 |
BorlandTalk.com
Borland discussion newsgroups
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Dmitry Surkov
Guest
|
 Posted: Mon Aug 16, 2004 10:09 am Post subject: Technical Strategy |
 |
|
All technologies and products which are developed
in Borland for itself (e.g. QC, IDE controls, etc.)
should be made in such a way and with such
(source code) quality that they can be converted
to end-user products. If there is some feature
in BDS, then it should be available (may be with
some restrictions  to Delphi users.
Dmitry Surkov.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Ottar Smidesang Holstad
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 16, 2004 12:11 pm Post subject: Re: Technical Strategy |
|
|
| Quote: | All technologies and products which are developed
in Borland for itself (e.g. QC, IDE controls, etc.)
should be made in such a way and with such
(source code) quality that they can be converted
to end-user products.
|
I remember someone from Borland saying the new component palette would also
be released as a VCL component. For D9, maybe?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kristofer Skaug
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 16, 2004 9:02 pm Post subject: Re: Technical Strategy |
|
|
Dmitry Surkov wrote:
| Quote: | All technologies and products which are developed
in Borland for itself (e.g. QC, IDE controls, etc.)
should be made in such a way and with such
(source code) quality that they can be converted
to end-user products.
|
Sounds nice, but is probably not good for Borland R&D productivity.
It's hard enough to produce and test quality UI components
if not also to have to volunteer the sources for public scrutiny!
Dare you imagine how many ugly hacks, rambling comments, coding standard
violations etc. that might be present in the Object Inspector, the Code
Editor, Form Designer, etc.? If you have to start dropping features in
order to present a clean component design that users can understand and
extend, what amount of re-engineering is it worth (at the cost of really
new features)?
It's been suggested that all programmers feel tempted to imitate the
concepts of their favorite programming IDE, even if the product they're
working on is something completely different.
But I'll grant you this: Seen from the outside, the Object Inspector
must be (almost) every developer's wet dream for an intuitive name-value
editor (unlike the TValueListEditor, which *nobody* seems to be able to
figure out how to use!). So if Borland could just upgrade (extend?) the
latter a bit to work more like the former...
--
Kristofer
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Daniel Becroft
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 17, 2004 7:28 am Post subject: Re: Technical Strategy |
|
|
Kristofer Skaug wrote:
| Quote: | Dmitry Surkov wrote:
All technologies and products which are developed
in Borland for itself (e.g. QC, IDE controls, etc.)
should be made in such a way and with such
(source code) quality that they can be converted
to end-user products.
Sounds nice, but is probably not good for Borland R&D productivity.
It's hard enough to produce and test quality UI components
if not also to have to volunteer the sources for public scrutiny!
Dare you imagine how many ugly hacks, rambling comments, coding standard
violations etc. that might be present in the Object Inspector, the Code
Editor, Form Designer, etc.? If you have to start dropping features in
order to present a clean component design that users can understand and
extend, what amount of re-engineering is it worth (at the cost of really
new features)?
|
Open Source, anyone? Our lecturer showed us some code the other day from a rather unorthodox UNIX
distribution that he is a part of, and one of the comments was:
"Hmm, not sure how to do this properly, but this hack should suffice."
Only trouble was, the comment was dated 15 years ago. *groan*
| Quote: | It's been suggested that all programmers feel tempted to imitate the
concepts of their favorite programming IDE, even if the product they're
working on is something completely different.
But I'll grant you this: Seen from the outside, the Object Inspector
must be (almost) every developer's wet dream for an intuitive name-value
editor (unlike the TValueListEditor, which nobody seems to be able to
figure out how to use!). So if Borland could just upgrade (extend?) the
latter a bit to work more like the former...
|
I'll agree to that. From a Java perspective, I could almost understand correctly how to re-produce
an OI component. However, from a Delphi perspective, I couldn't, since I can't recall having seen
anything about Delphi's reflection/inspection capabilities for Win32. Things are different for
..NET, though.
--
Daniel Becroft
; =================================
"Real computer scientists don't comment their code. The identifiers are so long they can't afford
the disk space."
"Blue sparks and white smoke, the two most expensive components of any electrical system, and once
used up will cost a fortune to replace."
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kristofer Skaug
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 18, 2004 1:59 pm Post subject: Re: Technical Strategy |
|
|
Daniel Becroft wrote:
| Quote: |
Only trouble was, the comment was dated 15 years ago. *groan*
|
aka "if it works, don't fix it" <g>
--
Kristofer
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
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
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
