Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Programming IT Technology

Prepare for Kylix: The Compiler and RTL 104

Posted by HeUnique from the coming-soon dept.
Borland/Inprise Web site has this article about Kylix - the Compiler and the RTL - what's going on, what will be in the Linux version, what's in and out. Developers who are planning to port applications from Windows to Linux (and vice versa?) would love this article. You may also want to take a look here if you don't know much about Kylix.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Prepare for Kylix: The Compiler and RTL More

Prepare for Kylix: The Compiler and RTL

Comments Filter:

  • Re:"Professional" tools? (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward
    I can tellyou how gcc compares to kylix right now:

    kylix will compile faster

    kylix will produce better optimized code. whether the difference will be enough to notice for 99% of application code out there is unclear.

    gcc will always be free as in both speech and beer. kylix will never be free as in speech.

    kylix is only i386 right now. eventually, it may support IA64, but don't hold your breath. right now, today, gcc supports damn near every chip in the world (including PPC, sparc, mips, i386, IA64, and a host of embedded chips).

    kylix can be faster than gcc and optimize better b/c it only has to generate code for i386. In that sense, you simply can't compare the two. If you don't mind being chained for the foreseeable future to intel chips, than kylix is the way to go. Just be clear that you're sacrificing portability. Oh, and by the way, kylix won't be running on *BSD or any nonlinux OS (except win32) anytime soon. With kylix, your only option is linux-i386 (maybe IA-64 later on).

    This is only a comparison of the compilers. Kylix also includes an IDE, a run time package, and much legacy support for delphi/C++builder code made on win32. gcc itself provides none of this, although there are other packages that provide similar features. For example, wxWindows provides a common windowing and OS environment on many different processors and OSs (Linux, win32, MacOS, etc.).

  • Thanks for being so helpful. (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Would it hurt /. editors to give a hint about what Kylix is? Not everyone wants to take the time to jump to another page full of advertizing banners and stuff just to see what their stupid article is about. Now that /. has so few articles, you'd think they could take a few minutes to write good abstracts instead of just including the illiterate ramblings of the submitters.


  • "At some time in the past they had a fairly
    broad line of compilers: Pascal, C, Basic, Assembler, and even Prolog!"

    Don't forget that they _had_ a Turbo Modula-2 !

    That thing never made into the market, but they _had_ it !

    How I wish they can do a Turbo-Perl, Turbo-Python, and a Turbo-XML !!

    :)



  • Well... I am happy that Borland is at last doing something for all of us. The Kyrix is truly needed.

    And if I may add this - I wish that Borland can do the following for all of us -

    Turbo Perl
    Turbo Python
    Turbo PHP
    Turbo XML

    If Borland can do that, many of us would spend our hard earned money to buy the nice things from Borland.

  • I am glad to see this happening. The amount of new Delphi applications that will ported over will be interesting to see. I like to see other people throw their in the linux ring.

    http://theotherside.com/dvd/ [theotherside.com]
  • What moronic about my last post? And I didn't know that you even noticed or cared
    thank you

    http://theotherside.com/dvd/ [theotherside.com]
  • I believe that you are partially right. The way I read the Kickstart announcement, the event is for the commercial component developers who make aftermarket component sets. There are a lot of these, and they are a large part of the story of Delphi's success.
  • Thanks for the link But i have a question. Who does this benifit most Linux/BSD/Unix or Microsoft??? I just get the fealing this will allow people to write better code that can then turn and be ported to windows. Just my mind.

    Nope. It undoubted hurts Microsoft and helps Linux. Think about it. If Kylix were released today, how many Linux applications could be then compiled on the Windows platform? Yes, the answer is 0. However, how many applications can be compiled for Linux? 100's of thousands, probably. So, it'll greatly increase the applications available for Linux, while starving the Windows platforms that before had sole rights to the applications.

    -Brent
  • Delphi and C++Builder for Linux....details [borland.com]. Should be cool.
  • I note with interest that the Kylix Kick Start event is NOT open to the public. That is, Inprise/Borland has decided who are eligibled to be the ones who port their application from M$ Windoes to Linux.

    So, they should open it to the public so that MSFT can attend? Not a good idea ...

    What about those small vendors who have interesting applications?

    I agree, there should be some way that one could apply to attend, but I don't know about opening it up to all comers. One should be wary of MSFT trying to kill this or at least subvert it, especially at the beginning stages.

  • Linux software will work on every Linux box that is using the same major version of the kernel, regardless of the distro. Windows NT and Windows 9x are fundamentally different operating systems, although they are both Win32. Even if they distributed the software in, say, only RPM form, there are plenty of tools out there to convert it.

    Chris Hagar
  • The amount of waffle on Borland's website about Kylix is remarkable. They go on for pages and pages about crap and this and that and then they get into some specifics, but never give anything useful. I gather (after spending half an hour on their website) that it is a linux port of C++Builder ?

