by Kevin Powick
As mentioned, I've never used D2007, though Nick H. has suggested to
me more than once that I should. For me, a snappy feel when using it
is more important than the initial load time, providing that the
stability is such that I'm not always needing to reload it. :-)
Stay with D7 then, cause snappy is the last thing i'd mention when
working with D2007.
It's better than D2006 i'd have to give Codegear that much, but it's
still no where near to how snappy D7 is.

As for the stability of the thing, it's just as stable or unstable as
D7 was for me. NOT.

After a few compile/debug runs you must shut it down and restart, if
it's not already crashed that is.



--
Dennis Cote
2008-07-21 15:45:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by Kevin Powick
Haven't used D2007, but is loading time really an issue? How many
times per day must one fire-up their IDE? I would hope the answer is
once.
I sure isn't if you keep running into this long standing assertion
failure which is always immediately followed by an abnormal program
termination.

Tamarack Associates acrhive)
http://216.101.185.148/scripts/isapi.dll/article?id=94D1C79D&article=6917262

The IDE aborted on me four times in a half a day of editing on Friday.
As a result I was forced to wait through several restarts. This was very
annoying, not to mention the frustration of having to repeat edits after
a crash. I hope I have better luck today.

Dennis Cote
Brion L. Webster
2008-07-21 17:02:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by Chad Z. Hower aka Kudzu
Delphi 2007 is SLOW to load. Exceptionally slow compared to other commonly
used IDE's.
Last time I loaded Eclipse (for some ColdFusion editing) it was painfully
slow. Didn't time it, was just my perception, but it did contribute to a
negative perception for the entire episode.
--
-Brion
There's no such thing as 'one, true way;'
- Mercedes Lackey
Chad Z. Hower aka Kudzu
2008-07-22 01:33:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by Brion L. Webster
Last time I loaded Eclipse (for some ColdFusion editing) it was painfully
slow. Didn't time it, was just my perception, but it did contribute to a
negative perception for the entire episode.
Aah yes. I thought about it after I posted but I havent used Eclipse in so
long. But you can see your perception there - and thats the same perception
people are getiting about Delphi.

VS was slow too - and MS got the message. While VS does support delayed
loading, thats not the whole thing for the speed up, a lot of other work was
done as well.
--
Keep up to date - read the IntraWeb blog!
http://www.atozed.com/intraweb/blog/
Jorge Almeida
2008-07-22 15:55:31 UTC
Permalink
Last time I loaded Eclipse (for some ColdFusion editing) it was painfully slow. Didn't time it, was just my perception, but it did contribute to a negative perception for the entire episode.
Eclipse 3.4 Ganymede require 11 seconds on VirtualBox VM
D2007 Win32 require 13 seconds minimum on VirtualBox VM

Difference not very much significant
--
Jorge
Chad Z. Hower aka Kudzu
2008-07-15 17:09:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by SiegfriedN
How difficult would it be for Codegear to use the D7 IDE and apply the
current Delphi compiler, packages, VCL, etc. ? (It would be good to get
some editor enhancements as well, but not essential for now e.g. code
folding.) Perhaps then it can be released as Delphi Classic? What a lean
mean IDE machine that will be! heheh
Years ago after XP was released I booted Win95 on even then an old slow PC
and was amazed how fast it booted compared to XP on a more modern machine.

I still use D7 a lot. And it flies. I would love to see the compiler from
Tiburon with generics etc available in the D7 IDE. :)
--
Keep up to date - read the IntraWeb blog!
http://www.atozed.com/intraweb/blog/
SiegfriedN
2008-07-15 22:22:07 UTC
Permalink
Chad Z. Hower aka Kudzu wrote:
[..]
Post by Chad Z. Hower aka Kudzu
I still use D7 a lot. And it flies. I would love to see the compiler from
Tiburon with generics etc available in the D7 IDE. :)
I am also still using D7, but I have only trialed Delpi 2007 and it was
quite good to be honest. We plan to upgrade if the request is approved.

I think what we are talking about would be like pimping cars. i.e
pimping D7 IDE with the latest D2007 native 'elements'. I can imagine it
being awesum..

Since Delphi is splitting into native and .Net versions perhaps the
native Delphi can be based on the 'pimped up' D7 IDE as a start. Could
be a fun experiment at least for someone with enough time.

Siegfried
Chad Z. Hower aka Kudzu
2008-07-15 22:01:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by SiegfriedN
I am also still using D7, but I have only trialed Delpi 2007 and it was
quite good to be honest. We plan to upgrade if the request is approved.
With Tiburon not too far off, and having so much meat in it for native code,
you might as well just wait for it.
Post by SiegfriedN
Since Delphi is splitting into native and .Net versions perhaps the native
Delphi can be based on the 'pimped up' D7 IDE as a start. Could be a fun
experiment at least for someone with enough time.
It's probably all one IDE though.
--
Keep up to date - read the IntraWeb blog!
http://www.atozed.com/intraweb/blog/
Marco Caspers
2008-07-16 05:33:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by Chad Z. Hower aka Kudzu
Post by SiegfriedN
I am also still using D7, but I have only trialed Delpi 2007 and it
was quite good to be honest. We plan to upgrade if the request is
approved.
With Tiburon not too far off, and having so much meat in it for
native code, you might as well just wait for it.
Or if you do go for D2007, don't forget SA.
It'll cost you more now, but if you can't wait for Tiburon SA will save
you a few..
Provided that Tiburon is released within 12 months from you buying
D2007 with SA..

I think it is a reasonable probability that that will happen.

--
Donald Shimoda
2008-07-15 23:39:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by Chad Z. Hower aka Kudzu
I still use D7 a lot. And it flies. I would love to see the compiler from
Tiburon with generics etc available in the D7 IDE. :)
If you can give a try to lazarus. IMHO is delphi 7 with esteriods. :P
After using it to migrate a big server i am surprised of how they
progress (lazarus and fpc).

Best regards.
--
Donald Shimoda

http://donaldshimoda.blogspot.com
http://blogs.remobjects.com/blogs/donald
ssamayoa
2008-07-16 15:22:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by Donald Shimoda
If you can give a try to lazarus. IMHO is delphi 7 with esteriods. :P
NO, NO, NO !!!

May be FPC has some more features than D7 compiler (and D2007 also) but
Lazarus and LCL are very behing to D7 and VCL.

Regards.



--- posted by geoForum on http://delphi.newswhat.com
GrandmasterB
2008-07-16 19:02:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by ssamayoa
Post by Donald Shimoda
If you can give a try to lazarus. IMHO is delphi 7 with esteriods. :P
NO, NO, NO !!!
May be FPC has some more features than D7 compiler (and D2007 also) but
Lazarus and LCL are very behing to D7 and VCL.
'Behind' is very subjective. The IDE, debugging, etc while decent, arent as
complete as D7. And the lack of packages means adding a component requires
a full recompile of the IDE, which is always a crap shoot.

But then again, Lazarus/FPC is WAY far ahead if you need to compile for a
non-win32 platform.
Ian Boyd
2008-07-21 20:16:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by SiegfriedN
Sticking my head in a lions mouth, but here goes..
How difficult would it be for Codegear to use the D7 IDE and apply the
current Delphi compiler, packages, VCL, etc. ?
Borland would have to finally bite the bullet and write their own WinForm
designer.

So very difficult.
Continue reading on narkive:
Loading...