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!

Delphi Renaissance

Hemos posted more than 9 years ago | from the back-from-beyond-the-pale dept.

Programming 262

bongo69 writes "The TIOBE Programming Community Index is reporting that Delphi is experiencing a revival, this coincides with Borland recently releasing Delphi 2005 allowing users to target both win32 and .net platforms, which to some, is a welcome alternative for .net developers reluctant to use Microsoft Visual Studio or the opensource alternative SharpDevelop."

cancel ×

262 comments

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

delphi? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10944183)

didn't they go out of business years ago?

Re:delphi? (1)

AndroidCat (229562) | more than 9 years ago | (#10944214)

You might be thinking of the Compuserve-ish service. Delphi isn't exactly an uncommon name even within the bounds of computers and software.

Re:delphi? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10944241)

As a matter of fact, that is what I was referring to. I actually am familiar with the programming language delphi, but figured a faux-ignorant FP was better then 'frosty pist lol!!11one'

Re:delphi? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10944345)

I would have gone for a tin-foil-helmet reference to the Scientology schools [delphi-sfb.org] . Ever seen Philippe Kahn and L. Ron Hubbard together?

Re:delphi? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10944776)

well, I only had a second to think it up before I lost the FP. In retrospect, I would have said something much more witty, but apparently I'm not quite as quick as I'd like to be.

Re: SharpDevelop? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10944539)

It's always good to see more competition in the world of IDEs, especially since the last good one from Microsoft was 6.0 in my opinion.

However the reference to SharpDevelop is laughable. Professionals don't use that piece of crap nor do they use Mono for that matter, only basement losers. Open Source doesn't make second rate software more attractive, except for Linux. But that's only because it's free and good enough for its limited tasks. Yeah you read it right. Linux is shit, fucking cock-smoking teabbaging faggots.

lazarus is maturing too (4, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10944195)

http://lazarus.freepascal.org/

ok so it doesn't support microsofts .net but it does support windows linux and (just about) mac os x

Re:lazarus is maturing too (3, Informative)

MacDaffy (28231) | more than 9 years ago | (#10944530)

There's an excellent version of the gpc Pascal compiler for Mac OS X available. There's even a plug-in for the Metrowerks CodeWarrior IDE (not free). Anyone familiar with Objective-C and Mac OS X's Cocoa/Carbon development model is invited to help generate wrappers to call the code, Join the mailing list here. The site and mailing-list are also excellent resources for Pascal syntax and engineering questions, so Delphi coders can benefit, as well.

Re:lazarus is maturing too (1)

MacDaffy (28231) | more than 9 years ago | (#10944558)

The links that didn't appear above:

http://www.microbizz.nl/gpc.html
http://www.pascal-central.com

.net developers reluctant to use Visual Studio (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10944203)

Talk about the smallest market ever conceived.

Re: .net developers reluctant to use Visual Studio (1)

stupidninja (833496) | more than 9 years ago | (#10944227)

But but but... using VS.net isn't cool! Using Delphi shows that you're different... like using a Mac

So... Delphi is a language, and a development environment? Does and anyone still use Delphi?

Re: .net developers reluctant to use Visual Studio (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10944491)

I'm using it. :-) And I've evaluated a lot of other IDEs. The nice thing about Delphi is that it supports the code-to-the-metal kind of developer and the RAD developer. You have the power and the ease-of-use, and that's not just a marketing blurb.

Re: .net developers reluctant to use Visual Studio (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10944445)

Most humans aren't very large when they're conceived either.

Why? (3, Interesting)

bay43270 (267213) | more than 9 years ago | (#10944206)

Numbers are nice, but I'd also like to know why. Does anyone know what advantages Delphi has over Visual Studio and mono products?

Re:Why? (1)

cbrocious (764766) | more than 9 years ago | (#10944225)

A decent IDE, relatively good language support (Pascal, now C#, and many others), and a whole lot of other features make it a great environment for RAD. That said, I have barely used it, just going on what I've heard from friends that are HUGE Delphi fans :)

Re:Why? (0, Troll)

Pxtl (151020) | more than 9 years ago | (#10944264)

Better language support is cool, because I'll never understand why a nice tool like Delphi standardised on a painful language like Pascal. Replacing the symbols in C with words just makes less legible C. The only nice part of the Pascal languages is the := assignment.

Re:Why? (3, Informative)

zulux (112259) | more than 9 years ago | (#10944321)

Pascal is a bit verbose... but Borland's Object Pascal is a great fit for event driven apps that have to talk to databases.

For this particular type of application, Delphi is great. For example - you can get a pointer when you need to, but you don't have to drown yourself with them all the time.

Re:Why? (1)

Jugalator (259273) | more than 9 years ago | (#10944382)

For this particular type of application, Delphi is great. For example - you can get a pointer when you need to, but you don't have to drown yourself with them all the time.

You mean like in Java and C#?

Re:Why? (1)

zulux (112259) | more than 9 years ago | (#10944522)


You mean like in Java and C#?


No.

Java doesn't HAVE pointers. No pointers at all. That's the point about Java.

Object Pascal has pointers if you need them.

Not sure 'bout C#, but then again, I don't care

Re:Why? (1)

Omega1045 (584264) | more than 9 years ago | (#10944536)

C# has pointers. I don't use them - really no need to IMHO. You also have to mark the code as unmanaged.