    This Borland-waffle applies to their help files too. Their website has jack shit, if it weren't for all the private fan sites there would be no online help (unlike MS's several terabytes of documentation on MSDN).

    The help files in Delphi and C++Builder are atrocious. They explain what is obvious, leave out the small details that would have helped to avoid bugs, and give totally irrelevant examples. To figure out how some item works you have to try using it and blunder round until you can make a guess at its function and implementation.
    The only reason I use it is because it has a much better compiler and much higher ease of doing most of the development on a project.

    Now, in order to resurrect some chance of not getting Score 0, I'd like to point out how I think product documentation should be better, most especially in development tools (as opposed to games etc.)
    It just sucks needing to know how to do something and not having the help available.
    Most documentation is in the nature of a few tutorials to do specific tasks (all well and good if your goal is to do exactly that specific task, but otherwise useless) and some sort of index of all functionality but with not much useful to say on each topic.
    As a programmer I know how hard it is to write good documentation. The attitude is "Well I know how it works, so they should be able to figure it out". This is actually quite stupid when you think about it.
    I'd gladly pay more for a product with thorough, practical documentation so that I could suss anything out when I needed it.

  • The link to what is supposed to explain what kylix is just goes to a page about an event. Granted the event will apparently tell us what kylix is, but that's not much use, apparently, unless we've been specifically invited by name...

    So could someone tell little ignorant old me what Kylix is?

  • There's also the whole glibc version issue and the general library dependency issue to deal with. Granted, both of those are bigger issues in Windows (can you say "DLL Hell")?, but they are also considerations.

  • Delphi jobs are particularly abundant in Texas as well. One of the Delphi tool vendors I work is located in Boise, Idaho. There are quite a few in the Boston area that use Delphi as well.

    In the Philadelphia area, where I live, the jobs are primarly custom software houses or consultanting firms. But, a they also tend to be in the pharaceutical and accounting areas and games arena as well. The consultant agencies which I have spoken with tell me that they are constantly hiring and there is no lack of work now or in the forseeable future.

    Judging by the people I speak with and the apparent total ignorance of Delphi by many developers tells me a few things...

    1) Most IT or marketing shops are contracting for work being done in Delphi and probably don't know it. All they know is the apps come on or ahead of schedule and work.

    2) I can still command my salary as their isn't a glut of Delphi (or Kylix) programmers yet.

    3) Kylix developers will be in demand as more an more companies decide to support Linux. This will help raise my salary if I should decide to leave my current position.

    4) More opportunities will be created as more startups seeks to fill the void of mission critical business applications.

    Kewl.

    Now, of Borland fails to deliver, then none of this will hold true and I will be forced to switch back to C++.

    RD
  • Any recruiter will tell you they have a abundance of high-paying positions to fill using Java or C++, but I have found a few who have even heard of Delphi, and they have been for low-paying positions.

    This effect is primarily because most IT shops are run by either Microsoft lemmings who read PC Maganize for mangement advise or Unix shops. The Unix shops tend to use C++ and Java because no real RAD tools exist in those arenas. If you want to write for Unix, you best be using C++.

    The fact that object oriented programming is so predominent in the Unix world should make Kylix a useful tool. The synergy of C++ and Kylix should create some exciting opportunities (Kylix is going to use (supposedly) .so files that should be able to link with those produced by other tools).

    So, let the C++ gurus do their thing and let the Kylix developers write the business apps and front ends. This can only be a winning combination.

    RD

  • First, you need to upgrade to D5 (forget D4). The advantages are numerous. D2 was a kludge (like D4) and should never have been released. D3 and D5 are the versions that can be considered "stable" for real development work.

    That aside, you do make some valid points.

    #1 - Syntax: The verbositiy is inherent of Pascal. But, I don't see how this makes it difficult to read. Good clean Pascal coding makes it possible to write code that is very legible and easy to comprehend. It not the diffulty in reading the syntax that makes C++ programmers uncomfortable - its the lack of terseness and the need to to type more to say the same thing.

    #2 - Liguistic flaws. Okay...I'll byte (pun intended) and give you this one. I agree, having to declare everything up front can make life a bit difficult. How many times I wish I had the ability to create a temporary variable in a block of code. To get around this, I use another function or procedure or redesign my code. The optimizer solves my problem while making the code, ultimately more readable (in my book).

    #3 - Lack of guaranteed destruction. Delphi will clean up anything it creates on the stack except for variables it creates in the heap. Thus, objects created aren't destroyed because they reside in the heap. A simply try/finally block solves that problem quite handily. But, also destruction of the object that "owns" the object will clean up any contained objects as well. This means that when an application terminates, all objects are automatically freed. The caveat here is that the objects know how to free up any memory they allocate in their destructor or there will be memory leaks.

