BorlandTalk.com Borland discussion newsgroups   Archives   FAQ   Search   Memberlist   Usergroups   Register   Profile   Log in to check your private messages   Log in  Next compiler: CLI capable? Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next          BorlandTalk.com Forum Index -> C++ Builder (Non-Technical) View previous topic :: View next topic   Author Message vortic Guest Posted: Mon Oct 23, 2006 8:28 pm    Post subject: Next compiler: CLI capable? In the next BDS or TurboC++ release: 1. Will it be able to compile using CLI language? 2. Please tell us, will it compile at least 85% of current Boost? Yes, I know they are working on #2, but it would be nice to get some real info on this. Back to top vortic Guest Posted: Mon Oct 23, 2006 8:30 pm    Post subject: Re: Next compiler: CLI capable? "vortic" <vortic (AT) users (DOT) sourceforge.net> wrote in message Quote: 1. Will it be able to compile using CLI language? I think technically I should say CLI as implemented by MS. Back to top David Dean Guest Posted: Mon Oct 23, 2006 8:55 pm    Post subject: Re: Next compiler: CLI capable? In article <453cdf92$1 (AT) newsgroups (DOT) borland.com>, "vortic" <vortic (AT) users (DOT) sourceforge.net> wrote: Quote: 1. Will it be able to compile using CLI language? I haven't heard anything about that. It doesn't appear to be on the roadmap, nor are there any QC entries. Quote: 2. Please tell us, will it compile at least 85% of current Boost? What is the best way to find out the percentage? I've been relying on Nicola and Alisdair's work up until now. I should probably be more active in finding out how to do it for myself. When Highlander is released, I'd love to put it through it's paces and find out. (we could also put in QC entries for the specific libraries where it fails) -- -David Quis custodiet custodes ipsos? Back to top mr_organic Guest Posted: Mon Oct 23, 2006 9:13 pm    Post subject: Re: Next compiler: CLI capable? "vortic" <vortic (AT) users (DOT) sourceforge.net> wrote in news:453cdf92$1 (AT) newsgroups (DOT) borland.com: Quote: In the next BDS or TurboC++ release: 1. Will it be able to compile using CLI language? 2. Please tell us, will it compile at least 85% of current Boost? Yes, I know they are working on #2, but it would be nice to get some real info on this. 1. I doubt it very seriously, unless DTG/DevCo uses Microsoft's own C++ compiler as a plug-in. AFAIK, only Microsoft's C++ compiler can so far target the .NET CLR. I don't see DTG/DevCo doing this for a long time -- the toolchain has other problems that need attention first (see next point). 2. I know that Boost is a high-profile area for improvement for the C++ compiler at DTG/DevCo, but I'm not sure that DevCo has any short-term plans to do anything about it. The low-hanging fruit is gone -- the compiler needs extensive low-level work in all areas: speed, compliance, code-generation, etc. (not to mention multi-processor support). And I'm not even getting into issues with the linker or debugger. I have a feeling that in order to address all the issues that C++ developers are complaining about, DTG/DevCo is going to have to so extensively re-work the compiler that it almost counts as a totally new effort. And since a compiler toolchain IME takes about three to five years to really mature, I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for a new C++ toolchain out of DTG/DevCo any time soon. (FWIW, I re-iterate my belief that DTG/DevCo ought to simply fork GCC and graft on VCL extensions so it can compile the VCL. It would save them a ton of work in the long run.) Regards, mr_organic Back to top Pete Fraser Guest Posted: Mon Oct 23, 2006 10:19 pm    Post subject: Re: Next compiler: CLI capable? It's down on the RoadMap as (wrongly) Managed C++ and is due with Longhorn support in 2007. http://bdn.borland.com/article/0,1410,33383,00.html -- Rgds Pete ========================================= GenHelp, the Component Author's help writer www.frasersoft.net/genhelp pete.fraser (AT) frasersoft (DOT) net "David Dean" <ozchzhq02 (AT) sneakemail (DOT) com> wrote in message news:ozchzhq02-0875F6.11555023102006 (AT) frylock (DOT) local... Quote: In article <453cdf92$1 (AT) newsgroups (DOT) borland.com>, "vortic" <vortic (AT) users (DOT) sourceforge.net> wrote: 1. Will it be able to compile using CLI language? I haven't heard anything about that. It doesn't appear to be on the roadmap, nor are there any QC entries. Back to top Rudy Velthuis [TeamB] Guest Posted: Mon Oct 23, 2006 10:42 pm    Post subject: Re: Next compiler: CLI capable? At 17:30:40, 23.10.2006, vortic wrote: Quote: "vortic" <vortic (AT) users (DOT) sourceforge.net> wrote in message 1. Will it be able to compile using CLI language? I think technically I should say CLI as implemented by MS. If you mean