Re:Why? (1)

Jugalator (259273) | more than 9 years ago | (#10944600)

Java doesn't HAVE pointers. No pointers at all. That's the point about Java.

Java supports JNI, right?

But yes, it's not part of the main language, although JNI is used quite frequently in the core libraries if you look.

Not sure 'bout C#, but then again, I don't care

I can assure you C# has pointers "if you need them".

Re:Why? (1)

rburt3 (544641) | more than 9 years ago | (#10944752)

Don't code much Java(TM), do you?

Re:Why? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10944389)

Actually it was C that replaced the Pascal words with symbols.

If you remember that Pacal was created as a "theorical" language by a swiss professor, you must admit that he got a lot of things right!

It's Pascal (5, Informative)

wiredog (43288) | more than 9 years ago | (#10944268)

Which makes it harder to write bad code. PLus, it's Borland. Borland, IMHO, writes better compilers than MS, and better libraries too.

Re:It's Pascal (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10944343)

Intel makes the best compiler for the usual suspects in languages (C, C++, Fortran).

Re:Why? (1, Troll)

Infinityis (807294) | more than 9 years ago | (#10944450)

Visual Studio and mono(poly) products?

It's because we all hate Microsoft and their monopoly. Delphi is not made by Microsoft, thus making it better than Visual Studio, etc.

At least, that's the general idea I've gotten from reading a few months worth of material on Slashdot.

Re:Why? (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10944488)

For once, Delphi has supported RAD (what people now think makes .Net great) for ages and in many ways are still far superior to .Net.

For developing Desktop applications there isn't a better suited development tool.

It also has an incredibly rich third-party component market:

http://www.devexpress.com and http://www.remobjects.com are some of the best.

Why not try it out? Delphi 2005 Architect is available for trial download at http://www.borland.com

Re:Why? (2, Interesting)

Tablizer (95088) | more than 9 years ago | (#10944763)

Numbers are nice, but I'd also like to know why. Does anyone know what advantages Delphi has over Visual Studio and mono products?

I don't know about the newest product, but Delphi used to be better for creating mail-able "packaged" applications, while VB targeted custom software. In other words, if you wanted to make a software package (boxed) to sell to many companies, go with Delphi. But VB was often preferred for very customized internal use projects.

Regarding Mono, VB and Delphi seem to more faithfully stick to the event-driven "component" model where each GUI widget handles its own events and attributes (or at least events and attributes are closely associated with a given GUI widget). Java stuff got away from this and turned into a messier model in my opinion. I think Java stuff tried to return to SmallTalk MVC models or something. I find component-event-driven the best GUI model for most custom business software.

Another thing is that coordinate-based GUI's as found in VB and Delphi are often better able to handle picky customers better than the hierarchically-nested "flow"-based GUI setups (such as that found in HTML) found in many Java products. The flow-based approach is perhaps more logical, but customers are not always logical, and want to tweak the GUI in such a way that is difficult to do in flow-based GUI systems. With coordinate-based GUI's you just move stuff to where the customer wants it without worrying about which containing frame or group it belongs to. I have encountered very picky customers before, and they don't want an earfull about nested containers getting in the way of putting things where they want to see it.

Re:Why? (1)

Karamchand (607798) | more than 9 years ago | (#10944823)

Can you elaborate on how Java does this connection between GUI and code if not with this event-driven model? Or do you have any links with a short description about it? I'd be really interested since I can't imagine much else apart from the way Delphi etc. do it. Thanks!

Re:Why? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10944944)

delphi gives you real rad (VB style) with a real native code compiler backend

it also (at least in earlier versions) produces reasonable size exes which DO NOT depend on rutime support dlls or worse ocxs (i have heared of people buying delphi to make cd autorun menus because of the ocx issues with vb apps)

not to mention well implemented refcounted strings with automatic copying (which basically means you can treat strings as primitive types without the continous copying overhead)

GNAA presents shemale cow porn (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10944209)

eat it [bayou.com]

The Return of Verity Stob ? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10944211)

This could mean the long awaited return of Verity Stob, whose column in DDJ has not been seen for many a months now.

I miss her.

Languages die for a reason (1, Interesting)

cexshun (770970) | more than 9 years ago | (#10944222)

Throughout the years, we've seen many languages die out. It's a natural progression of technology. I can't but think this is merely an act of nostalgia. Is delphi really feasible with the countless superior languages out there, or are people using it for the same reasons they still play NES games?

It's not a language (1, Insightful)

wiredog (43288) | more than 9 years ago | (#10944295)

it's an IDE. Delphi uses Pascal, but the compiler can also handle C++.

Re:It's not a language (1)

cexshun (770970) | more than 9 years ago | (#10944419)

I am aware of this. I apologize for a mis-use of terminology. I often equate IDE/programming environments with the word language. My apologies and I will turn in my geek card for shredding.

Re:Languages die for a reason (4, Insightful)

ites (600337) | more than 9 years ago | (#10944318)

The reason is only rarely technological. Borland's languages, from their Turbo- series onwards, were always significantly better than Microsoft's, but the market chooses tools based mainly on intertia and marketing. Microsoft advertised their way to dominance. Remember that so-called "Visual C/C++" was simply a wrapper around a few poor tools, with Visual Basic being the only component-based system, producing slow interpreted code, while for yearsBorland were producing fast compiled OO apps with Delphi.

