Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Programming IT Technology

Borland Releases Kylix 3.0 for Delphi and C++ 266

Posted by michael from the if-it's-pretty-it-must-be-better dept.
An anonymous reader writes "Looks like Borland is giving us Kylix for C++ after all. Kylix 3.0 is available in Open, Professional, and Enterprise versions. Time to start banging out those CLX apps! The Register also has a story about this."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Borland Releases Kylix 3.0 for Delphi and C++ More

Borland Releases Kylix 3.0 for Delphi and C++

Comments Filter:

  • Correction to the Register Story (Score:5, Informative)

    by fm6 ( 162816 ) on Tuesday July 23, 2002 @10:29AM (#3937430) Homepage Journal
    The writer seems to think that Kylix 3 will be a C++ replacement for Kylix 2. Kylix 3 will support C++ in addition to the existing feature set.
  • I wonder how seemless the Delphi and C++ will be. I also wonder if you can use the GNU C++ compiler for the C++ part, or only the Borland C++ compiler.
    • Kylix 3 will be 2 IDEs, one for C++ and one for Delphi. But I think you can make components in one IDE/lenguage and use it in the other.
      Of Course, the c++ code will compile in Kylix3/C++ and in CBuilder, and the OPascal code will compile in Kylix3/delphi and in Delphi
    • From the Borland Kylix 3 FAQ

      Q: What development languages does Kylix 3 support?

      Once installed, Kylix 3 delivers two separate IDEs--one for use with the Delphi language and one that supports C/C++. This support enables Kylix developers to provide solutions in the language that suits them or the language that is appropriate for the given project. Both IDEs take advantage of the sophisticated CLX architecture and each has corresponding support for crossplatform development with a Borland product for the Windows platform: Delphi language with Delphi, and C/C++ with
      C++Builder.

      Q: Can I use standard Linux development tools along with Kylix 3?

      Yes. For example, use build tools such as Make files or Ant, and editors such as vi or Emacs.

      http://borland.com/kylix/pdf/kyl3_faq.pdf

      So, looks like no GCC-support...

      • GCC and borland (Score:5, Interesting)

        by johnjones ( 14274 ) on Tuesday July 23, 2002 @11:00AM (#3937668) Homepage Journal
        ok borland have been shipping their CPP compiler for a while on linux (nothing new)

        what this release does I would think is link aganst the CLX to do the GUI stuff

        and add their CPP IDE (which is actually visual and drag and drop unlike microsofts which is just a text editor but they call it visual...)

        now if they where useing STANDARD CPP why should using GCC be impossible (I suspect they have a few broken things in terms of standard support just like gcc has a few broken things) and the fact that CPP changes every meeting does not help but it would be nice if they said what gcc would require to do this
        (I am not talking about opening up CLX just linking your code with it useing gnu tools)

        borland selling in effect libs and a IDE would be a good thing IMHO

        regards

        john jones

    • You can already find out how seemless the Object Pascal/C++ integration will be, Borland C++ Builder [borland.com]

      I've used BCB, and it's a quality product. It's not as clean as Delphi, but some PHB's I've seen get scared when you tell them you're going to write software in *shock* something other than C/C++.

      When it comes to working with databases it's just hard to beat the usefullness and quality of the Borland database components. You just have to do so much less work when you use them.

    • If the behavior on Windows is any indication, Delphi and C++ work very well together.

      As for gcc/g++, I don't that will be possible. I don't know Kylix but I do know C++Builder (though only with VCL, not with CLX), and it uses a number of extensions to C++ such as properties.

      • Perhaps more important, on the C++ side, is the general fact that code compiled with one C++ compiler is not likely to work with code generated by a different compiler. C++ specifies the use of name mangling, but doesn't specify how that is to be implemented. So all your class names and so on are represented in some compiler-specific way in the shared libraries, making them inaccessible to programs compiled with a different C++ compiler, unless the makers of the two compilers have gotten together and somehow agreed on exactly how to do the name mangling (which has not happened to date, that I've heard of).

        I can't speak for C support, but the failure of Borland C++ to support the GNU compiler is inevitable, and not anyone's fault, except maybe Bjarne Stroustrup's.
        • ...have gotten together and somehow agreed on exactly how to do the name mangling

          Well, it's not only name mangling, but also how exceptions are handled, how memory is (de)allocated, etc. A C++ ABI is more than just name (de)mangling.

          OTOH, there is an ongoing effort to define a common ABI for C++, and GCC 3.x uses that: see here [codesourcery.com] for more info.

    • Yeah that would be cool. Being able to compile your Kylix C++ projects with a makefile/autoconf system and assorted Kylix libraries/components/whatever without needing the complete IDE/RAD environment.