C++/CLI, that is supposed to become a standard of its own. Of course MS has the advanatge that they have the compiler and the framework already. <g> -- Rudy Velthuis [TeamB] http://rvelthuis.de/ "If FORTRAN has been called an infantile disorder, then PL/I must be classified as a fatal disease." -- Edsger Dijkstra Back to top vortic Guest Posted: Mon Oct 23, 2006 11:00 pm    Post subject: Re: Next compiler: CLI capable? "Pete Fraser" <pete.fraser (AT) frasersoft (DOT) nospam.com> wrote in message Quote: It's down on the RoadMap as (wrongly) Managed C++ and is due with Longhorn support in 2007. http://bdn.borland.com/article/0,1410,33383,00.html -- Rgds Pete Excellent, Highlander will be released THIS YEAR, and Delphi Vista will be released in 2007, along with a new Compiler for C++ folks that is capable of C++/CLI, so we will have C++.NET in the year 2007. Did you see that everybody, DevCo is releasing C++.NET compiler in the year 2007! Back to top David Dean Guest Posted: Tue Oct 24, 2006 12:08 am    Post subject: Re: Next compiler: CLI capable? In article <453cf996$1 (AT) newsgroups (DOT) borland.com>, "Pete Fraser" <pete.fraser (AT) frasersoft (DOT) nospam.com> wrote: Quote: It's down on the RoadMap as (wrongly) Managed C++ and is due with Longhorn support in 2007. http://bdn.borland.com/article/0,1410,33383,00.html Thanks Pete. I thought it was there, but then I couldn't find it. -- -David Quis custodiet custodes ipsos? Back to top Alisdair Meredith[TeamB] Guest Posted: Tue Oct 24, 2006 4:33 am    Post subject: Re: Next compiler: CLI capable? mr_organic wrote: Quote: 1. I doubt it very seriously, unless DTG/DevCo uses Microsoft's own C++ compiler as a plug-in. AFAIK, only Microsoft's C++ compiler can so far target the .NET CLR. I don't see DTG/DevCo doing this for a long time -- the toolchain has other problems that need attention first (see next point). Note that there were other folks beyond Microsoft also involved in the C++/CLI standard, who might also be interested in supplying a front end. Also note that the MS implementation, while the only one that is currently available, is not yet 100% conforming! (And I don't just mean because C++/CLI implies you must implement export!) That said, licensing the MS compiler would be a great starting point, although I personally have no idea what is being planned inside Borland. Quote: 2. I know that Boost is a high-profile area for improvement for the C++ compiler at DTG/DevCo, but I'm not sure that DevCo has any short-term plans to do anything about it. The low-hanging fruit is gone -- the compiler needs extensive low-level work in all areas: speed, compliance, code-generation, etc. (not to mention multi-processor support). And I'm not even getting into issues with the linker or debugger. I hope to have more to report here after Boost 1.34 is released ... Quote: (FWIW, I re-iterate my belief that DTG/DevCo ought to simply fork GCC and graft on VCL extensions so it can compile the VCL. It would save them a ton of work in the long run.) That was effectively tried with the licensed EDG front end for C++BuilderX. I think the idea of 'simply grafting on the Delphi extensions' goes deeper than you suspect. Note that they need to be ABI compatible with Delphi, as well as simply following the semantic rules. This may contradict the established GCC C++ ABI for Windows. I still think there is a lot of value in pursuing a GCC based product as-well-as BDS, but it would be an entirely different product - essentially a matured CBuilderX. I don't see much activity in this direction from Borland either, while focussed on giving the best CBuilder support they can (such as improving language conformance and passing those darned Boost tests!) -- AlisdairM(TeamB) Back to top Randall Parker Guest Posted: Tue Oct 24, 2006 6:24 am    Post subject: Re: Next compiler: CLI capable? Alisdair Meredith[TeamB] wrote: Quote: I hope to have more to report here after Boost 1.34 is released ... Alisdair, Wasn't 1.34 supposed to be released months ago? I got the impression back in April that it was supposed to be very close to release. No? Also, has Boost compatibility with the latest Borland compiler improved much in recent months? Back to top Alisdair Meredith[TeamB] Guest Posted: Tue Oct 24, 2006 8:06 am    Post subject: Re: Next compiler: CLI capable? Randall Parker wrote: Quote: Wasn't 1.34 supposed to be released months ago? I got the impression back in April that it was supposed to be very close to release. No? ERm .... suffice to say we are having a few teething problems finally getting this one out the door. The number of open issues dropped below 50 while I was away the last two weeks though, so it looks like we could be getting close to shipping! Note: the issue list must drop to zero before we can release, although