There's a reason why some people dislike using MS tools and adore Borland's tools. Often, though, the developer does not have the say in such choices.

Re:Languages die for a reason (1)

Jugalator (259273) | more than 9 years ago | (#10944433)

Keep in mind you're mostly talking in past sense now. Today, things seem to be far from the days of Turbo Pascal to me, both in the Microsoft and Borland camps.

In my opinion Microsoft has taken a great leap forward especially with the new compiler in .NET that actually *gasp* is starting to follow standards pretty well. We also cut the size on our compiled files across the board with that one in our flagship product, sometimes as much as halving them compared to Visual C++ 6. And then that compiler didn't even have any significant problems I could notice us or our customers suffering from. So I a renaissance this day is honorable, but also logical to question the value of, especially with the enormous amount of add-on libraries for C++ as opposed to Pascal.

Re:Languages die for a reason (1)

urmensch (314385) | more than 9 years ago | (#10944482)

We also cut the size on our compiled files across the board with that one in our flagship product, sometimes as much as halving them compared to Visual C++ 6

Is that including the .net runtime that you have to distribute in addition to your compiled files?

Re:Languages die for a reason (1)

Jugalator (259273) | more than 9 years ago | (#10944642)

Is that including the .net runtime that you have to distribute in addition to your compiled files?

I wasn't talking about managed code, just regular C++. So there are no .NET runtimes required as I don't use the .NET libraries.

Re:Languages die for a reason (1)

ites (600337) | more than 9 years ago | (#10944510)

Past tense, yes.

Microsoft still play the same game though. Standards for C++? Well, after how many years? And then whole new proprietary languages like C# at the same time...

The marketing goal is to capture developers, yes? The more bells and whistles the better. The technical focus often gets lost in the process.

Borland's main quality - before OSS made this a common philosophy - was to place technical quality first. It was, and still is, probably the wrong strategy for a commercial company.

Re:Languages die for a reason (1)

Jugalator (259273) | more than 9 years ago | (#10944712)

Well, after how many years?

Does that matter when we're talking Delpi 2005?
We aren't comparing Turbo C with an early version of Visual C.

And then whole new proprietary languages like C# at the same time...

They're preserving and improving C++ support. Don't care about C# if you don't wish to care.

The marketing goal is to capture developers, yes?

Yes, as with all companies, including Borland.

The more bells and whistles the better

I'm sure you'll find the same in Delphi 2005. Heck, they're even applying the Microsoft Versioning Scheme(tm).

It was, and still is, probably the wrong strategy for a commercial company.

Why do you believe that is the wrong strategy?

I fully agree that technical quality is a very nice thing to have, but I'm just questioning how much they'll achieve with a release like this. How are they going to convince the Visual C++ devs that their product is significantly better? It's easy if you compare Firefox with IE as there are major notable improvements while IE is almost daily suffering from security problems. But in this case I don't see a reason to shout "wow" even if I'm interested in developer IDE's. I've even tried Delphi in the past, but didn't see why I should learn Pascal when it seems like 95% of all developers use either Java, VB or C++ today.

Re:Languages die for a reason (4, Informative)

bad-badtz-maru (119524) | more than 9 years ago | (#10944773)

The person who originally wrote Turbo Pascal, and was also largely responsible for Delphi, led the C# design team.

Re:Languages die for a reason (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10944873)

Just for the record so that it's complete; that seems to have been a guy named Anders Hejlsberg.

Re:Languages die for a reason (1)

Teancum (67324) | more than 9 years ago | (#10944838)

Keep in mind that Delphi 1 was pretty much Turbo Pascal 9 repackaged and a nice GUI development environment thrown on. The compiler was pretty much the same, and most program written for Turbo Pascal can compile just fine in Delphi. The only major problem I have with that now is that the specialty units in Turbo Pascal like DOS, CRT, Graph, ect. aren't available in Delphi, but a determined hacker could easily put something together for Delphi and make full source code compatability to work... including compiler directives and switches.

Also, there are an enormous number of libraries for Pascal as well. Just type your current need into Google and add Delphi or Pascal to the search (like PNG Source Delphi) and you will find many pre-written components for Delphi, many with source code and much that is even GPL'd. While admittedly not as much as C++, it isn't as obscure as say FORTH or Component COBOL.

Re:Languages die for a reason (2, Interesting)

vasqzr (619165) | more than 9 years ago | (#10944451)


In the early days, Delphi was not just a 'Pascal for Windows', but a much-faster-executing alternative to the other RAD system out there - Visual Basic. Remember how slow VB was until version 5 or 6, when it actually became compiled?

Another reason why it's so popular, is it's based on Pascal. Which is much easier for many people to program than C/C++

Borland's early C/C++ products for Windows were much faster than Microsofts as well. They did make many mistakes however (remember OWL?)

Go to http://groups.google.com/ [google.com] and look for old newsgroup discussions of Visual Basic vs Delphi. Fun reading.

Re:Languages die for a reason (1)

AndroidCat (229562) | more than 9 years ago | (#10944489)

At the start, OWL was better than MFC in many ways.

Re:Languages die for a reason (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10944537)

VB6's speed increase by native code compilation is iffy at best. I've written software that actually ran several times faster when it was compiled as p-code. I was surprised too! Okay not that surprised considering I was using a MS development environment. I've become considerably jaded over the years in finding odd quirks in Microsoft's software.. I mean crap.

