Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Borland C++ For Linux

timothy posted more than 12 years ago | from the no-gnu-logo-though dept.

Programming 457

Ardax writes: "Looks like Borland is going to be releasing C++ for Linux, according to this InfoWorld article. We'll be seeing more details at LinuxWorld in NY next week. The article doesn't mention whether this will be C++ Builder for Linux, or 'just' a command line compiler. No matter what, this is a sweet thing. I wonder how it will compare to gcc? (I wonder if it will be able to compile the kernel? :-) ) If it's the whole C++ Builder shebang, I wonder if there will be an Open Edition? Borland's Community site has a blurb about this. There's no comments at the Borland community yet, but some interesting commentary might pop up there."

cancel ×

457 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

First Anime Lover Poster (-1, Offtopic)

beee (98582) | more than 12 years ago | (#2899037)

If they wrote Natalie Portman into Cowboy Bebop I think my penis would explode!!!!

fIrSt PrOSt

Re:First Anime Lover Poster (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2899065)

My penis would only get slightly stiffer. Now, if they wrap Natalie in alien tentacles, raping every one of her orifices, while she's chained to a wall, then, my penis might just explode. Cover her in thick, gooey alien jizz, and ... *BAM!!* I am a Unix eunuch.

sick of random numbers... (-1)

dead_puppy (532541) | more than 12 years ago | (#2899195)

here are some random letters
[goatse.cx]
d
D
Z
[
p
\
c
o
n
n
M
g
c
i
l
e
p
d
D
f
I
@
U
C
x
c
Q
V
a
r
S
R
`
p
J
t
q
V
v
b
O
k
[
p
D
D
`
X
\
T
c
A
L
N
H
C
c
b
y
o
L
O
@
q
q
`
`
n
J
p
g
H
k
D
u
]
q
L
q
b
n
z
q
D
I
_
x
p
T
V
]
E
L
D
n
u
Q
p
F
B
g
D
]
O
]
z
f
[
O
z
S
c
E
S
R
h
G
Z
h
]
W
F
A
u
`
A
z
Y
P
B
[
]
c
h
B
X
V
S
R
C
f
C
c
C
k
o
`
W
i
d
e
B
W
A
H
]
e
K
g
^
\
M
L
a
t
d
C
y
B
F
D
^
n
s
W
S
E
y
W
i
t
N
@
L
l
v
N
A
^
@
H
m
Y
f
F
b
p
B
R
A
U
k
h
u
x
p
a
Q
Z
k
W
z
V
e
G
`
I
f
j
W
o
R
m
g
E
x
w
s
U
k
i
`
H
i
V
J
A
x
w
B
f
Q
_
H
e
`
[
Y
F
j
N
^
d
@

a
z
y
^
P
M
R
@
T
Y
C
z
w
Y
X
W
O
s
R
c
G
N
@
V

b
`
]
@
g
Y
H
f
E
o
f
j
Z
@
L
D
x
D
C
j
I
g
A
`
C
e
a
k
r
P
Y
J
w
K
D
B
T
Q
r
m
O
D
]
n
h
\
\

E
O
X
r
p
_
l
E
b
Q
Q
V
F
H
A
x
V
w
l
D
R
b
`
i
g
i
t
l
J
R
t
T
g
i
n
[
Z
H
r
J
e
u
D
Y
s
V
B
s
e
M
R
G
J
]
D
@
C
b
@
@
g
k
W
H
E
\
D
W
m
x
P
j
a
H
q
@
x
Z
y
P
l
B
q
w
n
m
B
E
n
V
A
b
b
E
^
V
]
I
D
b
E
n
[
d
f
I
m
E
C
n
c
Z
a
\
D
H
b
N
I
L
m
l
H
O
q
I
R
\
K
f
s
U
F
_
i
Q
_
]
J
]
T
R
n
a
W
C
C
R
r
G
T
U
_
j
i
l
v
C
L
B
`
z
\
P
S
k
I
S
\
h
[
e
n
L
S
T
J
a
w
e
E
z
W
L
A
o
t
`
m
E
f
W
D
e
C
\
e
@
^
y
R
v
q
A
[
I
P
_
Q
J
s
S
g
d
Z
b
t
g
D
@
H
@
B
X
A
V
k
@
\
X
@
@
[
[
j
x
W
o
g
`
y
U
w
J
O
H
P
q
P
K