    #4 - Genericity. This is where I do have to concede. Templates don't exist in Delphi at the present time. But, there are are generic container objects and untyped variables (ick!).

    Supposedly, Kylix will introduct real macro support - a feature missing from earlier variants of Delphi. I don't know how extensive the macro processing will be...we'll have to wait and see.

    One other thing that is missing from Delphi, in general, is multiple inheritence. I don't know if this is a blessing or a hinderance. But, much of this is possible using interfaces which ARE being ported to Kylix.

    Yes, I am a Delphi developer. Been so since Delphi 1. Prior to that, I was a C/C++ and VB developer (more C/C++ with VB as "glue"). That was 1994 when Delphi was introduced. And,I don't program in C/C++ any longer (except on Linux...where I prefer Perl for most things). That is because I can develop 24x7 database and internet apps on a Windows platform using Delphi (well..assuming the OS can stay up 24x7).

    I find the language and tool well suited for group development in addition to single developer RAD sessions. RAD, in my book, is fine for prototypes...but it generates some nasty looking code that is often hard to follow. Nothing is more important then getting down the concepts and then doing a real design.

    The limitations you mention are pretty much specific to the difference between C++ and Delphi. Delphi developers can probably put together a list of things missing from C++ as well. Its all subjective and personal taste. A truly good programmer learns to adapt and overcome. They incorporate the best of what they've learned in other languages and use that knowledge whereever pssible.

    RD
  • I was a bit disappointed upon hearing that it was not open to the general public as well. But, that is what I get for not being a certified Borland tools vendor. Our company hopes to apply for that status in the near future (we've got clients (potential and actual) who have had enough of Microsoft. They want our product and they want it on Linux. Period.).

    It's unfortunate that people tend to take these notices out of context and put a negative spin on them. I'm not sure they even belong here without some sort of serious explanation. But, there were people responding to this article who were asking questions like "What is Kylix anyway?". A simple link to community.borland.com would have answered that in a heartbeat.

    For those that do participate in the tools program, they are elgible to receive the tools well in advance of the general public. The idea here, as you pointed out, is so that they can port their wares in time for the general release.

    Truth be told, Borland is trying to release as much information as possible to help prepare Windows developers for the daunting task of taking on Linux. Linux ain't Win98 (thankfully!). And, it has its own quirks that Windows developers simply can't appreciate until they try it.

    Delphi component and tools builders will have a tougher go at it mainly because it is not Windows and doesn't provide the Win32 API. Code that relied on low-level features of Windows simply won't work any longer without redesign.

    Application developers won't have to worry about these issues as they use generally don't code to the API level. They are more likely to use the tools created by the component writers (who already dealt with those issuer).

    Okay, so I'm digressing a bit. Take the notice for what it is...marketing hype targetted to Delphi developers to get them psyched for the imminient release of the one of the most significant advances for Windows developers.
  • I think you are way out of line here. First, Borland/Inprise aren't insinuating that the other tools aren't professional. They are making the point that their tools are now ready for "professional" developers to use in a Linux environment.

    As for you statement regarding hiring a programmer...I have been using Delphi since its introduction. Yes, jobs are far fewer thanks to the misguided managment who think Microsoft is the way to go. I got my job (and am being paid VERY well) BECAUSE I have such extensive Delphi skills. Many IT shops, once they realize the limitations of VB and the difficulty of C++ in getting robust apps out into the marketplace, switch to Delphi as their secret weapon.

    Delphi is predominantly a West Coast and European tool. So, unless you're in those regions, you probably don't see many Delphi jobs adverstised.

    BTW, you're so called "Gold Standard of Skill" is a bit elitist. Yes, its nice to know whats going on under the covers (that's what component developers do). But, having a developer who can take the tools I give them and mold them into a production quality app is more important to me (unless I want a component developer).

    RD
  • I'm not sure how taht happened, but in a few months Borland lost all its momentum. And Microsoft got it right. And that was not only because of MS tactics, but MS got it right in several senses:

    One of the biggest reasons Borland (and also the other compiler developers) got dusted by M$ is the fact that at that time M$ did not give anybody else direct access to the MFC and if they did it was usually at least 1 rev back from what M$ was currently using. That gave developers no choice but to use M$ products if they wanted all the latest and greatest features in Winblows. Borland was very instrumental in getting M$ to open up the MFC to other development tool providers.
  • I agree GNU C/C++ has been used to create alot of software but for the *nix application package I've been working on for the last 15 years it's only been the last couple years that GNU has been robust enough to even compile our apps. Even today we highly recommend that our customers purchase their HW providers compiler to save themselves alot of headaches and problems. And before you go off saying it's the way we've written our code, you should know that there has yet to be a *nix platform that our applications do not run on - including Linux (which seems to have a better implementation of gcc than most commercial *nix's).