Re:Languages die for a reason (1)

TopShelf (92521) | more than 9 years ago | (#10944360)

In actual practice, the abilities of one language or another are often inconsequential to a particular business. Once they have an installed base of software built around a certain language, the costs of switching are higher than any gains achieved from the "superior" language.

I work for a $1.5 billion company whose ERP runs on RPG. Sure, there's a Java version of the software coming out, but there's just no business case for making that switch. We'll probably still be using RPG for 10 more years...

Re:Languages die for a reason (1)

Infinityis (807294) | more than 9 years ago | (#10944385)

Languages die out because they change. No one speaks Latin any more because we needed to communicate more information in fewer syllables, so we now have English and a bunch of other languages. Granted, we still see Latin roots in many English words, but we also see words that have no real basis.

Same thing with assembly language...unless you're programming device drivers, you have almost no need to go back to it because C++ and other languages supercede it. Sure, you see some of the assembly language roots, but assembly has largely "died out" for modern software development.

So long as Delphi produces higher and higher level programming languages, they're a contender, and they'll only die out when people stop using it.

Re:Languages die for a reason (1)

Jah-Wren Ryel (80510) | more than 9 years ago | (#10944463)

No one speaks Latin any more because we needed to communicate more information in fewer syllables,

Hah! I sincerely doubt that syllabic efficiency had a thing to do with the death of Latin, even if Latin is possibly less efficient. I expect politics had a lot more to do with it - rise of the middle class, fall of Rome, etc.

Re:Languages die for a reason (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10944529)

Delphi has consistently beaten Microsoft's Visual Basic & Visual C++ in, of all places & as far back as 1997, "Visual Basic Programmer's Journal" Sept. or Oct. 1997 issue "INSIDE THE VB5 COMPILER ENGINE" where it absolutely TRASHED both (especially in math & strings which every program does alot of) & other areas as well (losing only in form paint to VC++ & by a far tinier margin than how much it won by in the other areas).

It also did so more recently in the year 2000 in the "Jakes Efficiency Programming Challenge" online which took string work done in Delphi & VC++ (combined if needed with compiler + hand optimization, & inline Assembler code) & did the same (for the 'naysayers' among you that say "well, what has it done lately?")

BOTTOM-LINE - Delphi can do ALL of what VB/VC++ can do for the most part & in VB "RAD" style... but, easier & better!

BUT to top that ALL off?

A big question folks have to ask is: If Delphi were inferior? Why then did Bill Gates hire away Anders Heijelsberg from Borland to redesign & improve Visual Studio, period??

Delphi IS better... but there is a mindset among management that "Microsoft will be around forever" & "no one ever got fired for buying IBM" type thinking... this does not mean MS stuff is better (quite the contrary from the examples I cite above)...

APK

Re:Languages die for a reason (1)

NavySpy (39494) | more than 9 years ago | (#10944904)

Countless superior languages? I can't think of /one/ superior language.

http://www.codefez.com/Default.aspx?tabid=79&new sT ype=ArticleView&articleId=47

or

http://tinyurl.com/63x85

Re:Languages die for a reason (2, Informative)

Ronin Developer (67677) | more than 9 years ago | (#10944933)

Why do you assume there are "countless superior" languages out there? Have you ever tried programming in Delphi's dialect of Pascal?

I program in a variety of languages. However, I became a Delphi convert when Delphi was first released. And, I still am a Delphi convert today and it is my tool of choice for Win32 programming.

As another post points out, Delphi is, and still remainds, a superior IDE, a very fast and optimizing compiler, a wide range of tools and components (VCL and CLX based) and decent. The "Delphi" language is merely the latest incarnation of Object Pascal. It is not Turbo Pascal -- it has evolved far beyond that.

The Delphi environment makes RAD programming possible with its compiler, debugger and visual editor symbiotically working together. Other tool developers (even MS) try to mimic the seemlessness of the environment and, for the most part, fail. MS went so far as to recruit the lead developer behind Delphi. .Net works because of that move.

Until just recently, Kylix broght the power of the Delphi to the Linux community. Unfortunately, it wasn't a success there. .Net, however, is proving to be a very lucrative venture and fit into the Delphi paradime. Borland now offers several languages targeting the .Net environment in Delphi 8/Delphi 2005. The weakness, in my opinion anyway, is that the class libraries are still base on WinForm. That makes it relatively difficult to port to Mono at this time. I hope we see a change there soon.

The bottom line is that Delphi is make resurgence because people see the advantages of such a development environment and the popularity and pervasiveness of .Net.

RD

What a wacky statistics system. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10944228)

Adding up comments on boards? What if most of the say, ADA developers are DoD contractors and never post anything on boards because of security clearance? (never used ADA myself).


The rankings are ok by me though as long as they have Java ranked over C#

Visual Studio (1)

alnjmshntr (625401) | more than 9 years ago | (#10944233)

besides the fact that it costs a lot, it's actually a damn good ide, don't think any developer can disagree with that. and the new (beer free) beta versions of visual studio express [microsoft.com] are pretty fine too.

Re:Visual Studio (1)

AndroidCat (229562) | more than 9 years ago | (#10944401)

Like beer, you're only renting it. The beta versions are due to switch off in March or so. And they require another Gawd_Awful of space for .NET 2.0 beta. (Shades of VBRUNx00.EXE.)

