Eternal Idol Birmingham,

OK. When you said you could have written it with asm, I thought it was your choice.
:grin:
Posted on 2004-01-16 05:24:24 by Odyssey

Eternal Idol Birmingham,

OK. When you said you could have written it with asm, I thought it was your choice.
:grin:


No problem, maybe I've expressed wrong, I'm not an English native.
Anyways, its allright.

:alright:
Posted on 2004-01-16 05:39:50 by Eternal Idol Birmingham
VCL isn't really *all* that bad - well, it's built with delphi which (as all borland product these days?) generates pretty bad code, but one can live with that, considering where delphi/bcb is usually deployed. No, the really bad thing about BCB and Delphi is that people link to VCL statically. While I can understand this from the sense of distribution, it's major suckage - the executables would be much smaller with dynamic linkage.
Posted on 2004-01-16 06:16:41 by f0dder

VCL isn't really *all* that bad - well, it's built with delphi which (as all borland product these days?) generates pretty bad code, but one can live with that, considering where delphi/bcb is usually deployed. No, the really bad thing about BCB and Delphi is that people link to VCL statically. While I can understand this from the sense of distribution, it's major suckage - the executables would be much smaller with dynamic linkage.


Maybe it isn't all that bad but it could be SO much better, come on it's written in Delphi.
Should I link it dynamically and then distribute 43243 libraries?
I just don't like it , I will stick to one file.
Posted on 2004-01-16 06:20:32 by Eternal Idol Birmingham
As far as I remember, the VCL itself is only one (or a few) files, and it's what takes up the major bulk of delphi/bcb programs. Other controls probably won't take up too much space and can be statically linked. It's hard to avoid a high footprint for something like the VCL, since it's pretty object oriented with a lot of inheritance... this makes it pretty silly for small projects, but for large GUI projects the overhead does become somewhat smaller - and really it is a thing that only ought to be distributed with dynamic linkage. Imagine statically linked VB programs? :rolleyes:

It's sad that delphi generates such sloppy code, the language itself isn't all that bad. I wouldn't go back to pascal though, even if a number of things in Delphi are nicer than C++ (units, get/set methods automatically invoked for member variable access, ...)
Posted on 2004-01-16 06:27:09 by f0dder
I still don't like VCL at all, I don't need dynamic linking to do all that VCL does by my self, and I still would get an application wich would be 10 times faster and 10 times smaller.
I just find Delphi and Pascal horrible and in this particular case I prefer to do all the CreateWindow or Dialogs that I need.

Just my opinion, VCL sucks, it's slow and large.


:alright:
Posted on 2004-01-16 06:33:31 by Eternal Idol Birmingham

I still don't like VCL at all, I don't need dynamic linking to do all that VCL does by my self, and I still would get an application wich would be 10 times faster and 10 times smaller.

Theoretically, if you used all (or most/a lot) of the functionality of the VCL, your assembly code wouldn't be *that* much smaller. It's pointless to use VCL for small projects, justifiable for medium size projects, and really no problem for large projects. I would certainly think twice before using raw API calls for anything but smallish projects...

As for speed... don't tell me there's much/any performance difference to be felt around the regular GUI stuff. I certainly didn't feel it back on my pmmx-200 (apart from somewhat slightly longer load-times), which again doesn't matter too much for the project sizes VCL-based is intended for.

You do admit it's a lot faster building your GUI parts of a project in Delhi/BCB than raw C/C++ or asm, don't you? :)

As for object pascal, I'd say it's a decent language, but somewhat slower to code in. There's a bit too much type safety (like requiring casts to translate between char/byte), and begin/end could have used curled braces instead. Other than that, I don't really think there's bad stuff in it compared to C++. I still by far prefer C++ though.

Anyway, I tend to do very little GUI programming these days, so I don't deal with vb/mfc/vcl. I'd like something that has the ease-of-use of the delphi form designer buy without requiring a full class library :/
Posted on 2004-01-16 06:52:17 by f0dder
It would be smaller, not a lot, but it will be still smaller, and commonly nobody uses all the VCL in the same project.
Speed? Try the RichEdit control of VCL, it blinks ... even when you just type regular text, try to do the syntax highlit of the iczelion tutorial, impossible.

Of course it's faster with Delphi, that's the only reason why I'm using it (according to my boss).

