3 ms·

> Even today, C++/CX with XAML is not as productive as C++ Builder I'm glad you think that - I work on C++Builder, and work hard to improve its strengths. Prod

> Even today, C++/CX with XAML is not as productive as C++ Builder I'm glad you think that - I work on C++Builder, and work hard to improve its strengths. Productivity is a key one compared to other C++ tools. These days it's not just Windows, but iOS and Android too, and you will hear more good news about platforms and C++ standards support sometime soon. Not all the team left for MS, by the way: we have some truly incredible people on staff. From the article, re Turbo Pascal, the precursor to Delphi, > You would be typing code, and then several seconds later it would be compiled, and you'd be running it. That's still true of Delphi today! There's a video on Youtube of a million lines of code compiled and linked in about six seconds. It's hard to overestimate the productivity that kind of round-trip speedy development brings.

pjmlp 9y ago
Nowadays I am mostly a Java/.NET guy, but nice to hear about upcoming C++ Builder improvements. German companies are still into Delphi, with a few yearly conferences.
badsectoracula 9y ago
Does modern C++ Builder still have DRM? I remember looking some years ago at how Delphi/C++ are doing and i saw that they had DRM (some people even complained in the forums that they had to use cracks to make the tools work in their laptop while on the go, which is a big screwup IMO). I have an ancient version of Borland C++ Builder - actually the first one - which i got off ebay some years ago (i like collecting old develpment tools [1]). I like that it basically works everywhere and is stable, even in Linux through Wine [2]. I used it mainly to make a few things for fun, like some patches for old games [3] (because it makes very small executables - like 250K or so), a small 3D editor [4] and a WinLIL [5] - a PyWin inspired shell for my LIL [6] scripting language (mainly an excuse to make yet another thing that uses LIL :-P). Normally i use Lazarus [7] (on which i wrote the more serious alternative for WinLIL, LIL Studio [8]), but there is value to being able to use C and C++ code directly from a very easy to use RAD GUI builder. For example it took me like a couple of hours to make WinLIL and 99% of that time was making the graphics routines - for LIL i just dropped the lil.c and lil.h files into the project and it worked out of the box. Also when a new version of GLEW was released, i thought "well, this is C right? Let's see if it works with BCB" and it did, although i had to remove the C99-isms (only a few changes here and there) [9]. For comparison to actually access OpenGL 4.6 through Lazarus i had to write an entire custom generator (basically reimplement GLEW) [10]. Some people have actually suggested me to try Qt Creator and i did... and it sucked. Ok, not exactly sucked, but it was way less "integrated" and more kludgy than what you'd get with classic VB, Delphi, C++ Builder or Lazarus. It is certainly a step above than the dialog editors you get in other toolkits that feel like glorified Win16 era resource editors (actually scratch the glorified bits because you can't even embed actual resources in them, only edit the dialogs). But even Delphi 1.0 on Windows 3.1 feels better. So yeah, C++ Builder can be a great thing to have... BUT! As i wrote above, the last time i tried Embarcadero's stuff, they seemed to be heavily infested with DRM crapware. I really detest DRM - notice how i actually have Borland C++ Builder running from its original disk basically 22 years after its original release from a company that practically doesn't exist anymore? I am certain it'll work even 22 years into the future - even if Microsoft goes braindead and kills Win32, it'll be Wine or even some emulation layer like DOSBox. But can i expect the same from modern C++ Builder? Does it still have the DRM? There have been several changes since the day i wrote the article at [1] (and even tried C++ Builder a year or so later and found that it addressed some issues i had with the UI that i mentioned at the bottom - although the bloat issues were still there, but those are minor issues that will solve themselves with time - after all i have tried BCB1 in an old PC from late 90s i have and it isn't exactly fast either :-P) and AFAIK the company has changed hands again so things might have changed on that front too. Personally i wouldn't like to pay $700 for a program that goes away in 3-4 years and shuts down their DRM servers making it impossible for me to use that again. And lets be honest, Embarcadero has changes hands (and names!) so many times over the years that their future prospects aren't exactly trustworthy. EDIT: i just saw that C++ Builder now costs $2k... well, FWIW i wouldn't be able to buy it even without DRM :-P. When did the cost change? I remember it being much cheaper. [1] http://runtimeterror.com/blog/borland-c-builder.html http://runtimeterror.com/blog/borland-c-builder.html [2] https://i.imgur.com/rInEdBY.png https://i.imgur.com/rInEdBY.png (that is XFCE with a Win95 theme) [3] https://i.imgur.com/eZ44J8y.png https://i.imgur.com/eZ44J8y.png [4] https://i.imgur.com/zRguUf8.png https://i.imgur.com/zRguUf8.png [5] http://runtimeterror.com/tech/lil/winlil.png http://runtimeterror.com/tech/lil/winlil.png [6] http://runtimeterror.com/rep/lil http://runtimeterror.com/rep/lil [7] http://www.lazarus-ide.org/ http://www.lazarus-ide.org/ [8] https://i.imgur.com/laBbvww.png https://i.imgur.com/laBbvww.png [9] https://i.imgur.com/JiQHAwz.png https://i.imgur.com/JiQHAwz.png [10] http://runtimeterror.com/rep/gl2unit/index http://runtimeterror.com/rep/gl2unit/index
- vintagedave 9y ago
  I can't comment on antipiracy tech, but I can state that I know of no reason whatsoever why anyone should ever need to crack the product to use it -- no bugs, nothing. Nor is there a reason existing installations would ever stop functioning (unless you have something where you'd expect it, like a timed license.) In terms of price: Starter is completely free. Pro's cost is on par with VS, and if not, feel free to reply why, always worth revisiting.

