Borland to build JBuilder 3 for Linux 99
NavySpy writes "Borland (you know, the guys that changed their name to Inprise and now have changed it back) have recently released JBuilder 3. They are releasing the Windows version first, and then are going to do an all-Java version for Solaris, with a follow on version early next year for Linux. You can read more here on borland.com. They also have a free version of Interbase for Linux, so you can put up a full featured DBMS for free. Nice to see a tools developer targeting Linux. "
Delphi for Linux (Score:2)
Also, one of the Linux sites has had an ongoing survey as to what software people would like to see ported to Linux, and Delphi is way above whatever is in second.
Having worked, like many of you, in multiple languages, I think that Object Pascal represents a great middle ground between the awkwardness of C and the kludginess of Visual Basic. Hopefully, we will see Delphi for Linux and Solaris in the future.
Many people don't realize that the component model for Delphi, the VCL, is what inspired Java Beans and that Borland had a big part in the design of the JB architecture. Linux seems to be lacking such a unified component standard.
Mike
Founder, The Delphi Advocacy Group (www.tdag.org)
http://BestAuctionBuys.com
Oracle 8.0.5 for free. (Score:1)
All-Java version for Solaris? (Score:1)
What about Delphi (Score:1)
What about Borland taking over linux development...and releasing a version of *Delphi* for Linux. That would be cool.
I guess there would be a lot of people who would stick to C++ though...which would be good because my development costs would be 3 times less than theirs
Yay! (Score:1)
My first compiler was Borland Pascal 3.0 and I've liked their tools ever since.
Of course I haven't done much Windows development in the last few years. This might actually get me to buy their stuff again!
Glade (Score:1)
Need a new keyboard? (Score:1)
Glade (long version) (Score:2)
If you run "configure", and run "make", you get a program. Run it and windows appear, they don't do anything. You get to edit the code it wrote (or transplant the window construction into another project) and add events, data, etc. It's a very, very handy tool (I use it to lay out AbiWord's dialogs) and I'd love to send a case of beer to the guy who wrote it.
Glade does more than just lay out widgets. It allows the user to set properties of these widgets through its properties panel window, set and edit named GTK widget styles, and more. Because GTK is pretty darn nifty, Glade is actually constructing widgets on the fly when you add them to your window area. These widgets act like they will in your program, respond to events like they will in your program, and can even take a bit of data right there for a test drive (for example, you can supply example entries for a drop-down list box and see how the pop-down window sizes up). What you see is what you get.
Glade is not a complete development environment, and I'm glad it doesn't try to be. I have XEmacs to do my editing work, and I really don't need another editor I won't use laying around.
I asked for this (Score:1)
I use JBuilder2 all the time, its got good visual-edit/code-edit integration but has crappy performance/reliability at times. I'm pretty sure that this is because JBuilder2 itself was mostly written in Java. Does anybody know if the JB3 will come with the JOVE technology on Linux. That would be cool, maybe the speed will become bareable.
Apologies for being off topic, and a bit troll-like, but I can't pass up this opportunity to bitch about Java. What a flaky, slow, confused, badly documented piece of shit. It's not the language that's the main problem - it's the system libraries (awt/swing/etc). They seem to written without a thought for speed/efficiency and are often broken in arbitrary ways. AWT/Swing with new event model has a great design, but crummy implementation. The alternative was MFC(euch), I'm still glad we went with Java, but I wish I had known about fltk a year ago.
If I see one more fucking student thesis repeating Sun's propoganda wrt C++/java comparison I will scream. When I work in java I miss STL so badly - it takes 500 lines of java to do 50 lines of STL based C++, and the C++ will be much faster and more reliable (compile-time v. run-time errors). It's easier to write truly abysmal code with C++ than with java, and there are hundreds of pitfalls in C++ but you can make the same argument about pascal compared to C - power requires responsibility. Java and pascal are great languages for beginners, but experienced developers prefer to work without training wheels.
Check out fltk (Score:1)
You should definitely take a look at a fast, high quality, cross platform, toolkit. It's not very rich in widgets, but you can write your own, and it comes with a deceptively powerful GUI builder. [easysw.com]
JOVE (Score:1)
www.instantiations.com/javaspeed/jovereport.htm
Yeah, I do know about pizza and JGL. Attempting to do STL without templates just doesn't work too well. If someone wrote a version of stl for pizza though, that would take away a lot of my antagonism towards java. Maybe if I get some spare time...