"Anyway, I tend to do very little GUI programming these days, so I don't deal with vb/mfc/vcl. I'd like something that has the ease-of-use of the delphi form designer buy without requiring a full class library :/"

Me too.
Posted on 2004-01-16 06:57:38 by Eternal Idol Birmingham

and commonly nobody uses all the VCL in the same project.

So very true! - but there's a lot of people using it, and by having a few delphi/bcb applications installed, you'll cover a lot of it - another reason why everybody ought to use dynamic linkage, to save disk and memory speed.


Speed? Try the RichEdit control of VCL, it blinks ... even when you just type regular text, try to do the syntax highlit of the iczelion tutorial, impossible.

Didn't know that! Sure it's not some control configuration that's messed up? I tend to avoid RichEdit like the plague anyway :) - and the syntax highlight stuff from icz' tutorial is a pretty ugly hack even with the original control :P


Of course it's faster with Delphi, that's the only reason why I'm using it (according to my boss).

Yup. If I was to design some big GUI shite, I'd seriously consider Delphi for that part of the work - so I could get it over and done with, and spend more time desiging interesting portions of the app in C/C++/Asm.
Posted on 2004-01-16 07:02:47 by f0dder
Posted on 2004-01-19 21:59:11 by cakmak
Microsoft used BOOST as an internal test during update of VC++7.1. So, it is no surprise that 0% fail on this test. Nothing against MS - just explaining the almost perfect result. In fact it is smart of them to use this code as a measure of fitness.
Posted on 2004-01-19 22:22:39 by bitRAKE

Another alternative, a synthesis of C and asm,Sphinx C-- is also an interesting language.

http://sheker.chat.ru/index_e.htm

Hi Vortex:
The above link seem not working any more. You should update your record with http://c--sphinx.narod.ru/indexe.htm
:cool:
Posted on 2004-01-22 16:33:15 by QS_Ong
The thing about VCL and MFC is all the development time they offer with the ActiveX controls. I'm really no VC++ genius or else I would have figured out how to plop an ActiveX control on a dialog that was created in VB without any MFC and use methods on the control and get back events. It've never seen *ANY* examples of this besides the common controls. I want a simple control (easy to create in VB for testing) and put that in a dialog (or a standard window) and use methods and get events. Now, if someone has a sample on how this is done in MASM or VC++ I would love to check it out. I can't find #$%^ on this!!!
Posted on 2004-02-04 09:53:11 by t-man
If using KOL instead of VCL it's possible to create very compact applications in Delphi (starting at 10kb). The only thing to think of is to use another set of components when designing the GUI. Except from that you will hardly notice any differences. KOL is written in assembly language for maximum speed and minimal size so if you like programming in Delphi but thinks that the executables are too big you really should try it out!

http://xcl.cjb.net/
Posted on 2004-02-04 15:19:08 by Delight
Does KOL allow the same ease of use as VCL? Ie, point-and-click interface, OnButton1Click and such? (I'm mostly interested in the 'standard controls', the more fancy parts of delphi aren't very relevant for me). If so, I might start using Delphi+KOL for my interfaces, and Visual C++ for the core programs :)
Posted on 2004-02-04 15:23:15 by f0dder

Does KOL allow the same ease of use as VCL? Ie, point-and-click interface, OnButton1Click and such?


KOL has it all, well actually, MCK has it all. KOL is a 2MB file containing all the necessary code and objects, and MCK handles the GUI-part.
Posted on 2004-02-05 04:42:36 by Delight


Hi Vortex:
The above link seem not working any more. You should update your record with http://c--sphinx.narod.ru/indexe.htm
:cool:


That link is working without any problem for me. ( Tested at home and office )
Posted on 2004-02-05 05:12:53 by Vortex

Vortex, does sphinx c-- have a hardcore code optimizer?

May I know what is hardcore code optimizer?

To Vortex:
The link sometimes don't work for me. May be my line is slow:( .
Posted on 2004-02-05 08:50:57 by QS_Ong

May I know what is hardcore code optimizer?

Something that generates good code, as opposed to sloppy code like Borland products, or just 'dumb' direct unoptimized output.
Posted on 2004-02-05 09:04:16 by f0dder
hi. some of my best friend that love Delphi are saying that "Microsoft .Net Framework is a copy of Borland VCL and MS steal VCL's Idea and use them in .net framework , Powered by VCL
Now you can have more fun and less trouble with VCL based architecht
Come on programmers! we brought .NET architecht from Borland for your convinience "
is it true?? and what can i answer them?:rolleyes:
Posted on 2004-02-10 23:35:53 by AliMH