      Although I wouldn't turn up my nose at the Borland compiler, it's a fast one, and it produces tight and good code.

    • I had asked this question some time ago (a bit over a year ago) of a Borland developer in a forum where the subject of C++ Builder for Linux was a topic.

      The long and the short of his answer was that we really can't expect a whole heckuva lot. The developer stated that it was not likely to be highly interoperable with conventional Linux development languages and tools. Certainly importing will be possible, but you couldn't expect, for example, gdb to be very successful with it, nor would it be likely that gcc or g++ be able to link with libraries or object files that were created with C++ Builder for Linux. Further, because C++ Builder extends the C++ language to accomodate certain features, it will not be possible to compile C++ Builder source code with g++.

      I hate being the bearer of bad news (I found it discouraging, at any rate), but I'm just repeating what I was told by a Borland developer. As I said, this was about a year ago, so if there is more up-to-date info on this topic from an authorized source, I am sure I'm not the only one here who would be interested in hearing it.

  • Delphi? (Score:4, Funny)

    by AccUser ( 191555 ) <[ku.oc.esoat] [ta] [ghm]> on Tuesday July 23, 2002 @10:31AM (#3937445) Homepage
    I don't know about Delphi, but most of our code is developed in Delhi.
  • Personally I don't see why this item is such news. IIRC Borland always said they would support C++ at some later date, and now they are.

    Now we just have to wait for really poor UI#s like all of the early Deplhi ones...
  • From the Register article: "Command-line tools get the job done at a low-level, but these tools have not been easy to use. You have several console windows open to build and debug [an application]," said product manager for RAD solutions John Ray Thomas.

    Since when is having multiple xterms "not easy to use"?

    • Re:amusing quote (Score:2, Insightful)

      by jpvlsmv ( 583001 )
      This guy is obviously not an emacs user.

    • Re:amusing quote (Score:2, Insightful)

      by DearSlashdot ( 592493 )
      Since when is having multiple xterms "not easy to use"?

      How about for people who are still learning how to code? Oh, I forgot, real 1337 linux hackers never went through that phase, they came out of the womb with their knowledge.

      All other things being equal, an integrated RAD environment will very often shorten time to code and debug a project. It is definitely easier to use a RAD tool like Delphi than just a text editor and command-line tools. For some people, it may not be that much different. For others, that may be the difference between getting into programming and not.

      Oh, I forgot again, you don't want those people in your precious Linux world.

      • Re:amusing quote (Score:2, Insightful)

        by Peter La Casse ( 3992 )
        How about for people who are still learning how to code?

        For them, nothing is easy to use, since coding is full of new concepts that they don't understand yet.

        Using multiple xterms is not more difficult than using multiple windows within an IDE, and both require the multiple window concept in order to display different files simultaneously.

        Now, coding in a single window, closing one file in order to view another - that's more difficult / less productive.

        • Re:amusing quote (Score:2, Insightful)

          by DearSlashdot ( 592493 )
          For them, nothing is easy to use, since coding is full of new concepts that they don't understand yet.

          I think you are drawing a too black-and-white distinction here. The fact is, someone learning understands things to varying degrees. Using a tool like delphi that 1) has excellent integrated debugging, 2) has excellent integrated, context-sensitive documentation, and 3) has excellent intellisense shortens that learning curve by taking what they know and making it easy for them to access the documentation and declarations, and extend their current knowledge. If they were completely in the dark, neither command-line nor RAD would be much of a help. But that's not the reality for most people (at least not for very long).

          Take Delphi. I want to use an object. I type the object's name, dot. Up pops a box with all of the properties and methods, in order of inheritance, with their parameter declarations. I can instantly see what options I have, which give me a great deal of insight into what this object does. If I need more, I press F1, and the help takes me to the object or property that I am on. Functions work the same. Type [function]( and up pops the declaration, so you can see exactly what you need to send this. Hit F1, and...you get the point.

          I find myself relying on Delphi's intellisense features to help me code because it reduces typos and is a lot faster. And that's just one feature. A good RAD environment is extremely useful for both newbies and veterans.

          This is less about difficulty than it is a matter of efficiency and expense. It costs more time, effort, and mental overhead (for most people, there are always exceptions) to work with multiple windows and command-line tools than with an integrated environment. I would argue that a great many, if not most, people would find that the benefits of a well-designed RAD tool are worth the costs ($ and time to learn how to use it properly).

          • But when do the training wheels come off? Either you learn to adapt to new environments easily, or you use an environment that will always be there and will always provide what you need it to do.

            While you can rely on a language, you shouldn't need to rely on the tool. Especially proprietary tools.

