"Randall Parker" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM > wrote in
Randall, you and Kenneth agree. Trust me, I understand how tempting it is to
reach out and smack someone right now, but Kenneth ain't the guy.
Here's my own little point of view:
I've been working for the better part of two years, first part time and
weekends, and lately full time, on a deep-development project using BCB as
my main tool. Leaving out the *** details, lets just say I use the VCL to
create things that I further manipulate using Windows API calls. And some
serious COM using the ATL.
Why did I chose the VCL? Sigh. I had confidence that cross-platform
development would one day come to Borland's C++ tools. Of course the API
calls and COM would have to be changed, but it's designed with that in mind.
I'm just reaching the prototype stage, which is good...but. Every line of
code I write leaves me with the rotten feeling I'm just going to have to do
it over again. In spite of that, it would make no sense to change tools
right now so I keep plodding.
If anyone on the planet can make a better case that Win32 needs to be
supported, I'd sure love to hear it. Hell, at this point I'd settle for
knowing I'll be able to call CreateWindowEx and CComObjectRootEx without the
VCL or wizards or anything. I've stayed up late before, it's just a little
Here is what I suspect Borland's strategy is: CBX is intended to be a way to
facilitate cross platform porting of things built *using other people's
tools*. I suspect this because they clearly emphasize the number of
different peoples' compilers it can work with. And a couple of other things.
Borland does not believe the VCL.net provides everything everyone needs to
develop applications on Windows, their public statements to the Delphi
community prove this. Even Microsoft doesn't believe that, otherwise VS.net
wouldn't still have, oh for example, MFC. However, Borland never planned to
strongly support win32 development on CBX. Their recommendation is to use
BCB, a product that resembles a '58 Rambler sitting in a farmers field with
weeds growing through the floor.
WX is irrelevant. Actually making the GUI of any app I've ever worked on
took about 10% of the time. Perhaps I can use WX the same way I am using the
VCL, to create things that I grab the handles for so I can call Windows. But
how do I call Windows? With my BCB headers? See above.
The only conclusion that makes sense to me is that CBX is intended to be
used as a porting tool and not as a development tool. So I buy VS and use
their headers? AND I buy CBX? Why on earth would I do that?