REALbasic 2007 R2 with incremental compiler

A section for all development and testing programmes and customised browsers written by SillyDog701 community. Featured products including Donzilla, Firescape, DJGM Distro, and Netscape Streamline.

REALbasic 2007 R2 with incremental compiler

Postby Antony » Tue 03 Apr, 2007 6:50 am

Image

REAL Software announced on Monday the release of REALbasic 2007 Release 2 which adds an incremental compiler and significant improvements to the debugger.

Main new features includes:
  • Incremental Compilation
  • Code Folding
  • Debugger Improvements
  • RTF Support


“In addition to the 18 new features and over 100 bug fixes that Release 2 provides, REALbasic 2007 Release 2 adds an incremental compiler and offers significant improvements to the debugger,â€
UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X; en-US; rv:1.8.1.2) Gecko/20070219 Firefox/2.0.0.2
User avatar
Antony
diamond member
diamond member
 
Posts: 15258
Joined: Tue 18 Jun, 2002 11:36 pm
Location: Sydney, Australia

Postby Dr Lobster* » Tue 03 Apr, 2007 2:58 pm

the ide looks ok, though most of those features have been around in visual studio and borland developer studio for a while - delphi has done incremental compiles since its first release in 1996 (which is why it compiles so very fast).

i guess the worst thing about it is the fact that the language itself (basic) is an utterly horrible mess, i can't imagine why anybody who wants to do cross platform stuff would implement their product in basic.
UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.8.1.3) Gecko/20070309 Firefox/2.0.0.3
Dr Lobster*
super member
super member
 
Posts: 164
Joined: Mon 29 May, 2006 3:46 pm
Location: Norfolk, UK

Postby Antony » Tue 03 Apr, 2007 3:16 pm

Dr Lobster* wrote:i guess the worst thing about it is the fact that the language itself (basic) is an utterly horrible mess, i can't imagine why anybody who wants to do cross platform stuff would implement their product in basic.
Because it is not complicated, unlike C or Java, to get started.
UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X; en-US; rv:1.8.1.2) Gecko/20070219 Firefox/2.0.0.2
User avatar
Antony
diamond member
diamond member
 
Posts: 15258
Joined: Tue 18 Jun, 2002 11:36 pm
Location: Sydney, Australia

Postby Don_HH2K » Tue 03 Apr, 2007 3:20 pm

The language itself may be a mess, but if you're targeting the .NET Framework it all compiles down to the exact same thing whether you're programming in VB, C/C++/C#, J#, and so on. Though if you want to be cross-operating-system about it, the .NET Framework itself is a mess.
UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.2; en-US; rv:1.8.0.7) Gecko/20060917 K-Meleon/1.02
Laptop: HP Compaq nx6325 - Turion 64 X2 @ 2GHz, 2GB DDR2, 100GB HD, ATI Radeon X300, 15" LCD, Seven Pro
Handheld: Palm Treo 650 - Intel PXA270 @ 312MHz, 10MB RAM, 32MB flash, 2.7" LCD, Palm OS 5.4
User avatar
Don_HH2K
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 5112
Joined: Sun 09 May, 2004 3:59 pm

Postby Antony » Tue 03 Apr, 2007 3:22 pm

Sorry, missed system requirements for Windows and Linux in the first post.

In Windows,
Minimum:
Windows 98 or better (98/NT/ME/2000/2003 Server, XP)
256 MB of available RAM
1 GHz Processor

Recommended:
Windows 2000, Windows XP or Windows Vista
512 MB of available RAM
1.5 GHz Processor

For Linux:
x86-based Linux distributions with GTK+ 2.0 (or higher),
glibc-2.3 (or higher),
CUPS (Common UNIX Printing System) and
libstdc++.so.5

Minimum:
256 MB of available RAM
1 GHz Processor

Recommended:
512 MB of available RAM
1.5 GHz Processor
UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X; en-US; rv:1.8.1.2) Gecko/20070219 Firefox/2.0.0.2
User avatar
Antony
diamond member
diamond member
 
Posts: 15258
Joined: Tue 18 Jun, 2002 11:36 pm
Location: Sydney, Australia

Postby Dr Lobster* » Wed 04 Apr, 2007 1:49 pm

Antony wrote:Because it is not complicated, unlike C or Java, to get started.


true, but it's quite expensive - visual studio express and borland turbos are free and if you really must use basic to learn programming you can do so for nothing, and like i said, the interface in vs and the borland products are much more productive and have had those 'new' features for several years in some cases.


Don_HH2K wrote:The language itself may be a mess, but if you're targeting the .NET Framework it all compiles down to the exact same thing whether you're programming in VB, C/C++/C#, J#, and so on. Though if you want to be cross-operating-system about it, the .NET Framework itself is a mess.


.net is a bit of an anomaly really. i get the feeling that microsoft aren't really behind it 100%, even though when compared to mfc it's a million times better.

i checked some of the new applications which come with vista (purble place, the sidebar, windows photo gallery, windows calender and windows mail) and none of them are written in a .net language. i can understand why office hasn't been ported over, but it seems odd that entirely new applications bundled with the new os, with the new version of the .net framework don't actually showcase the framework.

the framework itself suffers from a couple of flaws, firstly, it's incomplete. massively incomplete. to do system level stuff you need to perform unmanaged win32 calls, which, utterly negates any benefit of using the framework (such as being platform agnostic)

also, and more crucially, i believe the main reason why microsoft haven't adopted it in any real sense is that it is much easier to reverse engineer and although it can be obfuscated the actual logic and algorithms used can be seen in source form.

the cross-platform element of the framework is also interesting in so far is that is a community effort which is on some pretty dodgy legal ground.

the pc industry is in a flux at the moment. the limits of 32bit architecture are being reached and software vendors are going to need to start porting their apps to 64bit very soon, .net is a great way to ensure that no matter what processor architecture you have, the application will just work. if .net for desktop applications doesn't catch on then i feel it probably never will in any serious way.
UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.8.1.3) Gecko/20070309 Firefox/2.0.0.3
Dr Lobster*
super member
super member
 
Posts: 164
Joined: Mon 29 May, 2006 3:46 pm
Location: Norfolk, UK


Return to SD701 DevZone

Who is online

Registered users: Bing [Bot], Google [Bot], Majestic-12 [Bot]