            This is probably one reason a lot of really good developers prefer the unix tools, mostly emacs or vi rather than the latest fad, because a fad is exactly what it is. One year its C++ and Visual Studio, the next year its Java, now its .NET and C#. Yet Unix people are still using the same tools they've always used, emacs or vi, and just drop in a new compiler and extend the syntax rules in the editor for the new programming language. On proprietary systems, developers purchase a new system.

            So I think you're right when saying that developing in a "visual" environment is easier and you can catch on to programming quicker. But I believe that investing some more time into a "unix" tool is more valuable for your programming career. Actually, this isn't my idea--something I read on USENET.

            And that's why I am spending time learning emacs. Because I don't think I'm wasting my time.

  • Free Download (Score:5, Informative)

    by kh0ng ( 594312 ) on Tuesday July 23, 2002 @10:38AM (#3937501)
    heise [1] writes that there is a free version of Kylix [2] avaiable within the next few days. Its free and may only be used to develop Open Source applications.

    [1] http://www.heise.de/newsticker/data/hos-23.07.02-0 00/ [heise.de]

    [2] http://www.borland.com/kylix/open/index.html [borland.com]

    • Re:Free Download (Score:2, Informative)

      by nvrrobx ( 71970 )
      It's not really for only developing "Open Source" applications - it's restricted to GPL licensed apps. The BSD license is also an Open Source license, but apparently isn't allowed under the Free version of Kylix.
      • One could release their code under the GPL and BSD licenses. That would solve that problem. Under problem would be if you wanted to use an "Open Source" license that is more restrictive than the GPL.
        • reading above comment, it seems that perhaps I'm wrong, if they link to a gpl'd library, must be gpld, can't dual license it.
          • if they link to a gpl'd library, must be gpld, can't dual license it.

            If you link to a GPL library, the combination of the program and the library as a whole must be distributed under the GPL. There's nothing wrong with offering the code under a BSD (no-ad) license; it would only have an effect if someone rewrote it to not use Kylix or if someone had the proprietary version.

    • Re:Free Download (Score:3, Interesting)

      by sg_oneill ( 159032 )
      Actually it's been available for some time....
      I have the installer for it around somewhere, but I'm yet to fiddle with it yet for want of time. If it's anything like V1, it may have many of the wonderful library objects of the full version missing.... Sometimes I think that borland confuses free software for shareware.. *sigh* It's a shame though as Delphi/Kylix truely is a joyous language to program in.

      • Sometimes I think that borland confuses free software for shareware..

        Really? Shareware has nag screens. I haven't seen any nag screens in Kylix 2 yet. Care to elaborate? Kylix OE appears to be a free version of Kylix Pro to me.

        -Brent

        • nononono. I ofcourse presume that they removed the nag-like GPL screens of compiled apps generated from Kylix 1 in ver2? Did they? Borland *treats* the GPL as if its a second class of software. Principally the free-clx libraries are highly crippled compared to the non-free library... Implication.. Shareware.

  • Kylix is good. Kylix is great. (Score:5, Informative)

    by mojogojo ( 577421 ) on Tuesday July 23, 2002 @10:39AM (#3937511) Homepage
    I've actually used Kylix 2.0 Open Edition to cross-compile a shareware game I've been working on in Delphi 6. It's very convienent to have one set of source code, and simply re-compile with Kylix for Linux distribution! (Yes, avoiding Windows API calls and such helps... plus I'm using JEDI-SDL [sourceforge.net] (Simple DirectMedia Layer) for graphic/sound cross-platform stuff). Perhaps now instead of people saying, you can't develop cross-platform games with Delphi you should use C++... I can simple agree (instead of arguing and pointing out that Kylix is cross-platform) and say, sure, I could do that and use the same compiler I've been using all along... leaving certain code in Delphi, but re-writting parts in C++ (just for fun) but no, I don't have to use C++ it's just a language - I prefer Kylix 3.0 for my development environment!

  • If they could get this used in schools... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by FyRE666 ( 263011 ) on Tuesday July 23, 2002 @10:40AM (#3937521) Homepage
    This would be a major reason for schools on tight budgets to turn to Linux for computer programming classes! Why pay for the Microsoft tools (and tax) when this is available? Seems the LTSP folks should look into this...
    • First, MS is giving away the c++ stuff so it would be hard to turn away from that. (They do this for us anyways...) Second, from reading the article I was surprised to learn that it is "difficult" to program without a GUI.

      <BITCH>
      Damn, I must be a bigger freak than I thought. I find it much easier to use emacs and a makefile. dbx is a bit clunky but come on, is this stuff really that difficult? How come students freak out if they have to actually type something rather than click on it.
      </BITCH>

      More importantly, how come this makes it to slashdot, but this other article [theregister.co.uk] at The Register does not? Life isn't fair....