    As for your bit about the cameras - the 'professionals' use the Nikons and Hasselblads because the results are MANY times better than than what you get from a point-and-shoot camera and because the options give them greater flexibily to express what they are really after. I highly doubt that an application created, using the tools you mentioned, will produce results that much greater in quality than the ones created by Borland (or any other tool provider - in fact the opposite might be true), and I have yet to find anything that can't be done, using Borlands tools, that can be done using other tools.

    One last note: Keep your EMACS - give me VI any day =)
  • try here. [borland.com]
  • Kylix is "a high performance Linux application development environment that will support C, C++, and Delphi development", according to the Borland/Inprise web site.
  • In windows, Delphi and C++ Builder have something called the VCL or visual component library. This is equivalent to something like GTK+ (but without theme ability). It is very easy to use. As a downside to some, it is written in pascal so C++ programmers may feel limited. Kylix is the VCL port and there are some other basic libraries like the AnsiString (a simpler std::string that feels like pascal). It looks like it will be a bridge between windows and linux programming for developers using borland/inprise compilers.
  • There are two pascal compilers for linux that are nearly 80% compatible with Delphi 2, and both are open source and free: FPK and Sybil. Gnu Pascal is close, but only up to TurboPascal 7.0.

    - the sinister mister earache

  • Coincidently, here is an article [delphi-jedi.org] written by someone who has seen Kylix in action and gives some more info about it.
  • It's not all that different from cameras: lots of people use point-and-shoot cameras for all sorts of business applications, but the true "professional" cameras are still the Nikon F4's and Hasselblads, clunky and slow by consumer standards, but they get the job done in the hands of the professionals.

    I'll be interested to see how the GNU compiler stands up to kylix in terms of code generation and optimization. I think what Borland meant by professional was a tool capable of compiling 250,000 lines of code in 20 seconds and producing highly optimized output.

    And, I'd wager, once you see/use Delphi/Kylix for any length of time and are doing development for a windowed environment, you'll wonder why anyone would want to do it any differently.

    - the sinister mister earache

  • I found this: "Note to self: when vacationing in Australia, leave the laptop in California...". Is this a note for the author? or the readers? am i missing something?
  • I have to agree with you. I have been using Borland's tools for windoze development since Delphi 2 and they made life much easier than M$'s tools. I look forward to being able to program for Linux with the same speed as I have under windoze. I wonder if I can still release my programs under the GPL if I use Kylix. Will using a propritary development tool prevent me from GLP'ing my code?
  • Hmm.. BSD. Britney Spears Dist? Maybe her 'singing' career is just a cover. She's a geek like us!
  • Kylix?? Don't tell me Kylie Minogue has her own Linux dist now?! Ofcourse we'll see Danniix next, her sister is never far behind...
  • Try Free Pascal. (FPC) Pretty much a GNU'd direct take of the Object pascal franchise. Runs a treat, has Win32, Dos, OS/S , Amiga and (importantly) Linux versions. Does both the Turbo and Delphi Object models (Mix'n'match) A reasonably usefull set of units (Linux api's sockets etc, X stuff whatnot) and there is a side project to . . . . Build a GNU Delphi.
  • Thanks for the link But i have a question. Who does this benifit most Linux/BSD/Unix or Microsoft??? I just get the fealing this will allow people to write better code that can then turn and be ported to windows. Just my mind
  • The best part of the whole thing is what they said when asked about being "compatible" with all the different Linux distributions. The answer amounted to the following ( not an exact quote but pretty much the meaning is intact ).

    [metaquote]
    "We will test on a couple of popular distribs and tell customers to use that and it WILL work. It's no different from testing a Win32 application because technically there are several different Win32 OS out there that are not compatible."

    "One nice advantage of Linux is that we can negotiate to have our Runtimes distributed with the OS so that a developer on Linux will be able to send just the 50K file with his software on it to customers. we tried to make arrangements like this with MS and it didn't work."
    [/metaquote].

    I think our Free Development tools are entrenched enough that new closed and commercial tools like this will serve to widen the overall number of people developing for Linux rather than reduce the number of users on the GPLed tools. There is very little by way of core apps that hasn't already tied itself to Open Source tools anyway so who cares what the latest toys or custom business apps use? Running on Linux is good enough.
  • Let's face it - for a large commecial project, getting all those makefiles and dependencies right is a pain.

    Yes it is. On the other hand dealing with inflexable make replacments in large or small enviroments is also a pain.

    For example in my current "big" project I have ".t" files that are written in a language a perl script turns into .l++ files, which lex turns into .cc files. Make came with a built in rule to do the .l++ to .cc step, but I provided the .t to .l++ rule. If make hadn't let me do that I would have to run something else before each make, worse yet before each of some kinds of makes, but not others.