Re:Visual Studio (2, Informative)

Dystopian Rebel (714995) | more than 9 years ago | (#10944532)

it's actually a damn good ide, don't think any developer can disagree

Well, we can't have you strutting around all day thinking that!

Have you ever used a Borland IDE? I've used both Borland and Monoposoft and prefer Borland by far. Especially for UI development. All the properties of an object are easily accessible and the IDE's dialogs are nicely designed instead of being modal and unsizable.

I don't think any developer can disagree...

Re:Visual Studio (3, Interesting)

Lucas Membrane (524640) | more than 9 years ago | (#10944835)

I went to two presentations by traveling road shows about a year and a half back. The Borland guy using Delphi wrote all kinds of interesting apps in seconds. Never hit a problem, was able to handle any kind request from the audience (can you do this ...), etc, etc.

The Microsoft VS C# guy started about 15 minutes late, since he couldn't figure out how to increase the font size in his IDE so that the audience could read the screens that he was demoing. He gave up on that. So, we couldn't read his screen too well, but it was no loss. He didn't get very much to work. He did show us screen after screen of inscrutable WSDL automatically generated for us, but he never got it to do 1/10th as much as the Borland guy accomplished in roughly the same time.

Maybe it would be premature to buy Borland's product based on just those two demos, but you'd have to be religiously insane to buy Microsoft's on the same evidence.

SharpDevelop (1)

SomeoneGotMyNick (200685) | more than 9 years ago | (#10944236)

This is the first I've heard of SharpDevelop.

Other than what I can find at their website, has anyone had practical experience creating and distributing an app using only SharpDevelop?

Re:SharpDevelop (2, Informative)

arethuza (737069) | more than 9 years ago | (#10944283)

Yes, I've used it for over a year. It isn't nearly as slick as VS.NET but I find it to be pretty usable. When combined with the GUI debugger from the .Net SDK it makes a pretty decent development environment.

Re:SharpDevelop (1)

9thWave (822212) | more than 9 years ago | (#10944560)

I used #Develop for a while and was impressed with how far it has come in the last year. It appears to be a very good development effort overall, although it is not as feature rich as VS.NET (or Eclipse, from which it seems to take its inspiration). The only issues I had with it was the tendency to change UI toolkits every couple of releases (I preferred the Magic library to whatever it is they are using now), and the lack of an integrated debugger. Of course, it is an open source, plugin based architecture, so I am sure contributers will be stepping up soon. As far as good free alternatives, you could do a lot worse than this one. They also have some very interesting documentation if you are interested in writing plugin-based apps in general.

Re:SharpDevelop (4, Informative)

Teancum (67324) | more than 9 years ago | (#10944576)

I would say that SharpDevelop is one of the best Free-As-In-Beer environments for you to learn how to write software in C#. Download the ECMA docs for the specification and try to write a few programs, and it works out pretty well. Certainly much better than trying to write something with a text editor and trying to compile by command-line when everything else you may have is done through a GUI environment. Get the C# How-to books if you don't have access to them anyway.

I happen to be a Delphi developer as well, and my #1 complaint about Sharp Develop is that they use the Visual Studio environment as the model for how user interaction should take place. It isn't bad, but moving between Delphi and #Develop can be a bit of a paradyme shift that is uncomfortable. For those who are VS fans, it would be a much more familiar environment (like the windowing stuff and location of help files, etc.)

The GUI end is a little bit clunky, but it is getting better. The first time I tried #Develop the menu editor was so buggy that it crashed the package. It has been showing significant improvement over time, and is remarkably stable now for some fairly serious GUI development. They bootstrapped the development with Visual Studio, but I believe that #Develop is self-compiling now (the editor can be edited with itself).

The part of getting it to work with Mono is a big deal, and the only real reason that it doesn't self-compile in Mono is because Mono lacks the GUI support necessary to get it to work. This is being worked on, and with #Develop getting stable there is now a larger push to get it working in Mono on Windows (and yes, Linux too). It would be terrific if you could get true cross-platform development going for a GPL'ed GUI development environment.

Ow, that hurts. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10944272)

The people who bought Delphi 8 got a minor reaming. All the fixes and improvements (and hopefully the damned documentation) that should have been in 8 get dropped into "2005" after less than a year.

Releases that need a later mega-patch are bad enough without the mega-patch being the next ver$ion.

Can anyone actually get sharpdevelop to run? (0, Troll)

Idimmu Xul (204345) | more than 9 years ago | (#10944308)

I've just installed SharpDeveop to have a tinker and when it runs I am getting a shit load of errors based around a missing zip file. No wonder people would prefer to use Delphi, if it actually works!

Re:Can anyone actually get sharpdevelop to run? (1)

fiffilinus (45513) | more than 9 years ago | (#10944337)

You might consider a) consulting the #develop forum

- a nice place, or

b) run the postinstalltasks.bat coming with #develop

Re:Can anyone actually get sharpdevelop to run? (1)

Idimmu Xul (204345) | more than 9 years ago | (#10944421)

b)run the postinstalltasks.bat coming with #develop

cheers, that fixed it! thanks a lot

Re:Can anyone actually get sharpdevelop to run? (1)

Your Pal Dave (33229) | more than 9 years ago | (#10944441)

This can be caused by having an old version of Windows Scripting Host installed. You should have 5.6, or manually run the batch file as suggested by fiffilinus.