C++ Builder (Score:1)
I can't think of a single event that would do more to accelerate the development of crucial Linux apps than that.
Of course, this begs the question of which toolkit the vcl will be based upon
How about C++ Builder as well? (Score:1)
benevolent dictators of object pascal (Score:1)
i think the difference with borland has been that they have been willing to develop langauges for the better good. i remember hacking out code learning pascal in cs101 using borland turbo pascal at college and wathced as the language matured....i left pascal and used 'c' (puffs chest out) but come backl to it when delphi was released. In that time pascal v3.0 morphed into object pascal. The differences are significant both language wise (and tool wise). borland aint no microsoft!
yeah owl died :( (Score:1)
jBuilder and cli (Score:1)
A year after the first launch... (Score:1)
nice to see they use the ms and sun shock troops to give the prod a good thrashing before linux version though
cli...very nice (Score:1)
but i would urge all those considering purchasing jBuilder for l*nux to take a look at 'freebuilder' at www.freebuilder.org it's not v1.00 yet but then again jBuilder for l*nux isn't on the shelves and this ones free
Interbase vs. Oracle? (Score:1)
C++ Builder (Score:1)
dev
Yeah ... (Score:1)
dev
Build does NOT use mfc!!! (Score:1)
/dev
Depends on how you define "use". (Score:1)
/dev
Depends on how you define "use". (Score:1)
Yeah. I can't really argue with that I guess. I just didn't like pascal/delphi too much last time i used it. to much like ada. Gack!
dev
Tools? Schmools! (Score:1)
LONG LIVE ED!
Delphi for Linux (Score:1)
I can tell you the story about Borland C++, their former flagship which they abandonded two years ago. If this had been Object Pascal, our company would have been in deep trouble. OK, it wasn't fun but we survived and ported to Visual C++ (yuck).
Conclusion
Delphi for Linux (Score:1)
But to continue why we didn't choose BCB. Can you say OWL? At that time, BCB was not ready for developing large applications. And our trust that Borland would survive and continue to keep up with Microsoft weren't high. Not to mention that their last release of BC++ was one of the buggiest software I have ever used.
And proprietary software doesn't become less proprietary just because it runs on Linux.
Java JBuilder? (Score:1)
JBuilder for Linux: Yaaawn (Score:1)
The GridBagConstraints2 was used to fill a gap in the GridBagLayout initialisation, compare the ctor for GridBagConstraints2 with equivalent code and you'll see what I mean. In addition the source for the class is included with JBuilder so you can simply move it in the package of your application and avoid depending on the JBuilder-specific jars. The new version is much more stable, has improved modules everywhere, including the help system and several Wizards.
Java GUI builders. (Score:1)
Not to write a shameful plug but that's why JBuilder has an actual Java compiler as part of the designer. The code generated is clear and it doesn't contain markers in form of comments. If you edit the code and add your stuff the designer will be still able to read the UI-specific stuff. We call this two-way-tools.
Delphi for Linux (Score:1)
jBuilder and cli (Score:1)
Absolutely ! There's a command line compiler called bmj.exe (Borland Make Java compiler). It compiles java sources from the command line and does automatic dependency checking with minimal recompilation. Try "bmj -p your_package_name_here"
All-Java version for Solaris? (Score:1)
It's not the only free DBMS (Score:1)
I asked for this too (Score:1)
C++ Builder (Score:1)
Very buggy when I was testing it. But showed promise. It also didnt hamstring the programmer with too many features in its initial incarnation.
I like RAD tools when used in parallel with text editors, shortens learning time in the beginning by giving you source examples of gui placement so you dont get bogged down in posistioning of components.
All-Java version for Solaris? (Score:1)
How about C++ Builder as well? (Score:2)
This is the one app I miss in the linux world. I even started writing a version of it myself, but unfortunantly time is not a thing i have a lot of these days (I think that's why I liked it in the first place
Borland/Inprise (Score:1)
Just thought I'd clear that up.