    Example#2, in a recent "small" project I did to learn Java I wanted a yacc and lex like replacment. I found a few, but then I discovered neither of the IDEs I hade bought (CodeWarrier for Java, which was mostly crap, and Symentatec Visual Mumble-Mumble Java/Cafe/something which would be cool if it didn't crash a lot) support turning ".cup" files into ".java" files. CodeWarrier at least has a make I can decipher, but it seems to re-write that file and have no provisions for perminent changes. The tech support was unhelpful. Symentec didn't appear to have even that much. Again tech support was unhelpful. Neither integrated enviroments seemed to let me "integrate" anything else into them (be it a pre-parser, or a more vi like editor).

    Eventually I stopped using the windows IDE and started using command line Unix tools, despite the fact that they were far slower. Despite the fact that the debugger Sun's JDK came with was really really primitave (GUI debuggers have some really nice advantages). The flexability of the enviroment was much better. My mussle memory (editor afinity) could be catered too. It didn't blow up every few hours, and damamge the OS.

    All that said, I'm happy that borland is bringing this product to Linux. Some people will like what it provides more then the flexability of a tradtional Unix dev enviroment. Plus there is a lot of software written in it's language that can now be ported to Linux, some with very little effort. I just may have no dirrect use for it. (then again I may -- I'm a language junkie, and it's almost time to learn a new one...)

  • Pascal (Score:2)

    by jjr ( 6873 )
    Ahh yes that was the first language I learned
    and the first software package that I bought (instead of borrowed). It is great that borland is doing this I can now use a borland pascal on linux. Gotta love it


    http://theotherside.com/dvd/ [theotherside.com]
  • Don't flatter yourself. You're no MEEPT!!

    MEEPT!! was decidedly on-topic in a very off-topic way. (S)he managed to play Devil's advocate in a manner that irritated many GNU or Linux Zealots, and he never was direct about it.

    MEEPT!! communicated entirely in dadaistic yet insightful koans. Whereas $GRITSPOST is simply comic relief.

  • I don't want a "Decent desktop experience." This isn't sex. I want to get my work done, with a minimum amount of effort and ambiguity as to the means and the result. Most folks are like that. They'll learn a few apps that are core to the tasks they want to perform, and who cares about the rest.

    It's the apps, friend, not some imaginary purity of GUI essence. And Delphi is all about creating serviceable apps with reasonable GUI's, quickly and reliably.

    That's why this is a very, very good thing.

    As for actually using the desktop effectively, neither MS Windows, Mac, or Unices have yet to achieve, much less surpass, what was developed at PARC two decades ago. Lots more eye candy, of course, with functionless, brain-numbing animations and 3D and color. But it's still click, click, drag, de-click.

    So I agree with you that "desktop experience" has a long way to go. (Why can't I just draw on my desktop and tell it to "take things like this and combine them with that and perform this and that and then put them there"? The command line lives on because desktops are so poor at exploiting natural visual metaphors.)

    But that's not the point.

    -Ed
  • Borland's tools are useful. They are fun. They may even be "professional" (people get paid for the work they do with them, which defines "professional").

    What I object to is Borland's implication that Emacs and GNU C/C++ don't represent professional tools. Think about it this way:

    • The Linux kernel, the GNU tools, the UNIX kernel and tools, most telecom applications, most large web sites, etc. were all developed with command line tools. Borland's tools have mostly been used for consumer Windows applications and in-house RAD. With that in mind, is there any justification for calling Borland's tools "professional" and the command line tools not?

    • If you had to choose to hire a programmer for the long term, someone who needs to be flexible and work in a variety of environments, would you rather hire someone with 5 years of Delphi experience or 5 years of Emacs and GNU C/C++ experience? In all the places I have worked, the Delphi programmer wouldn't even get invited to an interview.

    If we allow companies like Borland to redefine "professionalism" in terms of their GUI and RAD products, I think we are lowering our standards. I have no objection to their products being called "useful" and "professional", but the gold standard of skill to me is still that a programmer is comfortable and productive without all that handholding. That kind of "under the covers" understanding is important even if you spend all your time in VC++ or Borland, because the debuggers and GUI builders in those tools simply aren't getting the job done some of the time.

    Not every professional programmer needs to achieve proficiency in vi, Emacs, and command line tools, but more ought to aspire to it. And appreciating those tools as professional and worthy of mastery is the first step towards that.

  • No offense, but it sounds like you're shooting from the hip a bit here...

    Emacs, GNU C/C++, etc are 'mainstream' for the Linux/Unix crowd. However, if you ask a current developer of exclusively MS Windows apps what Emacs is, s/he's likely to respond "Um... some sort of Apple Internet appliance?"