E
G
g
t
J
M
[
h
a
B
L
Z
b
j
C
n
I
@
V
X
t
\
k
Z

L
K
H
K
A
u
t
x
\
X
x
T
D
F
J
r
o
C
J
K
k
g
T
l
M
V
j
Z
K
Y
j
L
W
[
K
q
K
S
]
@
\
v
i
]
Z
F
j
N
x
w
C
V
a
[
M
O
r
]
m
L
o
v
I
K
X
B
]
b
r
V
Y
D
y
A
y
p
y
Z
d
D
U
B
s
\
j
O
D
F
l
n
o
@
`
h
N
K
I
V
Y
A
R
W
Y
\
W
@
\
b
]
a
X
Q
N
t
K
X
a
o
_
d
s
n
G
X
K
r
]
F
Q
L
Q
s
^
y
M
O
n
Y
C
n
j
A
^

_
\
A
Q
i
Z
^
q
M
B
G
h
J
h
S
l
y
Z
\
T
F
v
m
Z
g
I
l
D
t
l
k
b
d
w
R
j
_
d
q
c
x
i
Q
z
_
q
d
h
r
a
Z
a
E
Y
l
y
B
W
[
@
g
E
^
p
]
j
y
P
y
Q
\
k
G
y
E
V
m
H
s
Q
J
I
k
X
F
G
S
K
j
f
H
L
U
k
k
n
n
k
B
S
X
`
Q
h
s
c
G
m
p
@
u
w
@
N
s
r
a
l
Y
q
o
`

k
y
T
G
m
_
F
p
A
o
s
b
o
h
^
z
a
\

[
Y
^
E
a
K
C
U
H
r
I
V
C
`
f
S
d
f
X
M
J
Y
s
C
M
M
d
A
M
R
x
p
d
j
s
U
X
C

a
f
]
J
_
g
g
h
L
@
M
o
r
d
I
^
U
`
v
U
d
r
M
@
h
L
_
S
r
P
[
P
D
H
^
p
j
B
b
X
l
V
y
[
C
S
u
f
@
i
_
C
N
a
T
r
M
N
M
N
p
A
b
Y
y
A
b
U
A
f
q

What about FreeBSD? (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2899043)

If Borland was smart, they would release a
FreeBSD version. It's well-known that Linux
users don't pay for software. Part of the dogma
or something.

Re:What about FreeBSD? (-1)

The BOFH Troll (549884) | more than 12 years ago | (#2899259)

We need a BeOS port as well.

whoah! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2899044)

Look at that! Slashdot! What a big overflowing pile of slop it was today! Microsoft! Linux! Anime! Bork! Bork!

Slop, I tell you! Slop! S L O P! Slop!

Re:whoah! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2899077)

They modded you down!! Are you just gonna sit there and take that!!??

Re:whoah! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2899105)

Yes, I planned to. Why do you ask?

Re:whoah! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2899152)

No reason. Just asking. Jolly good, carry on.

But what about the CLX... (-1, Offtopic)

Microlith (54737) | more than 12 years ago | (#2899046)

fistral proster

More than once compiler... Good? Bad? (0, Troll)

dcardamo (260476) | more than 12 years ago | (#2899050)

I'm not too sure if having another compiler would be a good idea. Just think of all the new compile problems we'd have just thinking about compatibility. Managing different gcc versions can be a pain in the butt as it is.

Talk amongst yourselves...

Re:More than once compiler... Good? Bad? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2899069)

Yeah ... I think the government ought to pass laws banning all competition. It's just to much trouble for the consumer.

Re:More than once compiler... Good? Bad? (0, Troll)

Wheaty18 (465429) | more than 12 years ago | (#2899139)

I don't think we'd hear Microsoft complaining :p

Re:More than once compiler... Good? Bad? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2899136)

just write standard code.
that is all.

Market (3, Insightful)

SonCorn (301537) | more than 12 years ago | (#2899051)

I could see there being a market for Borland if they released a nice GUI C++ development environment; but if it was just a command line program, can someone explain to me why they would use it instead of gcc. I just see no reason to pay for it if it is a command line program. I can't believe that they would offer some feature that gcc doesn't.

