Best of the worst

Post #48,957 by ChrisR 8/10/02 6:33:55 PM Reply	Best of the worst It depends on what you are trying to accomplish. If you are trying to write UI intensive applications (i.e. front ends), then Visual C++ is the worst abomination ever foisted upon the programming world. Java Swing is an improvement but it still has a lot to be desired (the tools are flakey). For such UI tasks, VB, Delphi and Python are much more productive environments, and I do not blame management for spurning Java and C++ in that application space - a space which, I might add, occupies a significant portion of IT. If I was working in the embedded space, C++ is a much better fit than either Java or VB, but I'd probably still avoid Visual C++ as it has way too much overhead in the libraries and is processor specific. Most likely I'd use GCC in my efforts. (Might even use Objective-C if I was of a real mind to exploit objects). When it comes to enterprise level applications (i.e. the backend), then Java scores well with J2EE. Lots of libraries to simplify things, as well as good support from most of the backend and middleware products. This is also a significant portion of IT development, especially given that it is much easier to develop web applications from the backend perspective and leave the UI chores to the browser. Anyhow, I think it a mistake to think of Java and C++ as being competitive with Visual Basic. They are not. They are well suited for some applications, but are a dog in the places where VB makes sense. (Delphi is quite competitive in features and ease of use with the VB application space). Dissin' VB as a pathetic programming language may be common but Java and C++ do not come close to filling the void. They have their own set of problems and are not geared towards UI apps.
Post #48,969 by wharris2 8/10/02 10:54:01 PM Reply	A cogent commentary. The lawyers would mostly rather be what they are than get out of the way even if the cost was Hammerfall. - Jerry Pournelle
Post #48,993 by tuberculosis 8/11/02 1:48:41 PM Reply	RE Objective C Its environment (what apple calls cocoa) is far and away the best UI development environment of the bunch you mentioned. Of course its Apple specific, but then VB is MS specific so I thought I could chime in. I am out of the country for the duration of the Bush administration. Please leave a message and I'll get back to you when democracy returns.
Post #49,010 by tonytib 8/11/02 5:32:54 PM Reply	Yeah, but it won't work for embedded
Post #49,014 by CRConrad 8/11/02 6:02:55 PM Reply	Have you actually tried Delphi, so you can compare fairly? Todd B writes [under the heading RE Objective C]: Its environment (what apple calls cocoa) is far and away the best UI development environment of the bunch you mentioned. I haven't tried Objective C, so I can't... But unless you've really given Delphi a chance, how are we supposed to be able to take your word for that? Christian R. Conrad Microsoft is a true reflection of Bill Gates' personality - the sleaziest, most unethical, ugliest little rat's ass the world has seen unto this time. -- [link\|http://z.iwethey.org/forums/render/content/show?contentid=42971\|Andrew Grygus]
Post #49,035 by tuberculosis 8/12/02 3:07:25 AM Reply	My Delphi Experience Is admittedly limited to having an office mate who was gaga for it and gave me several forced demos. At the superficial level it sure seemed like a 4GL kind of thing that generated code. I could be wrong. Also, I have a little experience with Object Pascal from MacApp days. Its still an "emulated" OO language in the spirit of C++ and Java rather than a dynamic one in the spirit of Smalltalk and ObjectiveC. Which means I don't much care for it on a conceptual level. My third bias against it is that it runs on PCs - something I've never cared to work on. Unix servers are pretty much the only place I ply my trade. I've heard Delphi now works on Linux? But that would reqire me to buy a PC and I have no use for PCs. I'm quite happy with OSX. Why I think Cocoa is the coolest thing: The NextStep UI Builder (called InterfaceBuilder or IB) is radical in what it does. You actually visually assemble objects together - they don't have to be UI objects either. Once you create an assembly (this thingy connects to that doodad via this property and sends this message on getting this event....) it serializes the set of objects into a file (called a nib file for the extension used). Usually this is a window with widgets and your home-made controller class and maybe some model objects. Doesn't have to be though. So when you want a new instance of that window (or other kind of assembly), you reinflate the nib again. The nib acts as a sort of template. This means you don't subclass nearly as much in Cocoa programming (hardly ever actually). Instead, you just assemble stuff. This is kind of what Java beans wanted to do with its serialization and stuff, but Sun messed it up and the implementors couldn't get their head around real serialization so they all punted and did code generation. I also think they sort of had to because of Java's static binding nature. I am out of the country for the duration of the Bush administration. Please leave a message and I'll get back to you when democracy returns.