    The article was geared towards folks who DON'T develop on Linux/Unix environments - as in the people currently using Delphi for Windows. To them, there is no mainstream professional development tools from the companies they're used to dealing with. That's why it compared the currently shipping Delphi for Windows product to the planned Kylix for Linux product.

    Calm down, take a walk, try decaf!

  • Here is a question though: Is it like other Pascal orriented toolkits I've used that are clunky to use from C/C++ because of the differences between calling conventions and data types? I mean things like converting from C style null terminated strings to Pascal delimited length strings is an inconvenience. It would be a lot better if they have already wrapped things in a layer to make things like that more transparent, although that adds in some extra overhead.

  • I actually used the first Turbo Pascal, v1.0. And it was amazing at the time. Imagine! Doing a complete edit-compile-run cycle in just a few seconds!

    Ah yes, I remember then. I was working in the UCSD lab with UCSD Pascal. Since we "knew" that UCSD Pascal was the best pascal, and since we were working in the very lab that produced it, we considered ourselves on top of the world and in the company of giants. We also considered UCSD Pascal to be fast despite its reliance on p-code (it was ahead of its time).

    Then one of the proctors came in and said "you guys need to look at this". He pulled out a floppy with Turbo Pascal 1.0 and we loaded it up. Up came a simple editor and we typed in a typical standard Pascal program.

    Then we started the compile. And it was done. That fast. We were stunned. Even though some of that speed arose from it compiling to memory instead of floppy, it was still SEVERAL orders of magnitude faster that ANY compiler we had ever seen. We ended up playing with it all day, and never lost our amazement.
  • The amount of waffle on Borland's website about Kylix is remarkable.

    Kylix is a project to develop Linux tools. It is not a product. Furthermore, it is not done. Things can and will change. So, anything Borland had to say would be pure vaporware at this point. I respect them for not going the Microsoft route and talking about things before they are ready.

    This Borland-waffle applies to their help files too. Their website has jack shit, if it weren't for all the private fan sites there would be no online help (unlike MS's several terabytes of documentation on MSDN).

    In my own, personal experience, I have found Borland's help files to be pretty good, and certainly worlds better then Microsoft's. Sure, MS has more volume, but the signal-to-noise ratio sucks. Plus, Borland provides source for their runtimes and a full language definition for Object Pascal in the box. No chance of that for MS Visual Basic!
  • It's a GPL'd Pascal compiler for Linux x86 (and Win32 and OS/2 and...) that is very compatible with Borland Pascal and Delphi - but it's command line only at the moment.

    A frontend for visual development is being created with the Lazarus project.

    Visit www.freepascal.org [freepascal.org] and support the developers! They're trying to port FP to other platforms than x86 to make a tool that is not only available on the strategically important systems... Not that this is wrong, Borland has to make money of it!
  • Being written in Pascal is not a downside. The VCL (under Windows anyway) can be accessed by C++ programs just like any Win32 library. This is how C++ Builder works with compiled VCL from Delphi. I imagine it will be much the same way with Linux.

    -----------

    "You can't shake the Devil's hand and say you're only kidding."

  • I for one plan on buying this thing the day it hits the market. If I can write an application then both OSes could benefit (if my app was worth a crap that is). Also as a developer it would open up my market. I can attempt to sell to more people.
  • The choice of programming tools has no effect on the GPL. You can write GPLed code in Delphi or VB right now.
  • Right now I can not think of anything equavalent to VCLs in the linux world (well beans maybe). IMHO it was the VBX/ActiveX/VCL that made it possible for "ordinary" people to write windows applications that actually did something useful. By adding a component driven application architecture into linux Borland is ushering an new age of linux developement. Now you don't have to be a C guru to write a decent app. Also if database access is simple like Delphi expect this thing to take off big time. I can't wait!

  • I haven't used Delphi in years, and never really used any of Borland's other products, so I read this article on a whim, just to keep up to date, and boy, am I glad I did. This is exactly the kind of article that we need more of -- no marketing hype, no pandering drivel, just straight-forward, honest-to-goodness details. I like it. Good work, Borland.


    Cthulhu for President! [cthulhu.org]
    • "...is Joe Blow linux guy prepared for the intrusion of Windows application economics and is John Doe Windows developer prepared for the linux market?"

    Linux users are more used to having tons of different software out there to do any particular task (seen all the CD players on Freshmeat [freshmeat.net], for example?), so I don't think that an influx of new software, even software ported from Delphi on Windows, is going to have a real impact on the average Linux user's life. Let me rephrase -- the applications themselves will most likely be welcomed and probably get used quite a bit, but the flood of ported apps will not, in itself, be a problem.