Re:Can anyone actually get sharpdevelop to run? (1)

thebra (707939) | more than 9 years ago | (#10944646)

Works great on my w2k box. I've been using it for 6 months and have had few problems with it.

Delphi big in the UK (3, Interesting)

MrBandersnatch (544818) | more than 9 years ago | (#10944315)

Actually Delphi is still quite a popular in the UK
(http://www.cwjobs.co.uk/JS/JobResults.asp?ref erre r=none&SiteID=2&MarketID=14&IndustryID=1&Mode=&Sea rch=Ind&PageNum=1&Industry=IT+%26+Internet&RankByT itle=1&JobType1=&PostedDays=7&Keywords=delphi&Sort =1&Locations=)

It was SO FAR ahead of the field when it first came out, I actually did my first non-unix based programming on it and was very impressed. Sadly like most Borland products, while being technically superior to their rival offerings they have just never got the market share they deserved.

Re:Delphi big in the UK (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10944498)

There's certainly no doubt about you comment. I certainly agree that Borland IDE's are far superior to anything Microsoft has to offer. Not to mention how nice VCL and CLX are to use. And that if you wish to use C++ you can use Borland C++ Builder and using the same exact VCL/CLX libraries with the same syntax and not have to relearn a new component library.

Novell is porting SharpDevelop (4, Interesting)

bflong (107195) | more than 9 years ago | (#10944423)

It's interesting to note that Novell is porting SharpDevelop to Mono.
See http://www.monodevelop.com/ [monodevelop.com]

Poor ol' Delphi... (5, Interesting)

ElGuapoGolf (600734) | more than 9 years ago | (#10944425)


I used Delphi in my first programming job out of College. Initially I chuckled over the fact that it was Pascal, but eventually grew to learn and love Object Pascal.

It wasn't so much the language that made it great, it was the way the IDE, Debugger and compiler all played so nicely together. And yes, a C++ version was available as well. It was all of the ease of Visual Basic (and let's be honest, more) but without the bullshit of being stuck with some horrible language and the pain of trying to manage runtime distribution. Delphi compiled all dependencies into your binary, if you so wished. No more dll hell, at least, as far as your Delphi applications went.

It also had the relatively unheard of concept (at least in the windows world, at that time) of direct database access. You didn't have to mess with ODBC. You could write your corporate app for in-house use, and just let them change parameters in configuration screen, use them to connect to a database yourself. No freakin ODBC control panel applet to mess with. Nirvana, I tell you.

The VCL was another nice Borland item. It was their Visual Component Library (I think) and it was basically a wrapper around the standard Win32 controls/forms. Worked very well, and even made it over to linux with Kylix.

Unfortunately, Borland subscribed to the commodore school of marketing. The best place to see Borland adverts was in Borland targeted publications. The choir was already converted, but they never figured that out. That combined with typical MSFT tactics (hire away their best developers, give away competing products for a song) reduced Borland to a shell of it's former self. Now they exist by pumping out JBuilder updates every 8 months and living off that revenue gravy train.

Re:Poor ol' Delphi... (2, Funny)

Infinityis (807294) | more than 9 years ago | (#10944672)

(based on "How Come" by D12)

How come, we don't even code no more,
And you don't even work no more
We don't barely use your stuff at all
and I don't even feel the same love when we debug no more
And I heard it through Slashdot..we ain't even beefin now
After all the years we ignored you...ain't no way no how
This software can't be true
We developers...ain't a IDE changed...unless its you!

Ok...so there's a my song. Where do I get my free competing software?

Re:Poor ol' Delphi... (1)

skintigh2 (456496) | more than 9 years ago | (#10944714)

That was both intelligent and insightful, are you sure you have the right web site? You're supposed to be posting things like "pascal is the sux0r, msft told me so."

Anyway, I'm a hardware guy that programs for fun and for work when he has to. I've used c, c++, java, ada, pascal, delphi, scheme, asm, matlab, VHDL, etc. When I first used Delphi in 1995 it's IDE was not just beyond anything I had ever used before, that 1995 IDE is STILL beyond the latest C++ IDE Microsoft released to date.

In addition, Pascal-based languages are inherently more intuitive that any C-based language, and thus more readable. The simplest example I can give is something I do all the time: logic operations.

Say you want to write:
(a or b) and (c nor d) xor (e nand f)

In Pascal/Delphi you write
(a or b) and (c nor d) xor (e nand f)

In C you write ...

that was a trick: unless you are a memorizing champion, before you can write this in c you go to your book shelf and you look up "xor" in the index, but you won't see it. So then you look up "logic" but that's not their either, so you start guessing. You're pretty sure you used an xor last year and it was something with a pipe, or mayme a percentage symbol, so you start at the beginning of the index and start to flip through all the giberish combinations that look like swears from the sunday comics. Eventually you find the answer.

So, now you write: ...

HA! Tricked you again! In Pascal the compiler is smart enough to compile the code without having it's hand held the entire time by forcing the user to write crap like prototypes. In this example, I never specified whether I wanted to write logical or bitwise comparisons. Pascal/Delphi is smart enough to figure it out on its own. C++ is lost without you holding it's hand in the scary darkness.