Re:Market (4, Insightful)

qurob (543434) | more than 12 years ago | (#2899082)


can someone explain to me why they would use it instead of gcc

On many UNIX workstations, GCC makes slower/much slower code than the system vendor's compiler.

Many people argued the speed/size benefits of Watcom's DOS compilers compared to DJGPP, the (DOS port GCC)

Re:Market (2)

dinotrac (18304) | more than 12 years ago | (#2899267)

It's awfully hard to know without seeing the Borland compiler first,
but...
gcc is not known for handling C++ especially well. 3.0 is supposed to support the language better, but is reported to generate larger executables and no better performance than present.
I have no idea of how the Borland compiler would get along with current linkers and whether it would be better than the current mess, which is largely responsible for the long time required to start KDE apps.
This stuff may not matter for free developers, but commercial developers may see improved performance as one of the edges they can ask people to pay for.

This is great news! (1)

red_gnom (545555) | more than 12 years ago | (#2899298)

Maybe they have a reason to believe, that their compiler will produce better optimized binaries.

I would love to see C++Builder for Linux though. It is incredibly good product. I use it for Windows, and love it.

Yes! This is great news for Linux comunity.

Compile the kernel? (1)

jjares (141954) | more than 12 years ago | (#2899052)

Isn't the kernel written in pure c? is c++ 100% compatible with c?

Re:Compile the kernel? (2)

Wheaty18 (465429) | more than 12 years ago | (#2899068)

The creator(s) of C++ tried to make it as backward-compatable with C as possible. But it's not 100% backwards-compatible.

For example, in C you didn't *have* to prototype your functions; the compiler would make some assumptions (which weren't always right :p). But in C++, you *must* prototype your functions.

That's just one example, I'm sure there are more though...

Re:Compile the kernel? (2)

tongue (30814) | more than 12 years ago | (#2899071)

C++ isn't compatible with C, so to speak, meaning a straight C compiler will not compile your C++ classes. But C++ is by definition a superset of C, meaning that all valid C code will compile cleanly by a C++ compiler. In theory at least.

Re:Compile the kernel? (1)

Score0, Overrated (550447) | more than 12 years ago | (#2899084)

Valid C :

int main()
{
int new=3;
return new;
}

it won't compile with a C++ compiler

Re:Compile the kernel? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2899114)

looks like you're wrong ... C:\DOCUME~1\ADMINI~1\Desktop>icl t.c -o t Intel(R) C++ Compiler for 32-bit applications, Version 5.0.1 Build 010525Z Copyright (C) 1985-2001 Intel Corporation. All rights reserved. t.c Microsoft (R) Incremental Linker Version 6.00.8447 Copyright (C) Microsoft Corp 1992-1998. All rights reserved. -out:t.exe t.obj C:\DOCUME~1\ADMINI~1\Desktop>t C:\DOCUME~1\ADMINI~1\Desktop>

Re:Compile the kernel? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2899124)

how was the poster wrong?
looks like you successfully compiled t.c
therefore it was valid c code.

Re:Compile the kernel? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2899177)

you can't compile it with a true c++ compiler, new is a reserved word. in straight c it isn't.

Re:Compile the kernel? (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2899192)

The intel compiler uses the source file's extension to decide whether to compile with the C or C++ syntax

C++

D:\IntelC\Compiler50\ia32\bin>icl ft.cpp
Intel(R) C++ Compiler for 32-bit applications, Version 5.0.1 Build 010525Z
Copyright (C) 1985-2001 Intel Corporation. All rights reserved.
ft.cpp
ft.cpp(5): error: expected an identifier
int new=3;
^

ft.cpp(7): error: expected a type specifier
return new;
^

ft.cpp(7): warning #120: return value type does not match the function type
return new;
^

compilation aborted for ft.cpp (code 2)


C

D:\IntelC\Compiler50\ia32\bin>icl ft.c
Intel(R) C++ Compiler for 32-bit applications, Version 5.0.1 Build 010525Z
Copyright (C) 1985-2001 Intel Corporation. All rights reserved.
ft.c
Microsoft (R) Incremental Linker Version 6.00.8447
Copyright (C) Microsoft Corp 1992-1998. All rights reserved.

-out:ft.exe
ft.obj

Re:Compile the kernel? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2899203)

C:\DOCUME~1\ADMINI~1\Desktop

Do you run all your linux apps as root?