Regards,
Jeremy
VCL is not MFC (Score:1)
The other problem, of course, is that Delphi and C++Builder (and, to stay on topic, JBuilder) are shrink-wrapped commercial software products. And if there's one thing that _has_ to be open source, it's the development tools. As much as I would love for Borland (sorry, Inprise) to release Delphi for Linux, I bet I'd change my mind the first time a library upgrade broke the package and I had to wait months for Borland to fix things.
All that aside, I have to say I'd happily [have my employer] pay the $2500 for a copy of Delphi Client/Server for Linux. I might even buy JBuilder if I can find it within myself to care about Java.
-Graham
Huh?!? Where'd you get that from?!? (Score:1)
"TooOldForThis" writes:
I can -- porting Delphi!
Yup.
What?!?
What on Earth gave you that bizarre idea??? The VCL is written in Object Pascal, yes -- and MFC is a C++ library, which Delphi can't use. What Delphi gives you access to is the "good" old raw Win-API, as used in C (non-++) programming; and that is what the VCL is built on.
If you fear MFC influence (I would), then what you should be wary of might be, ironically, C++ Builder -- because it can use MFC (and actually comes bundled with it, I think), whereas Delphi does -- and can -- not.
On the contrary, a raw API like GNOME's seems more suited to build one's own class library on top of, in stead of fighting with, or at least "going against the grain of", another class library -- like QT -- that almost certainly isn't designed along the same lines as the one you want to implement.
Christian R. Conrad
Christian R. Conrad
MY opinions, not my employer's - Hedengren, Finland.
Depends on how you define "use". (Score:1)
"Builder apps can call mfc crap, which is why it ships with mfc, but builder can't and doesn't use it."
No, it doesn't use it in its own IDE -- but linking to it in apps you build with it sure falls within what *I*, at least, would call 'using' it.
"VCL and MFC can coexist, but Builder itself only uses VCL. We're safe.
Naah. If 99% of all C++B-built *applications* use MFC, then either the port of C++B *without* MFC would be worthless, or we'd see a helluva lot of clamoring for a port of MFC, too. Fortunately, it is of course nowhere near 99% (anybody have any idea about the actual proportion?), but still: That *could* change. With C++B, we are *not* as "safe" from MFC as we are with Delphi.
Christian R. Conrad
Christian R. Conrad
MY opinions, not my employer's - Hedengren, Finland.
Yes, I knew that. Didn't I *say* so? (Score:1)
Christian R. Conrad
Christian R. Conrad
MY opinions, not my employer's - Hedengren, Finland.
Depends on how you define "use". (Score:1)
No no; in that sense, you're quite right, of course. That's why I said that "fortunately, it _isn't_ anywhere near 99%" (or words to that effect). Quite probably, as you say, it's closer to 0%... I wouldn't know, since I've never seen, nor will I ever*, _any_ MFC code in apps built in _my_ favourite Borland application builder.
My point was only that since it _can_ be done, there _is_ a possibility that somebody, somewehere, is doing it. In that sense, C++B _is_ more of a "risk of MFC contamination" than Delphi, where that risk is ZERO*.
Can you agree to _that_ tiny little point at least, which is all I was trying to say? Since you didn't explicitly admit that "use" doesn't necessarily mean what you used (Heh!
Christian R. Conrad
*) Unless they do something really stupid to it, in a future version...? Naah, may the Ghods preserve us!
Christian R. Conrad
MY opinions, not my employer's - Hedengren, Finland.
Wow, you've noticed InterBase ALREADY? (Score:2)
It's not like it's been available for almost a *year* or so (several months before all the other commercial-RDBMS vendors even began to come on board), or as if I ever *said*, right here on
Oh, wait -- it IS exactly like that!
(See "my" URL above? Yeah, I changed it a few months back -- to keep it current when InterBase re-arranged their site; before that, it pointed to where IB4/Linux was available for download *then*!)
Sheesh, folks, don't you even read your *own* damn site?!?
Christian R. Conrad
Christian R. Conrad
MY opinions, not my employer's - Hedengren, Finland.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Java GUI builders. (Score:1)
Except the default code it generates is UGLY and it is very hard to modify if you ever get out of the enviroment. And the Visual Cafe greats event listeners for you? Arghhh...