pjmlp 9y ago

Nowadays I am mostly a Java/.NET guy, but nice to hear about upcoming C++ Builder improvements. German companies are still into Delphi, with a few yearly conferences.

badsectoracula 9y ago

Does modern C++ Builder still have DRM? I remember looking some years ago at how Delphi/C++ are doing and i saw that they had DRM (some people even complained in the forums that they had to use cracks to make the tools work in their laptop while on the go, which is a big screwup IMO). I have an ancient version of Borland C++ Builder - actually the first one - which i got off ebay some years ago (i like collecting old develpment tools [1]). I like that it basically works everywhere and is stable, even in Linux through Wine [2]. I used it mainly to make a few things for fun, like some patches for old games [3] (because it makes very small executables - like 250K or so), a small 3D editor [4] and a WinLIL [5] - a PyWin inspired shell for my LIL [6] scripting language (mainly an excuse to make yet another thing that uses LIL :-P). Normally i use Lazarus [7] (on which i wrote the more serious alternative for WinLIL, LIL Studio [8]), but there is value to being able to use C and C++ code directly from a very easy to use RAD GUI builder. For example it took me like a couple of hours to make WinLIL and 99% of that time was making the graphics routines - for LIL i just dropped the lil.c and lil.h files into the project and it worked out of the box. Also when a new version of GLEW was released, i thought "well, this is C right? Let's see if it works with BCB" and it did, although i had to remove the C99-isms (only a few changes here and there) [9]. For comparison to actually access OpenGL 4.6 through Lazarus i had to write an entire custom generator (basically reimplement GLEW) [10]. Some people have actually suggested me to try Qt Creator and i did... and it sucked. Ok, not exactly sucked, but it was way less "integrated" and more kludgy than what you'd get with classic VB, Delphi, C++ Builder or Lazarus. It is certainly a step above than the dialog editors you get in other toolkits that feel like glorified Win16 era resource editors (actually scratch the glorified bits because you can't even embed actual resources in them, only edit the dialogs). But even Delphi 1.0 on Windows 3.1 feels better. So yeah, C++ Builder can be a great thing to have... BUT! As i wrote above, the last time i tried Embarcadero's stuff, they seemed to be heavily infested with DRM crapware. I really detest DRM - notice how i actually have Borland C++ Builder running from its original disk basically 22 years after its original release from a company that practically doesn't exist anymore? I am certain it'll work even 22 years into the future - even if Microsoft goes braindead and kills Win32, it'll be Wine or even some emulation layer like DOSBox. But can i expect the same from modern C++ Builder? Does it still have the DRM? There have been several changes since the day i wrote the article at [1] (and even tried C++ Builder a year or so later and found that it addressed some issues i had with the UI that i mentioned at the bottom - although the bloat issues were still there, but those are minor issues that will solve themselves with time - after all i have tried BCB1 in an old PC from late 90s i have and it isn't exactly fast either :-P) and AFAIK the company has changed hands again so things might have changed on that front too. Personally i wouldn't like to pay $700 for a program that goes away in 3-4 years and shuts down their DRM servers making it impossible for me to use that again. And lets be honest, Embarcadero has changes hands (and names!) so many times over the years that their future prospects aren't exactly trustworthy. EDIT: i just saw that C++ Builder now costs $2k... well, FWIW i wouldn't be able to buy it even without DRM :-P. When did the cost change? I remember it being much cheaper. [1] http://runtimeterror.com/blog/borland-c-builder.html http://runtimeterror.com/blog/borland-c-builder.html [2] https://i.imgur.com/rInEdBY.png https://i.imgur.com/rInEdBY.png (that is XFCE with a Win95 theme) [3] https://i.imgur.com/eZ44J8y.png https://i.imgur.com/eZ44J8y.png [4] https://i.imgur.com/zRguUf8.png https://i.imgur.com/zRguUf8.png [5] http://runtimeterror.com/tech/lil/winlil.png http://runtimeterror.com/tech/lil/winlil.png [6] http://runtimeterror.com/rep/lil http://runtimeterror.com/rep/lil [7] http://www.lazarus-ide.org/ http://www.lazarus-ide.org/ [8] https://i.imgur.com/laBbvww.png https://i.imgur.com/laBbvww.png [9] https://i.imgur.com/JiQHAwz.png https://i.imgur.com/JiQHAwz.png [10] http://runtimeterror.com/rep/gl2unit/index http://runtimeterror.com/rep/gl2unit/index

vintagedave 9y ago
I can't comment on antipiracy tech, but I can state that I know of no reason whatsoever why anyone should ever need to crack the product to use it -- no bugs, nothing. Nor is there a reason existing installations would ever stop functioning (unless you have something where you'd expect it, like a timed license.) In terms of price: Starter is completely free. Pro's cost is on par with VS, and if not, feel free to reply why, always worth revisiting.