Re:Compile the kernel? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2899293)

C++ isn't a superset of C. The following will differ:

int i = sizeof ('a');

in C++ the result is 1, int C the result is 4. Evil huh? C++ is smart enough to realize you're taking the size of a char, whereas C will just cast it to an int first.

Also, in C++ you are not SUPPOSED to be able to call main from main. But most compilers still let you. In pure C, you CAN call main.

Re:Compile the kernel? (4, Interesting)

AYEq (48185) | more than 12 years ago | (#2899122)

The kernel is not written in pure C, even though it's portability would make you think so. It is writen in C with a ton of GNU extentions. So the kernel is really tied to gcc. (which actually makes it more protable because gcc runs on a ton of machines)

More info (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2899055)

Debugger? (1)

Score0, Overrated (550447) | more than 12 years ago | (#2899056)

I wonder if it will be able to compile the kernel?

And, if so, I wonder if it will have a kernel debugger. [lwn.net]

First pozt (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2899057)

Bizatch!

no lame

not lame

nope

More Mainstreaming of Linux (1)

$lashdot (472358) | more than 12 years ago | (#2899058)

It's nice to see more commercial development packages coming to Linux. I would imagine that every step like this brings more developers to consider Linux developing as less and less it's own world. It's some good news to balance off the Loki happening.

They should open up their Windows products (1)

qurob (543434) | more than 12 years ago | (#2899059)


It's not like anyone BUYS them...

It'd be nice to have a C++ Builder for Linux though.

I got the impression (1)

ninth harmonic (413806) | more than 12 years ago | (#2899060)

that the writer of the article didn't know what they were writing about. Oh well I cant wait for the Windows version of C++ Builder

IDE Me ! (2)

beanerspace (443710) | more than 12 years ago | (#2899061)

What an old fart I am. I remember cutting my teeth back in the 80's on Turbo C 1.0 ... and nearly did back flips when they finally got the Windows IDE right with C++ 5.0 some ten years later.

Let's hope it doesn't take them as long to give us a familiar interface. Sure, the command line would be nice, considering Borland's robust libraries and deep oop capabilities ... but an IDE would be even sweeter.

Re:IDE Me ! (2)

An Ominous Coward (13324) | more than 12 years ago | (#2899194)

If you're looking for a familiar interface, I don't think you'll be disappointed. Kylix, Borland's recent Delphi for Linux IDE, is for all purposes identical to Delphi 6. Kylix 1 had some stability problems, but Kylix 2 has been perfect. I'm sure that C++Builder for Linux will be stable and be immediately useful for experienced C++Builder users.

Remember Borland C 1.5... (3, Funny)

Lobsang (255003) | more than 12 years ago | (#2899062)

Hmmm...

I wonder if this will be like Borland C V1.5 (or was it 1.0? I'm getting old anyways...):

main()
{
int a = 4 / 8;
printf("%d\n", a);
}

Result: 2

It's not a joke kiddos. It was a real bug, just like that.

Re:Remember Borland C 1.5... (1)

szomb (318129) | more than 12 years ago | (#2899218)

Oh yeah? MS Visual C++, version 6.0, right now, today:


#include

int main()
{
const i = 1.0;
double d = 1.0;

if(i == d)
cout << "yes" << endl;
else
cout << "no" << endl;

return 0;
}


You guessed it. It prints no.

Re:Remember Borland C 1.5... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2899241)

actually, I have MS VC++ 6.0 w/ SP5 and it does print "yes".

However, you're missing something. ANSI C++ forbids declaration of i with no type.

Gotta love MS products

Re:Remember Borland C 1.5... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2899283)

ANSI C 89 and K&R however supported default int so it's a nice compatibility feature.

Ever heard of a const int? (3, Funny)

Plasmic (26063) | more than 12 years ago | (#2899245)

Const defaults to int. You're doing a direct comparison of a floating point with an integer.

I have a PhD in Visual C++. This is widely known among my graduate students.

Oh, by the way...I have another certification,too. (1, Troll)

Plasmic (26063) | more than 12 years ago | (#2899253)

Also, I'm an MCSE.

Re:Oh, by the way... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2899303)

u r 1 l33t d00d, may I bask n yr l33tness?