Re:Poor ol' Delphi... (1)

ElGuapoGolf (600734) | more than 9 years ago | (#10944910)


Actually, I'll disagree slightly.. :)

For me the best version of Delphi was V2. The Win16 version was buggy when you really pushed it hard. But Delphi 2.... wow... Even when Delphi 5 was out, I'd use that on a build box and do all my coding with Delphi2. Which is a very nice testament to the backwards compatibility of the language.. yeah, I'm sure I was missing out on all sorts of nice Delphi5 specific features, but 2 was just that good. And even in that early of a version, it was still light years ahead of anything else.

Kylix wasn't bad, but they did screw the pooch on it. Making it x86 specific was okay in the Win32 world, but it was never going to cut it in the Linux world. If they had made a portable compiler or at least announced they were going to and released an x86 compiler first, I think they could have owned the corporate development space. Instead, they lost out to Java. But hey... JBuilder isn't all that bad. :)

Re:Poor ol' Delphi... (1)

tomstdenis (446163) | more than 9 years ago | (#10944943)

---
Say you want to write:
(a or b) and (c nor d) xor (e nand f)

In Pascal/Delphi you write
(a or b) and (c nor d) xor (e nand f)
---

I don't recall nor, nand being operators in Turbo Pascal 6 or 7.

Oh that's right. Borland "updates" the language with every release. Unlike say C which is a standard that largely hasn't changed much since the 80s [yes, there are many nitpicking details that have changed but pretty much any C89/C90 code will compile nowadays].

So when I write "C" programs I'm not writing "Delphi 2005" programs or whatever...

Also "hand holding to write prototypes"... well then you suck as a software developer. Pascal units have implementation and interface sections. The "interface" section DEFINES THE PROTOTYPES FOR THE FUNCTIONS.

So if you write all of your code in one huge source file without breaking up the code... well you can't develop code properly.

Tom

Delphi has always been under-rated (4, Informative)

gUmbi (95629) | more than 9 years ago | (#10944458)

I'm sure that there is going to be a bunch of Delphi bashing posts but Delphi was one of the first truly great object-oriented development environments (the other might be IBM's VisualAge). It allowed for rapid layout of forms with the power of OO components. And the language, although not loved by many, is consistent and just as powerful as Java. The component library was also second to none.

Re:Delphi has always been under-rated (1)

Tablizer (95088) | more than 9 years ago | (#10944957)

It allowed for rapid layout of forms with the power of OO components.

What is the difference between "OO components" and non-OO components? VB/Delphi style is to have events and attributes closely associated with a given widget, but I am not sure doing this by putting everything in a single class per widget is the best or only way to do that.

The associations needed for widgets, attributes, and events is a fairly complex structure that could be built with multiple classes/objects, some kind of internal structure of pointers, a nimble database, etc. Ideally the IDE user doesn't have to know or care how it is implementated (although exposing the internal structure may simplify sticky debugging and roll-your-own IDE add-ons).

Delphi 2005 - A Winner (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10944464)

Delphi 2005 is really good value for money. For the same price as previous Delphi releases you get C#Builder, Delphi for Win32 and Delphi for .NET all in the same IDE. And Borland have enhanced the Win32 language too, they haven't just plugged it into the new IDE. So they show that they do actually care about the rest of us that do not believe that .NET really delivers that much benefit (and quite a few negatives actually) to end users.

Unlike Microsoft, Borland doesn't believe in pushing one platform. They have no specific platform agenda. When you buy Borland tools you know you're getting something that preserves your existing investments well- be they multiple platforms or simply your existing code base. For example, it is much easier to move code from Delphi for Win32 to Delphi for .NET than VB6 to VB.NET.

That, and all the enhancements to the IDE such as refactoring, sync-edit, and MDA developement make Delphi 2005 a winner!

Obligatory coffee talk... (4, Funny)

Weaselmancer (533834) | more than 9 years ago | (#10944477)

Microsoft Visual Studio is neither visual, nor is it a studio.

Discuss.

Re:Obligatory coffee talk... (1)

Infinityis (807294) | more than 9 years ago | (#10944531)

Microsoft is neither micro, nor is it soft.

Mod up.

Re:Obligatory coffee talk... (1)

oldwarrior (463580) | more than 9 years ago | (#10944953)

Java is not a country, nor a beverage, nor a movement - it's a copyrighted trademark.

Re:Obligatory coffee talk... (3, Funny)

halivar (535827) | more than 9 years ago | (#10944596)

Microsoft Visual Studio is neither visual, nor is it a studio.

It could also be said that Microsoft Works doesn't, and neither does Microsoft Excel. Microsoft does give easy Access, though, because it's hard to lock your Windows.

Perhaps Microsoft is being more metaphysical? "Try Visualizing a Studio, and you will be there." Sort of a cosmic humanistic what-you-feel-makes-it-real type of software value-add delivery.

Now if you'll excuse me, I have to go puke now.

market persistence (1)

gargonia (798684) | more than 9 years ago | (#10944492)

I think the real question is whether or not this resurgence of Delphi will continue once the "new" has worn off of Delphi 2005. I think some people are trying it out right now, but may move back to other IDEs after a while.

Re:market persistence (1)

FuzzyBad-Mofo (184327) | more than 9 years ago | (#10944569)

Bah, Vim is the only IDE I need..