Post #59,409 by CRConrad 10/25/02 11:31:43 AM Reply	Delphi evangelism, continued... (new thread) Created as new thread #59408 titled [link\|/forums/render/content/show?contentid=59408\|Delphi evangelism, continued...] Christian R. Conrad Microsoft is a true reflection of Bill Gates' personality - the sleaziest, most unethical, ugliest little rat's ass the world has seen unto this time. -- [link\|http://z.iwethey.org/forums/render/content/show?contentid=42971\|Andrew Grygus]
Post #49,086 by jb4 8/12/02 2:39:46 PM 8/12/02 2:42:05 PM Reply	Several counterpoints Most likely I'd use GCC in my efforts. I'm currently using gcc in an embeded application (w/ QNX as the OS). If gcc is supposed to be some kind of shining star for what the Open Source "community" can produce, they should be ashamed and embarrased. The ANSI C++ statnadard has been a standard for 5 years, for chrissakes, and has been a stable proposed standard for quite a bit longer. gcc's ANSI compliance is a fucking joke; Visual C pus pus has better compliance (and you KNOW how I feel about Visual C pus pus!). Dissin' VB as a pathetic programming language may be common but Java and C++ do not come close to filling the void. They have their own set of problems and are not geared towards UI apps. You're confusing the language with the support libraries. Visual C pus pus uses the godforsaken POS ephemistically referred to as MFC. MFC is basically useless for just about anything (except marketing, and how much marketing is written in C++, anyway?). Now let's try a real library; for example, Borland's C++ Builder's VCL (the same library used by Delphi). Developing UI-intensive apps in C++ Builder is a breeze, and is even easier that developing the corresponding app in Visual Bullshit (mostly because it's backed by a real language.) So C++, coupled with a class library tailored to the job (and devoid of Micros~1 bullshit), is more than capable of "filling the void". jb4 "About the use of language: it is impossible to sharpen a pencil with a blunt axe. It is equally vain to try to do it with ten blunt axes instead. " -- Edsger W.Dijkstra (1930 - 2002) (I wish more managers knew that...) Edited by jb4 Aug. 12, 2002, 02:42:05 PM EDT Expand All History
Post #49,232 by Arkadiy 8/13/02 2:55:46 PM Reply	What version of gcc are you using? 3.0.x is rather compliant. It's better than 6.0
Post #49,256 by jb4 8/13/02 6:41:25 PM Reply	Re: What version of gcc are you using? 2.95.2 Been told (albeit by the QNX people) that 3.0 is "not quite stable" yet. Neither are in Borland country WRT compliance... jb4 "About the use of language: it is impossible to sharpen a pencil with a blunt axe. It is equally vain to try to do it with ten blunt axes instead. " -- Edsger W.Dijkstra (1930 - 2002) (I wish more managers knew that...)
Post #49,336 by Arkadiy 8/14/02 10:22:14 AM Reply	Re: What version of gcc are you using? 2.95 was indeed not terribly compliant (shameful, if you ask me). We moved to 3.0, currently at 3.0.4 . I was the last one to move, after discovering that 64 bit integers and template types don't mix in 2.95. It seems to be stable on Linux, Solaris, Aix and HPUX (3.0.1 was not, optimizer bugs on HPUX). But QNX? I have no idea. Check it out anyway - you're switching to it eventually, aren't you?
Post #49,450 by jb4 8/15/02 9:33:13 AM Reply	I'd rather switch than... I dunno. The port of gcc to QNX is in the hands of QNX themselves; the "community" does not do the port. Therefore, QNX users are sort of at the mercy of QNX, who, besides having no true marketing plan, are notably myopic with regards to C++ in general. Last I heard, their new, oh-so-kewl upgrade, which contains a (JAVA-based) IDE, is to use 2.95.3. Switching? If I had my way, I'd switch to (embedded) Linux, and use Kylix. (But when do I ever get my way? :-( ) jb4 "About the use of language: it is impossible to sharpen a pencil with a blunt axe. It is equally vain to try to do it with ten blunt axes instead. " -- Edsger W.Dijkstra (1930 - 2002) (I wish more managers knew that...)

Welcome to IWETHEY!