Re:Ever heard of a const int? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2899284)

True, but an intelligent compiler (ie, one that conforms to standard), would convert the types properly. First, the 1.0 to an (int)1 in the assignment line, then (int)1 to (double)1.0 in the conditional. 1.0 == 1.0. It should print yes.

C++ Builder more likely than not (1)

wrinkledshirt (228541) | more than 12 years ago | (#2899063)

If it isn't visual, it won't be long before it is. They'll probably incorporate the same toolkit that Kylix has.

Oh man... (5, Insightful)

pb (1020) | more than 12 years ago | (#2899070)

Borland has always put out wonderful tools, and really worked hard on making their compilers optimized on their platforms, but I think they've missed the boat here. This is most likely for easy porting of other applications written with Borland tools to Linux, because Linux already has a solid toolchain of its own. Regardless, I hope they get back on track.

What I miss most is the old text-based Borland IDE. That was the most productive development environment ever. RHIDE is close, but wasn't stable on Linux when last I checked.

??? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2899072)

Who cares?

This Is Very Good! (4, Insightful)

Lethyos (408045) | more than 12 years ago | (#2899073)

Borland's IDEs (baring of licensing crap ;-) have always been exceptional. Current opensource IDEs are decent, but they are no where near the quality.

It comes down to maturity. Borland has been making powerful IDEs for a very long time. Development for opensource IDEs however is a fairly new thing (KDEvelop is good, but it is still fairly unreliable and not as featured as I'd like).

After years of tweaking, Borland's got it down pat.

Competition is good (2)

prisoner-of-enigma (535770) | more than 12 years ago | (#2899075)

If nothing else, it'll be nice to have an industrial strength competitor to GCC coming from a (former) heavyweight in the development community. I remember Pascal oh so fondly...

And I'll be real interested to see if it will actually compile the kernel!

The next version of Kylix will probably have C++.. (3, Interesting)

frleong (241095) | more than 12 years ago | (#2899083)

Kylix was supposed to be compiler independent. The current generations have only the Object Pascal compiler. IIRC, the next version of Kylix will support C++ too.

Re:The next version of Kylix will probably have C+ (3, Informative)

mz001b (122709) | more than 12 years ago | (#2899256)

intel has already release C and Fortran 90 compilers for Linux that are free for non-comercial use. These are very fast compilers when used on a Pentium IV.

IDE from Turbo C++ (1)

Animixer (134376) | more than 12 years ago | (#2899086)

I hope that it comes with the same IDE as Turbo C++ 3.0....I've always liked the text-mode interface. :)

my balls hurt (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2899087)

I guess they need to be...how should I put this...cherished.

First post you miserable fucks.

who cares?? (0)

Ninjak (552197) | more than 12 years ago | (#2899088)

Do anyone except high school "Intro to C++" students use Borland these days?? For real Win32 development it's Visual C++ or bust. And I don't think you leet Linux dudez will switch from your gcc. So this port is basically worthless.

Don't get me wrong, I think Borland Turbo C++ was a great product...ten years ago. And Borland's new "Builder" stuff is just an over-bloated version of TC++ 3.0.

Re:who cares?? (1)

Wheaty18 (465429) | more than 12 years ago | (#2899130)

Heh, Visual C++ is not ANSI compliant.

Re:who cares?? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2899238)

yeah but almost all compilers aren't 100% ansi compliant. vc++ is ok as a compiler.. gcc is fine too, but I think vc++ handles templates much better than gcc, but thats just my opinion.

Cross-platform... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2899089)

Does this mean that code will be cross-platform if developed in a Builder environment?

You don't say... (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2899091)

void main(void) {
printf("Big deal\n");
}

YOU FUCKING MORON (-1, Flamebait)

Ninjak (552197) | more than 12 years ago | (#2899116)

I would like to take this opportunity to point out how vastly superior I am to you, Mr. Anonymous Coward. See, according to the ANSI standard, the main function MUST have return type int. Thus, the code you have posted does not compile. So you basically posted a meaningless pile of indecipherable crap.

To conclude, you are a fucking moron. Thank you.

Re:YOU FUCKING MORON (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2899175)

I make all mine return type char.

I don't like running with the pact.

Re:You don't say... (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2899145)

ahem... since we are discussing C++

int main(void)
{
printf("Big deal\n");
}

Re:You don't say... (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2899156)

I guess this isn't my day...

int main(void)
{
printf("Big deal\n");
return 0;
}

Re:You don't say... (1)

mlk (18543) | more than 12 years ago | (#2899184)

I thought C++ was that dam crappy

out "Big Deal\n";?