    The same thing can be said from the Windows users point of view -- how many windows users need or want many of the tools that are available on Linux? Many of the tools already have Windows equivalents; I can't think of any major tools (or classes of tools) that do not already exist on the Windows platforms, so, once again, Windows users will mainly gain choice. Which is a good thing -- inevitably a windows user will find a great tool that has been ported from Linux to Windows, become curious about it, and learn about Linux that way.

    darren


    Cthulhu for President! [cthulhu.org]
  • Delphi is pretty good at hiding all the diferences. You can specify a range of different calling conventions if you need them. Most data types have a direct equivalent and you can probably find a stack of free tools to do header conversions and suchlike.

    Also, Delphi strings are slightly different from the old pascal-style strings - They are basically reference counted null-terminated strings that can be passed to C/C++ functions just fine.

    I think a lot of the C/C++ compatibility resulted in the first place from Delphi having to be compatible with all of the Windows APIs. Delphi is pretty far removed from the original Pascal langauge both beacuse of this and a lot of programmer productivity enhancements.
  • Don't complain until Britney Spears releases Brinux with the marketing campaign, "Boot me baby one more time"...
  • This sounds like a fine tool and it is great that established companies like Borland are supportin Linux but before we get over-excited, it's worth thinking about whether it really helps address the 'Decent desktop experience on the Free Unices' problem.

    For one thing, the desktop environment efforts on Linux/xBSD are already fragmented and seemingly non-directed. From the user's point of view, both KDE and GNOME are sluggish, ugly Windows knockoffs. For developers, they are Yet Another Set of Toolkits/Component Models/APIs based on inelegant, obtuse cruft such as X11, C++, CORBA... Do we really need, say, another Qt and associated flamewars?

    The more fundamental problem seems to be a sort of conceptual tunnel vision that the major desktop development efforts on Linux seem to share. Perhaps this has to do with the perceived need to 'catch up' with existing popular desktop environments. This may be because few Unix-based desktop environments have been considered something worthy of aspiring to - a problem that doesn't exist on the server side. But even if we imagined KDE or GNOME developed to the point of reasonable stability and responsiveness, what will we have? A toolbar, a start button, a file explorer, a nice desktop water rippling effect, a bunch of un-navigable control panels, endless hierarchal menus, artsy and unreadable 'themes', at best, _parity_ with the painful experience of other desktop environments. Is this really as good as it gets? Will these desktops engender the kind of attachment graphics designers have for their Macs and webmasters have for their ultra-tweaked install of Apache? Will propellerheads and grandmas flock to them, recognizing them as the easiest, most intuitive, powerful ways to interact with a computer? If not, how valuable is it to have another set of tools that help us get there faster?

    -pvg

  • "Professional" tools? (Score:3)

    by jetson123 ( 13128 ) on Friday March 17, 2000 @06:06PM (#1194684)
    The results of the survey indicate that developers are seeking RAD, database enablement, and GUI design - all strong evidence that Linux is ready for mainstream professional application development.

    I, for one, find these kinds of statements by Borland insulting. Linux has "mainstream professional development tools" (Emacs, GNU C/C++, etc.). Those are the kinds of tools professional developers have been using for decades, before PCs or Borland were even around.

    It's not all that different from cameras: lots of people use point-and-shoot cameras for all sorts of business applications, but the true "professional" cameras are still the Nikon F4's and Hasselblads, clunky and slow by consumer standards, but they get the job done in the hands of the professionals.

    Maybe Borland and Microsoft tools have grown up to be professional tools in their own right, for their own market niche (just like there are a lot of high-tech "professional cameras" now, not just manual ones). And they may get some following once more application developers move from Windows to Linux. But I haven't been holding my breath for those kinds of tools on Linux, and I doubt many current Linux developers have either.

  • This is going to have a huge effect on Linux (Score:3)

    by Junks Jerzey ( 54586 ) on Saturday March 18, 2000 @07:23AM (#1194685)
    For Windows, first there was MFC (Microsoft Foundation Classes). Horrible, horrible, hacks, but the MFC DLLs ship with every Windows machine. Then Visual BASIC and Delphi came along and have generally been battling it out, with VB getting more attention.

    Now Borland has a good chance of getting their libraries to ship with many Linux distributions. The result is that you can write pretty flashy UI-oriented applications and distribute them as teeny-tiny executables. Yeah, I know all about Tk and GTK and such, but Borland's stuff is much nicer. All of a sudden, Linux is going to have very nice GUI apps. Borland tech is very good; they may not be crazy hippies, but they're infinitely better than Microsoft.

    Additionally, Object Pascal is a bang-up development language, even without the RAD tools. You have much less muss and fuss than C++, and the compile times for even large projects on any halfway decent machine are effectively zero. It makes gcc seem like a total 1970s dog. I'm hoping Borland will give away the command line OP tools like they have with their C compiler. I'd switch to OP for all low-level development in a second. (Strangley, many of the features of Pascal that C programmers hated back in the C/Pascal wars of 15 years ago are now in C++, most notably VAR parameters (C++ references) and function prototypes.)