some of those issue will be resolved by simply marking the test 'expected fail' for a given compiler. Quote: Also, has Boost compatibility with the latest Borland compiler improved much in recent months? I am hoping to have more news on the latest compiler shortly after 1.34 goes live... -- AlisdairM(TeamB) Back to top Andre Kaufmann Guest Posted: Tue Oct 24, 2006 8:10 am    Post subject: Re: Next compiler: CLI capable? Alisdair Meredith[TeamB] wrote: Quote: mr_organic wrote: [...] Also note that the MS implementation, while the only one that is currently available, is not yet 100% conforming! (And I don't just mean because C++/CLI implies you must implement export!) Does it really imply to implement export (you mean template export) ? Why ? By the way template export doesn't IMHO add the value it's expected to add, true code separation and generally faster build times. [I would be a great fan of template export if it would - better said could do this] Quote: I still think there is a lot of value in pursuing a GCC based product as-well-as BDS, but it would be an entirely different product - essentially a matured CBuilderX. What value would a GCC based add ? And wouldn't that imply that Borland would have to release an open source compiler ? A C++ compiler which doesn't support VCL would IMHO lead to the same fiasco like CBuilderX. Not enough developers will buy it, because it doesn't support VCL. Quote: [...] Andre Back to top Nicola Musatti Guest Posted: Tue Oct 24, 2006 11:53 pm    Post subject: Re: Next compiler: CLI capable? vortic wrote: [...] Quote: Excellent, Highlander will be released THIS YEAR, and Delphi Vista will be released in 2007, along with a new Compiler for C++ folks that is capable of C++/CLI, so we will have C++.NET in the year 2007. Didn't you hear? They had to postpone Highlander till next year because they found that the name bcb2006 was already taken :-P Cheers, Nicola Musatti -- Nicola Musatti Team Azzurro http://nicola.musatti.googlepages.com/home Back to top Nicola Musatti Guest Posted: Wed Oct 25, 2006 12:03 am    Post subject: Re: Next compiler: CLI capable? Alisdair Meredith[TeamB] wrote: Quote: mr_organic wrote: 1. I doubt it very seriously, unless DTG/DevCo uses Microsoft's own C++ compiler as a plug-in. AFAIK, only Microsoft's C++ compiler can so far target the .NET CLR. I don't see DTG/DevCo doing this for a long time -- the toolchain has other problems that need attention first (see next point). Note that there were other folks beyond Microsoft also involved in the C++/CLI standard, who might also be interested in supplying a front end. Also note that the MS implementation, while the only one that is currently available, is not yet 100% conforming! (And I don't just mean because C++/CLI implies you must implement export!) That said, licensing the MS compiler would be a great starting point, although I personally have no idea what is being planned inside Borland. I'd much prefer that they licensed those other folks' front-end... Possibly to concentrate on the in-house backend. Quote: 2. I know that Boost is a high-profile area for improvement for the C++ compiler at DTG/DevCo, but I'm not sure that DevCo has any short-term plans to do anything about it. The low-hanging fruit is gone -- the compiler needs extensive low-level work in all areas: speed, compliance, code-generation, etc. (not to mention multi-processor support). And I'm not even getting into issues with the linker or debugger. I hope to have more to report here after Boost 1.34 is released ... At this point I wonder which will come out first... Quote: (FWIW, I re-iterate my belief that DTG/DevCo ought to simply fork GCC and graft on VCL extensions so it can compile the VCL. It would save them a ton of work in the long run.) That was effectively tried with the licensed EDG front end for C++BuilderX. I think the idea of 'simply grafting on the Delphi extensions' goes deeper than you suspect. Note that they need to be ABI compatible with Delphi, as well as simply following the semantic rules. This may contradict the established GCC C++ ABI for Windows. I don't think investing in a new technology for win32 is a good idea, especially as that entails porting the VCL to a new compiler. On the other hand starting from scratch with a C++/CLI solution makes much more sense. I guess the real issue is going to be what it's going to take to make the VCL.NET accessible/usable from C++/CLI. Quote: I still think there is a lot of value in pursuing a GCC based product as-well-as BDS, but it would be an entirely different product - essentially a matured CBuilderX. I don't see much activity in this direction from Borland either, while focussed on giving the best CBuilder support they can (such as improving language conformance and passing those darned Boost