Re:You don't say... (1)

mlk (18543) | more than 12 years ago | (#2899191)

or my day either
cout << "Big Deal\n";

Re:You don't say... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2899234)

Your original was okay.

main must be declared to return int, but actual return statement is optional. If it is left out, it is the same as return(0);

Re:You don't say... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2899251)

well, if we're being pedantic assholes:

int main(void)
{
printf("Big deal\n");
return 0;
}

I am the greatest troll of ALL TIME!!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2899221)

Ninjak ate the bait right off. And with all caps, no less. That's double points!!!

What a loser.

Not only that (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2899270)

But the humour of it was not lost on one intelligent moderator...

open edition? I think not. (2)

MathJMendl (144298) | more than 12 years ago | (#2899093)

I wonder if there will be an Open Edition?
Yes, that would indeed be cool. Unfortunately, it's not gonna happen. If they open source it then people could recompile it for windows, and boom, there goes their whole suite for windows down the drain! But still, with GCC already out there, does it matter?

Re:open edition? I think not. (2)

MathJMendl (144298) | more than 12 years ago | (#2899133)

Hmm. I didn't realize they already had open versions. I guess this makes sense from their point of views. I retract my previous statement. :P

Linux Kernel (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2899096)

the linux kernel is pretty much gcc dependant, lots of non ansi-stuff going on there.

great! (2, Informative)

Jucius Maximus (229128) | more than 12 years ago | (#2899103)

Then all we need is Textpad [textpad.com] for Linux and then all well be well in the land of CS coding...

Re:great! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2899247)

Try Moleskine, its textpad done better
(I think the project resides on Freshmeat)

XEmacs vs Borland C++ (2)

Mongoose (8480) | more than 12 years ago | (#2899104)

Hhhhmmm... let's see I can use XEmacs with code generation, source templates, tags, class browser or I can use Borland's and not be able to use elisp.

I'm sure MSVC++ kiddies new to unix development in general can enjoy it however. I just hope I don't see 'project files' all over the damn place a year from now in lieu of Makefiles and autoconf.

Re:XEmacs vs Borland C++ (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2899128)

I hazard a guess that Autobreak won't be missed...

Re:XEmacs vs Borland C++ (-1, Flamebait)

cscx (541332) | more than 12 years ago | (#2899248)

I'm sure MSVC++ kiddies

Too bad MSVC++ kiddies make real applications.

FP!! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2899107)

Hahhaha First Post!!! Eat my ass Spork boy!

I want this... (2)

Bill Henning (504) | more than 12 years ago | (#2899110)

Don't get me wrong; GCC is greak - but C++ Builder is an impressive way to write GUI applications quickly.

I'd immediately recompile MemTach for Linux :-)

Best Regards,

Bill

Resume Item (4, Insightful)

kenneth_martens (320269) | more than 12 years ago | (#2899112)

It's not clear (at least from the sketchy information in the article) if there will be an Open Source/free version, but I hope so, and here's why: currently my university requires us to use Windows in our computer science classes, mainly because Microsoft gives us a lot of expensive software for free (if Microsoft makes it, students probably have access to it--Visual Studio 6, Visual SourceSafe, SQL Server, Windows XP Pro, ...)

That leaves people like me--who prefer to run Linux instead of Windows--at a disadvantage. I have to have a dual boot system, and I have to reboot to Windows every time I need to hack out some code for a class. Now, if Borland releases their C++ for Linux and makes it free, I know I could convince a couple of my professors to ditch the Microsoft stuff and use teach the class using Linux and Borland. That would enable me--and the rest of the university--to gain some practical experience coding on the Linux platform, and not just on Windows. Don't get me wrong, there isn't anything wrong with knowing how to code using Windows and Microsoft Visual Studio (in fact it's probably a good resume item), but I'd like to get familiar with some alternatives before I enter the workforce.

Re:Resume Item (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2899159)


practical experience coding on the Linux platform

That's an oxymoron.