  • What Kylix is... (Score:3)

    by Carnage4Life ( 106069 ) on Friday March 17, 2000 @04:25PM (#1194686) Homepage Journal
    From this page [google.com] cached on Google:

    Project Kylix is currently planned to be a Linux component based development environment for two-way visual development of graphical user interface (GUI), Internet, database, and server applications. Plans are for Project Kylix to be powered by a new high-speed native C/C++/Delphi compiler for Linux and will implement a Linux version of the Borland VCL (Visual Component Library) architecture. The Borland VCL for Linux will be designed to radically speed native Linux application development and simplify the porting of Delphi and C++Builder applications between Windows and Linux.
    The Project Kylix design was heavily influenced by the results from the Borland Linux Developer Survey, conducted in July 1999, which generated over 24,000 unique survey submissions. The results of the survey [inprise.com] indicate that developers are seeking RAD, database enablement, and GUI design - all strong evidence that Linux is ready for mainstream professional application development. The Project Kylix development environment is planned to support major Linux distributions including Red Hat Linux and the forthcoming Corel LINUX.

  • Borland is back! (Score:4)

    by cribeiro ( 105971 ) on Friday March 17, 2000 @04:08PM (#1194687)
    I'm a user of Borland products since 1984. I actually used the first Turbo Pascal, v1.0. And it was amazing at the time. Imagine! Doing a complete edit-compile-run cycle in just a few seconds!

    Time gone by, and Borland grew. At some time in the past they had a fairly broad line of compilers: Pascal, C, Basic, Assembler, and even Prolog! Now it's funny to think about the relation between developers and Borland at that time. A lot of developers loved Borland. They had it - fast compilers, support for several programming languages, passable editors and good libraries. Then came Windows.

    I'm not sure how taht happened, but in a few months Borland lost all its momentum. And Microsoft got it right. And that was not only because of MS tactics, but MS got it right in several senses:

    • Microsoft began its TechNet and similar programs. They had the best documentation available. Of course, being the sole provider of the OS helps a lot :-) Also the performance of MS compilers was being enhanced at the same time, so it was a no-brainer for the average C/C++ shop.
    • On the other side, MS got Visual Basic. I know many people dislikes VB, but it was truly the first practical visual development environment. And don't tell me about Gupta SQL Windows and things like that. The design of their competitors was nice, but tools sucked. You need to factor the popularity of VBXs that allowed Joe Programmer to ship Windows apps in a few days.

    Years later, Delphi (and BC++) saved Borland from bankrupt. In my opinion Delphi is another amazing feat. They got everything that was right in the VB concept, and added their own spice. Popularity grew once again. However, all of this was not sufficient to make them a viable alternative to the now gigantic MS monopoly.

    Now we have a Linux version of the works. And I think that Borland can make it happen again. They know how to make it, as shown with Delphi. And I think that their entry will start a flow of activity in the Linux marketplace as not seen before. Let's face it - for a large commecial project, getting all those makefiles and dependencies right is a pain. Also most of the technical factors that were against Borland effort on the Windows market dont exist at all in Linux (see the hidden APIs). It's just a matter of getting it right once again. Given that, I think that they will have a very bright future, while helping Linux to lift one more restriction to win market share in the business side.

  • Prepare (Score:4)

    by earache ( 110979 ) on Friday March 17, 2000 @06:20PM (#1194688) Homepage
    While everyone is excited that a favorite development tool is coming to linux, I'm curious if anyone is thinking forward to what this will do for linux as an OS.

    I've been using Delphi since version 1.0 and I can't, make that won't, imagine myself using anything else because it simply doesn't make economic sense in terms of prototype deployment, time to market, etc. I'm not entirely certain the average slashdot head truly comprehends how powerful Delphi exactly is, and how easy and mildly idiot proof it makes developing.

    With Kylix will come quite a few Windows developers excited to provide their products for both OS's; but is Joe Blow linux guy prepared for the intrusion of Windows application economics and is John Doe Windows developer prepared for the linux market?

    Ironically there is another article on Slashdot regarding MIDI sequencers and audio editing software; which happens to be the two things [inneraktive.com] I've developed in Delphi and am dying to get to Linux as soon as I have kylix in hand. I know several other Delphi developers that feel the same way. I honestly believe that with the release of kylix will come a serious change in the Linux landscape; and are people prepared for that?

    - the sinister mister earache.

  • here [borland.com] instead of wherever the main article was pointing.

    Short summary sentance from the page:

    Kylix is a "Linux component based development environment for two-way visual development of graphical user interface (GUI), Internet, database, and server applications."

Slashdot Top Deals

To the systems programmer, users and applications serve only to provide a test load.

Close