Nothing beats a piece of paper and a pencil to great a good layout. Sure, typing all the
Of course for me GUI is a small part. RAD tools sure help if you do it every day, and do not care if anybody will ever have to modify, maintain or rewrite it....
Email them. (Score:1)
If Borland does a port to Linux then I feel they could really shake up the industry.
IMHO yeah, with emphasis. If they'd had Delphi out before Visual Basic (which IMHO is sadly inferior), they'd now own the windows RAD tool market. They may yet own the Linux RAD tool market if they move fast enough. They won't just have a time-to-market advantage, but also a we're-not-Microsoft advantage. And AFAIK Delphi is already very well-liked in massive, hellish, elephantine, necropolistic MIS departments.
If anyone from Borland is reading this, do the port and I will buy an enterprise edition the week it is released.
I've emailed them, and I got a vague response. If they get more requests, maybe they'll listen more closely. IMHO the fact that they've released JBuilder is a good sign that they're on the ball with this.
I don't use C++ Builder any more, except in contract work I do for an ex-employer. I'm not so fond of the RAD thing on the whole. Still, if you are doing RAD, C++ Builder/Delphi are as good as it gets. In particular, the VCL (which has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with MFC; I've looked at the source for both) is abstract enough (unlike MFC) that it wouldn't have to be broken very badly on an interface level if it were ported.
"Once a solution is found, a compatibility problem becomes indescribably boring because it has only... practical importance"
Builder VCL == Delphi VCL (Score:1)
Last I saw the source (Builder version 1, Delphi 2) the two VCL's were identical ObjectPascal code. Builder can compile ObjectPascal just fine; I've written VCL controls in ObjectPascal and compiled and used them in Builder. At an old job I used mostly Builder but sometimes Delphi, and so I wrote VCL things in ObjectPascal so I could use 'em in both.
The MFC thing isn't true, anyway. As many others have said, the VCL is its own thing from the ground up, based directly on the API.
"Once a solution is found, a compatibility problem becomes indescribably boring because it has only... practical importance"
Free clone (Score:1)
There is a clone of JBuilder2, called FreeBuilder.
Haven't used it, but it boasts the same features, and is available for Linux as well as Win32.
Homesite is www.freebuilder.org, but is unresponsive today. Check FreshMeat.
Java JBuilder? (Score:1)
I've been using JBuilder2 for some time now, and it does, in fact, seem to be written in Java - well, at least parts of it are. In a quick look through the dir structure, there are some
At this time, it's definitely platform bound, but, unless it relies heavily on JNI, a Solaris Java should be run-anywhere - unless Sun has embraced and extended Java in it's own favor.
Completely portable - as in Win32 as well? (Score:1)
Maybe Linus was wrong in his assertion that Java was promissing, but got overhyped on it's portability.
Now if only it ran as fast as native code.. Hmm maybe TransMeta will see to that.
I was beginning to wonder... (Score:1)
Inprise? (Score:1)
I mean what a stupid name INPRISE. I've always respected Borland for offering an alternative to M$ tools, but what a crummy name.
Interbase vs. Oracle? (Score:1)
However, it runs out of grunt pretty quick once you start getting into applications dealing with around a GB of data, intensive transaction processing, and requirement for fast batch throughput, i.e. enterprise-level applications. I've worked with both in medium and large sized companies, and speak from painful experience.
Oracle leaves Interbase for DEAD performance-wise on every other OS including various Unices, and is much more extensible and flexible due to tools such as PL/SQL, etc.
Oracle charge like wounded bulls for support, software and consulting. They won some award for the rather dubious achievement of outperforming Microsoft Product Support Services (that particular bar is EXTREMELY low), but were mentioned in the article as being even more expensive.
Oh, and the Oracle front end tools SUCK. DEsigner/2000 generates form and report PL/SQL which fails the database engine's syntax checking, Developer/2000 is the clunkiest visual development environment I've ever seen. This is MHO, but it is shared by a number of Oracle consultants with whom I have worked.
The RDBMS is reasonably slick, though.
Delphi is the moral equivalent of J++ - NOT (Score:1)
What do you mean by this? As Sun would have it (and the courts agreed to a significant extent), Microsoft put J++ out to attempt to wrest control of the Java initiative away from its open proponents (more truthfully, away from Sun) by "polluting" it with MS proprietary features and extensions.