Re:market persistence (1)

gargonia (798684) | more than 9 years ago | (#10944585)

See what I mean! It's already starting! ;^)

Borland and its IDEs (3, Insightful)

Space_Soldier (628825) | more than 9 years ago | (#10944513)

One thing that annoys me about Borland is that they have a bunch of IDEs that overlap. They should unite all of them and have a single IDE similar to how Microsoft has Visual Studio that supports many languages. If you were to buy a bunch of this IDEs to support multiple programmers who want to use their religious language, the price will be higher than Visual Studio, which comes with the same languages except Pascal and Sun's Java.

Re:Borland and its IDEs (1)

Infinityis (807294) | more than 9 years ago | (#10944553)

Beware the IDEs of March...

Re:Borland and its IDEs (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10944581)

At least in Version 6 MS Visual Studio was "just a bunch of IDEs" as well. It was just a package of MSVB, MSVC++ and some other goodies. Not one IDE supporting many languages.
Did this change with .NET?

Re:Borland and its IDEs (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10944956)

The IDE for Visual Studio .NET is the common IDE for VB.NET, C# and VC++. Visual SourceSafe and Visual FoxPro are still separate products and IDEs.

Re:Borland and its IDEs (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10944888)

You need to do a bit of reseach.

Here allow me to help : http://www.borland.com/delphi [borland.com]

The Delphi 2005 IDE is one IDE with the capability to create Delphi applications (win 32 and .NET), C#.NET, ASP.NET, VB.NET, Console Apps, CPL apps, etc, etc, etc. No need to launch more than one development IDE, even if you want multiple projects in multiple languages all open at once.

All that and more (already mentioned was the code-refactoring and sync-edit)

Not to mention the ease in deploying a .NET application (Frontpage Extensions, FTP or XCopy) Visual Studio only allows FP Extentions.

My 2 cents.

Why should open source accept .NET (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10944519)

Why?
Acceptance of .NET by open source and therefore linux distributions is what will determine the future of the ".NET" platform.

If ".NET" becomes part of linux distributions then it will really mean "compile once run everywhere" and eventually even Sun and OSX will be forced to provide it. If OTOH .NET is available only in MS windows then it will go down because developers will prefer more portable languages.

Why should open source help MS by accepting .NET?

Very trustworthy (2, Insightful)

Guillermito (187510) | more than 9 years ago | (#10944520)

A survey based on a Google search referred on Slashdot. How trustworthy.

They should port it to BSD (0, Troll)

Cro Magnon (467622) | more than 9 years ago | (#10944542)

They have something in common, if you believe Netcraft.

Delphi is my secret weapon (3, Informative)

Local Loop (55555) | more than 9 years ago | (#10944554)

I don't know (or care) about .NET, but if you are writng a windows program Delphi is staggeringly more efficient to develop in than C++. You can also use it to do Windows API stuff efficiently, meaning you can write most of your custom controls in delphi itself without have to resort to C++.

I just wish they could get their act together and make better documentation.

I actually used C++ for many years before finding out about Delphi, but now that I've switched there is no way I would ever go back.

Of course, more efficient development is not in the best interests of most programmers, because they are motivated to drag out projects as long as possible for job security reasons. But when you are doing fixed-bid contracts, or even if you just care about your reputation, Delphi is the way to go.

New web cartoon: Jendini.com [jendini.com]

.net (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10944570)

Delphi has had the ability to make .net projects for ages, before Visual Studio, even.

I can see why (1)

Keick (252453) | more than 9 years ago | (#10944649)

My company just is now switching back to Delphi for our tools development, after a year or so stint of using C#. I personally love C#, but I've been using Delphi since version 1, on Win 3.11.

Just for kicks, I compiled our latest C# development project, weighing in at less that 10K lines. 30 seconds on my 750MHz. Our last Delphi project, about 70K lines, build in 3 seconds.

Microsofts C# is over an order of magnitude slower. Between that, and the relatively lacking availability of components for .net, it was an easy decision for us to switch back.

How I do it (1, Funny)

oexeo (816786) | more than 9 years ago | (#10944766)

I don't need any of this IDE crap; I send assembly instructions directly to the kernel using an oscillator connected to a PS2 cable

Price and licensing killed Delphi (4, Insightful)

Junks Jerzey (54586) | more than 9 years ago | (#10944797)

Delphi is some kick-ass technology. It's a solid language, it compiles like *lightning* (essentially instaneous since ~1997), zero link times, and the provided libraries are great. Maybe not greater than .net, mind you, but an excellent alternative that was there many years earlier.

Delphi used to be the darling of the small developer and hobbyist programmer. Not only did you get all of the above benefits, but the standard edition was only $70. An absolutely brilliant alternative to Visual C++ and Visual Basic.

But then Borland quietly upped the price and changed the licensing. It used to be Standard for ~$70, Professional for ~$500, Enterprise for ~$1000. Then they changed it so the cheapest edition you could use in a commercial environment was $1000+. The only other version is Personal, around $100, but it is strictly license-bound to be used for learning the language and writing applications that other people don't use. Borland essentially made a one-line change to the license that forced programmers to jump to a product that costs 10x more. The result? Delphi web-sites and tutorials and hobbyist-written programs in Delphi dropped like a rock. Too bad, Borland.

Delphi great but.... (1)

dogen (574612) | more than 9 years ago | (#10944843)

Delphi has always been great but.. Vendor Lockin and Platform lockin - yek. And they definately need GC to stay contemporary.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>