Re:Resume Item (3, Insightful)

Cuthalion (65550) | more than 12 years ago | (#2899162)

You know, there's nothing stopping you from using GCC and whatever editor you like (RHIDE, emacs, whatever) under linux. If you absolutely must make it work under windows too, all the better - now you're learning how to write portable code. Even neverminding that, using GCC is much more practical linux experience than using Borland C++ will ever be, in that most everyone doing linux development will not drop everything and migrate to Borland's tools immediately.

Re:Resume Item (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2899202)


You know, there's nothing stopping you from using GCC and whatever editor you like (RHIDE, emacs, whatever) under linux. If you absolutely must make it work under windows too, all the better - now you're learning how to write portable code.

Actually, when my professor says "You will use Visual Studio 6 for this project" and "you must use Visual SourceSafe" that kind of kills the rest of my options. Usually they're not quite that bad, and I try to make my code portable, but since now we just got a whole bunch of cool new software from Microsoft, they are excited about trying it out.

--kenneth_martens

Re:Resume Item (2)

Pinball Wizard (161942) | more than 12 years ago | (#2899167)

Based on Borland's past offerings, I'd say there will probably be a free C++ compiler(command line) but not C++ builder.


I'm currently learning Java using their JBuilder6 Personal Edition [borland.com] , (a very good Java IDE, I might add). It's available for free on both Windows and Linux. Its got everything you need to learn Java, just not the enterprise stuff. So its possible they might do the same with C++ Builder. Its just in the past(for Windows) they made the base compiler free and charged you for the IDE.

Re:Resume Item (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2899176)

Its got everything you need to learn Java, just not the enterprise stuff

try oracle jdeveloper, its free as in free beer as well

Re:Resume Item (1)

Peyna (14792) | more than 12 years ago | (#2899232)

I'd hope so. Especially considering that the entire .NET SDK is free for download for all from MS, it would be a good idea for others to follow suit. If you ask me, vi/notepad makes a great IDE when you can get the rest for free =]

Re:Resume Item (1)

Octorian (14086) | more than 12 years ago | (#2899242)

Hmm... At my school, all the lower-level CS courses seem to be stuck in MS-land. (well, the undergrad TA's are all MS freaks, even though the profs/grad-TAs aren't) So, back when I took those, I would code my project in Linux, then make it "VC++ Compatable and Tested" before turning it in.

Now that I'm in upper-level courses, I get to see more of what the CS department here really supports (Solaris, and some FreeBSD). So, since most of my code has to work in Solaris, I just use the Ultra 30 I got myself this summer :) (much nicer than ssh'ing into something else for testing and de-quirking) Oh, and in the rare instances that I have to use Windows... (like one class where we had to write Win32 and UNIX versions of system programs) Well, that's what the SunPCi card is for! (and I can minimize it when I want to, and it doesn't eat system resources) That Sun is really nice, as now I'm taking a class where I need to do graphical stuff on Solaris, and it's nicer to work from my dorm room, than to either go to the lab or do cross-campus remote-X.

That sucks. (1)

nemesisj (305482) | more than 12 years ago | (#2899274)

Lots of my classes ask for submissions written on a particular platform (linux, windows, heck even irix sometimes). My goal has always been to write my assignments in a different platform. It's helped me learn a lot about cross platform coding and lets me experience different operating systems.

C++ Builder for Windows? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2899137)

What on earth do they mean C++ Builder for Windows? Version 5 has been out for ever.... Are they talking about version 6 or are the PR people completely confused about operating systems?

Borland C++ or Borland C++ Builder (3, Informative)

fwankypoo (58987) | more than 12 years ago | (#2899140)

The blurb (linked to here [borland.com] mentions that Borland is going to announce C++Builder for Linux. Just a tasty little tidbit that needs to be adressed:P

Re:Borland C++ or Borland C++ Builder (2, Informative)

Wizy (38347) | more than 12 years ago | (#2899157)

correct, this is going to be C++ Builder, the full IDE. Same as they made Delphi for linux (Kylix).

Re:Borland C++ or Borland C++ Builder (3, Informative)

blitzrage (185758) | more than 12 years ago | (#2899210)

"We are taking our C++ development solution to the Linux platform. We have seen a lot of Linux developers who used to be Unix developers," said Alison Deane, a senior director of product marketing at Borland, in Scotts Valley, Calif.

She added that Borland plans to announce C++Builder for Windows next month, but declined to provide details.


No they didn't. They just said they were going to announce C++ for Linux, and C++ Builder for Windows.