Are you really trying to convince us that Borland put out Object Pascal to stop those free software fiends threatening its domination of the software market with freeware/open source Pascal? If so, see your doctor and get your medication adjusted.
Crap. Borland put Object Pascal and Delphi out as Windows development tools, competing with other Windows development tools, something which they actually do extremely well.
This is GREAT news! (Score:1)
Delphi for Linux (Score:1)
I think most Delphi developers are so happy with Delphi they would rather have their clients reboot several times a day due to an inferior platform than use gcc.
That locks an enourmous number of companies out of Linux because its not the Office suites that are the issue. It is the billions of dollars of custom software and inhouse apps - the business logic - not the office fluff that will hold the Linux explosion back.
If they could port the VCL to use either QT or GTK as a compile option would be nice. Also we need the BDE.
Welcome Borland because GUI tools help Linux (Score:1)
A previous poster had the opinion that GUI's were not important. IMHO he couldn't be more wrong. True, it is the behind the scenes "command line interface" -able OS components which are the best foundation, but a CLI or character-oriented interface effectively uses just 2% of the available screen space at a time.
As an example of this, while I am old enough to remember and have enjoyed text only (e.g. command line) games, does any one really think that games like Quake or DOOM aren't successful without being effective "graphical user interfaces?"
Second point. Although I won't wasted the space to list them, many major software packages out there were developed using Borland's development tools, which have been top-notch since the late '80's. While their announcement only discusses JBuilder (I use their C+++ tools), this still offers value to the Liinux community because there is a huge pool of software developers who can be more productive in a Borland IDE than in just about any other IDE (Integrated Development Environment) becuase of outright familiarity with the tool-set. (I have begun using other Linux IDEs, BTW.)
One more opinion. My hope --which I intend to communicate to Borland -- is that the most important thing they can do is provide top-tier support for using the existing standard libraries in Linux rather than coming in with their own. If they do this, I will be able easily rebuild my WinTel Apps in Linux. If I can come up with an e-mail address, I will post it later in this thread.
Other Vendors Tools (Score:1)
Interbase vs. Oracle? (Score:1)
Thank you.
A year after the first launch... (Score:2)
Java GUI builders. (Score:1)
My 0.02 cents..
- nr
How about C++ Builder as well? (Score:1)
I asked for this (Score:1)
For 1.1 we looked at Visual Age, but decided it was too slow and big (64Megs min!), didn't support inner classes and had an *interesting* interface. Anyway, by this stage we'd invested too much time, effort and code into Visual Cafe. We knew its bugs, we didn't want to switch to a whole new load of bugs
My current place has a mandated standard of J/Builder. Nobody seems to like it much, and now that I've moved from the horrors of Java GUI development, to the pleasures of servlet development, I've switched to using XEmacs for everything. It's reliable, and does everything I need. In general I'd say that if you're not developing GUIs stick to either, that vi, or codewright, or something. Even if I was developing GUIs still, I have to say I'd be tempted to stay with Emacs. Less time spent fighting the tool's idiotic idea of how to do things, is more time spent productively.
What's JOVE?
_____________________________________
Java's a nice language, and on the server I think it's lovely. There's no way I'd switch to Perl, C/C++, or even Python for the sort of stuff I'm doing now. However the AWT has been, and probably always will be broken. The code is shit. Javasoft never seem to fix anything until about a year later EVEN WHEN you give them the fix. Swing has a nice design, granted (though even there, there are some braindeadisms), but why didn't they just ditch the entire AWT and start from scratch. Uggh. As for the implementation...apparently recently they've actually started optimising it. Maybe it will end up as good as really badly written MFC code. Maybe... After a while you do start to wonder whether the only thing worse than a Microsoft programmer, is a Sun programmer. Sigh. We need an open source project to rewrite the windowing system so that it works. Any takers?
You do now about JGL, don't you? It's basically STL implemented in Java. There's also a group in Australia (Pizza I think) who developed templates for Java. For that matter it's a nobrainer to implement oneself, and a more efficient version than C++'s as well (use casts).