tests!) That would be interesting especially if they come out with a multiplatform solution that's not as sluggish as Eclipse. On the other hand when they launched into CBX JBuilder was all the rage; two years later it had to join 'em so as not to be licked. Cheers, Nicola Musatti -- Nicola Musatti Team Azzurro http://nicola.musatti.googlepages.com/home Back to top Peter Agricola Guest Posted: Wed Oct 25, 2006 8:10 am    Post subject: Re: Next compiler: CLI capable? "Nicola Musatti" wrote: Quote: That would be interesting especially if they come out with a multiplatform solution that's not as sluggish as Eclipse. You should really try http://www.codeblocks.org/ It's a _native_ CBuilderX and is said to be modelled after Visual Studio. (I can't compare because I don't use Visual Studio, not even the free one's. When I removed C#Builder trail including the .NET framework I have never installed a program again that needs the .Net framework.) The IDE itself is built using wxWidgets, but there is no need to use that library yourself. There is a Dialog editor, wxSmith for wx applications but that one I haven't tried yet. Borland compiler is supported out of the box. It was auto detected on my machine. Be sure to pick the nightly build. Version 1 rc2 is depricated. Peter Back to top Display posts from previous: All Posts1 Day7 Days2 Weeks1 Month3 Months6 Months1 Year Oldest FirstNewest First         BorlandTalk.com Forum Index -> C++ Builder (Non-Technical) All times are GMT Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next Page 1 of 5   Jump to: Select a forum C++ Builder Newsgroups----------------C++ BuilderC++ Builder (ActiveX)C++ Builder (Announcements)C++ Builder (Command Line Tools)C++ Builder DatabasesC++ Builder Databases (ADO)C++ Builder Databases (Desktop)C++ Builder Databases (InterBase Express)C++ Builder Databases (Multi-Tier)C++ Builder Databases (SQL Servers)C++ Builder (Graphics)C++ Builder (IDE)C++ Builder (Internet)C++ Builder (Internet Socket)C++ Builder (Internet Web)C++ Builder (Jobs)C++ Builder (Language)C++ Builder (Language C++)C++ Builder (Compatibility with MFC)C++ Builder (Native API)C++ Builder (Non-Technical)C++ Builder (Students)C++ Builder (Third Party Tools)C++ Builder (Upgrade)C++ Builder (VCL)C++ Builder (VCL Components Usage)C++ Builder (VCL Components Development)C++ Builder (VCL Usage)C++ Builder (WinAPI)C++ Builder Installation Delphi Newsgroups----------------Delphi (General)Delphi ActiveX Controls UsageDelphi ActiveX Controls DevelopmentDelphi As400Delphi DatabasesDelphi Databases (ADO)Delphi Databases (dbExpress)Delphi Databases (Desktop)Delphi Databases (InterBase Express)Delphi Databases (Multi-Tier)Delphi Databases (SQL Servers)Delphi DeploymentDelphi GraphicsDelphi IDEDelphi InternationalizationDelphi InternetDelphi Internet Isapi-WebBrokerDelphi Internet WebSnapDelphi Internet WinsockDelphi JobsDelphi Language BASMDelphi Language ObjectPascalDelphi Model Driven Architecture (General)Delphi Model Driven Architecture (Third Party)Delphi MultimediaDelphi Native APIDelphi Non-TechnicalDelphi ObjectPascalDelphi OLE AutomationDelphi OO designDelphi OpenToolsAPIDelphi Reporting-ChartingDelphi RTLDelphi StudentsDelphi TeamSourceDelphi Thirdparty ToolsDelphi Thirdparty Tools (General)Delphi Thirdparty Tools (IntraWeb)Delphi Thirdparty Tools (RaveReports)Delphi UpgradeDelphi VCLDelphi VCL ComponentsDelphi VCL Components UsingDelphi VCL Components WritingDelphi WebServices SOAPDelphi WinAPIDelphi XMLDelphi Installationcomp.lang.pascal.delphi.components.misccomp.lang.pascal.delphi.components.usagecomp.lang.pascal.delphi.components.writingcomp.lang.pascal.delphi.databasescomp.lang.pascal.delphi.misccomp.sources.delphi JBuilder Newsgroups----------------JBuilderJBuilder AnnouncementsJBuilder Applet IssuesJBuilder As400JBuilder CompilerJBuilder CORBA/RMIJBuilder DatabasesJBuilder DB SwingJBuilder DebuggerJBuilder DeploymentJBuilder DocumentationJBuilder EnterpriseJBuilder HandheldJBuilder IDEJBuilder JavaJBuilder JavaAPIJBuilder Java LanguageJBuilder Java SwingJBuilder Java BeansJBuilder Java Beans UsageJBuilder Java Beans DevelopmentJBuilder JBCLJBuilder JDataStoreJBuilder JobsJBuilder LinuxJBuilder MacintoshJBuilder & MobileSetJBuilder MultiLingual AppsJBuilder Non-TechnicalJBuilder OpenToolsJBuilder Servlets (JSP)JBuilder StudentsJBuilder Team DevelopmentJBuilder Thirdparty ToolsJBuilder UpgradeJBuilder Installation InterBase Newsgroups----------------InterBaseInterBase Bug DiscussionInterBase GeneralInterBase IBConsoleInterBase OpenSourceInterBase ReplicationInterBase SQLInterBase ThirdpartyInterBase Installation Miscellaneous Borland Newsgroups----------------AppCenterAppServerEnteraVisiBroker  You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2006 phpBB Group SEO toolkit © 2004-2006 webmedic.