More compilers for Linux is a GREAT thing. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2899182)

Code quality is one the most pressing issues today. The result of coding errors can be SECURITY HOLES and a lack of reliabity.

More compilers will help to improve code quality.

Each compiler catches a different set of errors. The more compilers that you have compile your code, the more errors you can detect.

This can also help find errors in gcc (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2899209)

Not only does compiling with multiple compilers help to find errors in a program's code, but it also helps to find errors in gcc.

If code compiled by gcc produces different results from code compiled by another compilers, the differences can be used to find problems in the compilers.

Re:More compilers for Linux is a GREAT thing. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2899224)

nice troll

Re:More compilers for Linux is a GREAT thing. (1)

Octorian (14086) | more than 12 years ago | (#2899258)

Mod this up!

Myself, being a bit of a platform freak, I see this all the time.

GCC is way too lenient. Heck, I've even found cases where MSVC++ catches more things.

I've also used the Sun Workshop compiler, IBM's xlc, and SGI's MIPSpro.

IBM xlc has this neat thing where error messages not only indicate line number, but also where exactly in the line it found the error.

BTW, MIPSpro is my favorate so far. It's error messages are actually quite informative. Also, if you happen to be on an SMP box, add the "-apo" compiler flag and it auto-parallelizes your program. Has anyone else seen a compiler that can make your plain single-threaded app take advantage of multiple CPUs?

Re:More compilers for Linux is a GREAT thing. (0, Flamebait)

cscx (541332) | more than 12 years ago | (#2899263)

So, what you're saying is that if wu-ftpd was compiled under C++ builder instead of gcc [gnuhippie C compiler], it wouldn't be full of SECURITY HOLES?

sfw: so what? (0)

fz00 (466988) | more than 12 years ago | (#2899229)

so what? there's no debugger, no ide, where's the value? maybe for fast compilation it might be useful but without a debugger, it's useless. unless you can use the gnu debugger maybe.

Look, Linux sucks (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2899260)

okay, Linux might be the worst OS ever developed. Seriosuly, what's the point?

OOOHHH, I HAEV httpd.conf, I am gay!!!!

I mean, comeon, IIS' GUI is the bomb diggity, yo. How fucking ass-backwards do you have to be to use vi to configue your webserver? vi is the most worhtless test editor ever, mmkay? Wordstar beat thes fuck out of vi? Remember Wordstar? yeah, it was mde for DOS (made by Microsoft; every worthwhile app was made for an MS system), but Wordstar rocked, because a brand spanking n00b could see what they had to hit to do things. vi? vi = bullshit. You have to sit there and read man pages. How gay is that? Plus, Wordstar could do legitimate text editor things like underline, italic, bold, superscript, subscript. vi can't do any of that shit. How gay is vi? Gay like the goatse.cx man, that's how gay.

Fucking Linus. "Ooooh, we're open sourve, so we're superior to Microsoft!!". Yeah, right, you stupid cumbubbles. Make a GUI better than MS, or an off suite better than MS, or a web server better than MS, or a mail server better than MS (yeah, fuckers, qmail's the best mail server made for Linux, and it is pretty sweet, but there's no calendar, or contacts or anything elses that makes exchange sweet), or really anything better than MS and maybe you'll be taken seriosuly.

Dumbass fuckwads.

Wonderful (3, Interesting)

rice_burners_suck (243660) | more than 12 years ago | (#2899261)

I applaud Borland for choosing to put more of their fine products on Linux. I have personally used Borland's products since version 3 of their Pascal compiler, which was a pretty long time ago. In conjunction with TurboPower's libraries, which were distributed with complete source code and no royalties, Borland's compilers, both for Pascal and C/C++, were always truly amazing products.

Now, with the increasing popularity and acceptance of Linux, I believe that Borland's products have found a new home, better than on DOS and Windows. I strongly believe that if Borland continues to implement their fine software on Linux, some great applications, brand-name commercial as well as free, will show up on Linux, making it a strong and competitive alternative to the Windows family of operating systems.

Perhaps someday, a couple of years down the road, Microsoft will begin implementing their software, such as a Microsoft Office for Linux package, just as some years ago, IBM sold native Windows versions of their OS/2 applications. Hopefully, this move by Borland will bring that a bit closer to reality.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?