  • two powerful object-oriented languages in on development solution

  • Neverwinter editor? (Score:1, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward
    I know they haven't even released a client yet, but Bioware told us that they couldn't port the NWN toolset because there is no borland c++ builder for Linux.

    Now there is. Anyone think they'll port it after the client?
  • I looked all over the Kylix website, and failed to locate any screenshots for their product. What gives?

    Yes, I know I can download a Trial, if I go through the registration process... but I just wanted to look at it.

    I've never heard of a product page without product images. Wierd. :-/

    Anyone have a link?
  • Is there standard command line compiler in Kylix? Is it possible to compile existing programs - for example Linux kernel - with it?
    It will be nice if gcc wouldn't be only choice.

  • tricked (Score:1, Informative)

    by aXi ( 6533 )
    I feel tricked I went to the Borland site to try to download, foudn out I had to register. Only to find out after registering that only version two is downloadable..
  • Borland's only a couple years late.

    Good try, anyway.

    RHIDE [rhide.com] had me pretending to be using Turbo C++ for the longest time.
  • DataCAD is written in Delphi. I wonder how hard a port would be?

  • This also affects NWN. (Score:4, Interesting)

    by rasjani ( 97395 ) on Tuesday July 23, 2002 @11:11AM (#3937757) Homepage
    Never Winter Nights gameeditor for linux hasnt been released because of this. It was build with c++ builder but they couldnt release it for linux because they didnt have Kylix yet to allow. Yew! Wonder who fast isle can provide the editor ;))
    • Wonder who fast isle can provide the editor ;))

      isle? You mean Black Isle? They have nothing whatever to do with NWN...it was produced by Bioware, and published by Infogrames.

      It would be cool indeed if they port the NWToolset. My fingers are crossed, but I don't expect it anytime soon; the Live Team is pretty busy squashing bugs at the moment...
      • My fault, true, i meant Bioware. Somehow i allways thougt that they are same company, where Black Isle is the coding team and Bioware the marketing one..
        • hehe, nope you've got it backwards. For the BG series, Bioware developed, and Black Isle (a division of Interplay) published/marketed. However, for NWN Bioware dumped Interplay, so now Black Isle and Bioware are completely separate now (although Black Isle is using Bioware's old Infinity engine to create Icewind Dale 2).
    • Actually, Kylix use a new component library (CLX), so they can't actually 'port' the toolset, which was written using VCL or whatever the old libs was called. Well, not easily.

  • Kylix CLX Library is GPL (Score:1, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward
    hosted on Sourceforge http://freeclx.sourceforge.net/
  • Grrrrrr.....
    anyhows

    C++ looks good, C Builder has always had far better debuging tools than Delphi, I hope Kylix C++ has decient debugging.

    The professional version now has a postgres driver, there was a serious lack of DB drivers in Kylix 1 professional.

    Kylix 2 had an odd dependency on Wine I hope thats fixed now.

    Looks like it's time to upgrade that Kylix 1 Pro box set I've got sat on the shelf...

  • exporting the project to GNU makefile....

    several shortcuts and completion style things

    debugging spawn processes, connecting to running processes. Almost anything debugging related it appears

    dataaware compents such as labels (!), edit boxes, listboxes...

    and a lot of other nice features.

    No complaints, they are trying to sell it :)
  • Reading the Register's [theregister.co.uk] article I came across the bizarre phrase "GNU Perl toolkit". I have never heard of this toolkit. A google search of the exact phrase "GNU Perl toolkit" returns nothing. The FSF's page on Perl [gnu.org] has nothing mentioning any sort of toolkit, whereas their page on Java [gnu.org] has many projects listed.

    A search of google did reveal however that there is a shocking number of companies who seem to believe that there is something called "GNU Perl" including apparently IBM [ibm.com]. I'm not holding my breath for RMS to spend any of his time correcting this widespread inaccurate credit of Perl to the GNU project.

  • Maybe this was just me, but when I last tried Kylix 2 I found it incredibly slow and buggy. This is such a shame, as Delphi is excellent. I put this down to it being a winelib app, is this still the case? Can anyone who's used it for serious work tell me how it holds up?

    thanks -mike

  • We're close with this. In some glorious future, there will be a C++Builder that doesn't care if it's running under Linux, 'Doze, or OS X for that matter.
    While we're at it, the groovy IDE is nice, but making all of the plumbing interchangeable is a Good Thing.
    Don't mind paying for well thought-out product, just don't want the blood-on-goatskin experience of dealing with Redmond.
    I guess CodeWarrior specializes in that sort of platform gymnastics, but their pricing for the Palm version didn't excite a purchase out of me...
    Anyway, I had gaffed off the upgrade from C++Builder 5 in anticipation of this...

Slashdot Top Deals

Round Numbers are always false. -- Samuel Johnson

Close