Comments on: Delphi “Weaver” Beta coming

By: Tuncay ?ZER

Tuncay ?ZER — Fri, 08 May 2009 12:06:25 +0000

I hope Delphi 2010, excellent to Delphi 7 stars. successfully

By: Kent Morwath

Kent Morwath — Mon, 20 Apr 2009 16:12:06 +0000

I hope they will keep Delphi language as far as they can from Prism. Hoffman *doesn’t* know how to develop a language – it just adds as many as reserved words he can to make it “fashionable”. He changes old Pascal syntax “just because”. Delphi can’t become a pure OO language, thereby going after Prism will just add a lot of useless stuff (like the “method” keyword). If Prism becomes the driver, CodeGear will lose another good slice of Delphi developers – many of those using it much more alike C++ than Visual Basic. And many of those waiting a 64 bit compiler – another delay may not be acceptable.

They are going to move Delphi again to an overcrowded area – instead of covering less crowded niches. Another bad move. And sorry, Hodges at R&D will be another disaster. They’d need someone with a real vision, and Hodges lacks it.

By: Ken Knopfli

Ken Knopfli — Tue, 24 Mar 2009 16:39:34 +0000

The complexity of targeting multiple platforms with the same code base has been discussed in detail so often, I’m astounded how many votes multiplatform is getting.

Perhaps this is it a good sign; lots of young programmers have moved to Delphi? I wonder how many that voted have really tried it. I have only used FreePascal once, many years ago, so perhaps there’s some wonder tool bundled with it now. But coding for Windows and Linux using CLX and Kylix taught me a lot about the futility of the exercise.

(I am posting my comment here because I can view the first page of UserVoice.com but our company Access Control blocks everything else.)

By: Ken Knopfli

Ken Knopfli — Fri, 20 Mar 2009 16:47:18 +0000

Duh. “…and inheritance” – cut an paste error.

By: Ken Knopfli

Ken Knopfli — Fri, 20 Mar 2009 16:45:14 +0000

I am not necessarily the author of the class and inheritance.

I am aware that these tips were intended to help, and thanks for that. But I need Delphi to help me focus on programming a solution, not workarounds, so hopefully someone’s listening.

By: Shawn Ridenour

Shawn Ridenour — Fri, 20 Mar 2009 14:52:26 +0000

There are already two ways you can do objects that allocate on the stack. (1) descend from TObject – just like you did in bp7 or (2) declare it as type record if you don’t need inheritance.

By: Jens Borrisholt

Jens Borrisholt — Fri, 20 Mar 2009 10:13:40 +0000

Ken Knopfli:
>> Bring back objects that can be (or behave like they are) created on the stack, with destruction on going out of scope. This was still possible in BP7 (I think it was BP7? Or was it Delphi 1?). The current commonly used workaround using interfaces testifies to its usefulness.

did you read Marco Cantus solution for this ?

By: Ken Knopfli

Ken Knopfli — Fri, 20 Mar 2009 09:44:45 +0000

This is JUST the compiler, not the IDE, right?
OK, here goes:

1. Some way of identifying and linking out unneeded VCL stuff. With every version of Delphi, the executables just keep getting bigger, a bad for us freeware/shareware guys.

2. Fix the WITH statement. There are already some good suggestions out there which reduce complexity and improve readability. And if used intelligently, it even helps in debugging. (Syntactic sugar is what higher-level languages are about, else we’d all be using Assembler.)

3. Local VAR declarations. Conserves namespace.

4. Bring back objects that can be (or behave like they are) created on the stack, with destruction on going out of scope. This was still possible in BP7 (I think it was BP7? Or was it Delphi 1?). The current commonly used workaround using interfaces testifies to its usefulness.

Two personal quirks:

5. A switch to enable case sensitivity.

6. Local BEGIN END blocks allowing local scoping.