Cian
QT, GTK--, Java, etc (Score:1)
Personally I think applets always were a bit of a stupid idea, made more so by the crap JVMs on all browsers. Writing an applet that works across all of them is an interesting exercise in futility. Shame really.
Cian
JBuilder for Linux: Yaaawn (Score:2)
Even so, it's probably the best commercial Java IDE available for Win 9x/NT. And, hey, it's no worse than any of the other commercial, shrink-wrapped programs I've used on the Windows paltform. But, then, that's why I'm using Linux now.
If folks really want a Java IDE for Linux, I recommend going with one of the pure Java solutions such as NetBeans or Simplicity. There are plenty of them out there. Yup, they all have problems. NetBeans frequently crashes when you load the help facility, for example. But, hey, that's just as good as the JBuilder program has ever been, and NetBeans is free for non-commercial use. At least you're not paying for the privilege of being crapped upon.
Okay, okay, JBuilder for Linux is good because the PHB's think commercial, shrinkwrapped software is all that matters. And, unfortunately, we live in a world where the opinions of morons are increasingly the only opinions that matter. But I think the rest of us are better off using the Development Tool of the New Millennium(DTNM):
DTNM Features:
- Cross-Platform
- Works with C, C++, Java, Lisp, Perl, BASIC, Pascal, Ada, and just about any other language you care to name!
- Quick to load; memory-efficient
- Available in more styles than you can count
- Available for *NO COST* on every platform; sometimes it's even *free*!
That's right: DTNM is none other than the good ol' text editor. The tried and true solution used by professionals for decades. Although some of us were temporarily led astray by flashy GUI RAD tools, most of us very quickly realized that the cost of those tools is greater than their benefit.
You not only have to buy and learn them, you have to learn to work around them, learn to get past their quirks, learn to undo the things they do automatically which you don't want them to . . . Eventually, you realize that you're saving maybe 15 minutes of work by using them, then spending the rest of your coding time fighting against 'em.
They can have their JBuilders and their other visually oriented, rapid-application-prototyping, integrated development platforming, developer-stupifying, coder-hobbling, hacker-hating tools. I'll stick with my trusty text editor, thanks.
And guess what? Text editor users will code circles around those "RAD" dudes and dudettes every day of the week.
So thanks, Inprise/Borland, but no thanks. This is one coder who, regardless of the flashy coding tools paraded in front of him, is going to stick with the tool that works.
-Joe
Borland (Score:1)
I used to use Java, but its beans kept bunging up my machine, so now I just drink Tea and program C instead. What all this cross platform rubbish, if it ain't free source, and doesn't compile on a POSIX platform. I don't waste my time with it.
The only true cross-platform application is a free source one.
Java JBuilder? (Score:1)
Thanks!
All-Java version for Solaris??? (Score:2)
If someone could help clear this up for me I would appricate it because I've been working in Java for almost 3 years now and I am still using NEdit & make because nothing out there is worth the effort (and/or available in Linux). Any comments on JBuilders of the past would also be helpful.
All-Java version for Solaris??? (Score:1)
JBuilder is firt 'cause it's easy! (Score:1)
Glade? (Score:1)
Where does it fit in? Does anyone that'as tried
it have an opinion of it?
Java not so independant - nothing is! (Score:1)
The VM has to be written for each platform, in order for the Java to run. In a simple marketing speech that's all that would need to be done. However, writing a virtual machine is not a walk in the park, especially when the platforms have extremely different chararteristics.
The next step is to get the IDE and windowing stuff working. This is the area that you were talking about. It's sort of platform independant, but not really. There's a lot of work that goes into making sure an IDE works, and often the existing code has to be modified and made more platform independant.
Smalltalk is a VM language that has been platform independant for years, but the same problems exist. You can develop on NT, 95, whatever, and run it on AIX, for example. However, the socket code on AIX is implemented differently by the OS than in Windows (for example). So you end up with platform specific code.
The trick is to make the platform specific code exist in the IDE so that the users are not exposed to it. Of course, that's never completely true...
I'm positive that the big commercial Java IDE's will be available on Linux in the very near future. It will be sweet having VisualAge Java for Linux...
Dozer
"The dumber people think you are, the more surprised they're going to be when you kill them."