programming???

  • Thread starter Thread starter chowderhead
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
eerrrr: The March 2000 PC Plus cover cd has Delphi 3 Pro on it. The Jan 2001 DVD has Delphi 4 standard on it ... the CD version may well also have Delphi on it, but I don't know of course, since I only have the DVD version.Not sure which to recommend ... the Pro version has more features like Net connectivity, advanced synchronisation and so on ... but D4 has more language features like method overloading.

Dag: Yes, ML doesn't exactly have a fully consistant paradigm ... when you're dealing with file manipulation, you're really using non-functional commands that've been wrapped by a functional/ML layer ... there's no way around that, since file systems ARE imperative concepts.
 
Delphi availability...well, 6 is best of course, 150 MB isn't so bad is it? I mean, if you know someone with ISDN or DSL it shouldn't be a problem.Delphi 4 Standard is IMO much better than Delphi 3 Proffesional...think dynamic arrays...and all the other nice langauge features added in. (If you get Delphi 4 you have to take care to install all the service packs though as it's very buggy).

BUT, Delphi 3 Prof. has the VCL source code included. Myself I wouldn't be able to create a single Delphi program without the source code for the libraries, your mileage might vary (most people don't look on the source until they have at least a year of experience with Delphi anyway...I think...)
 
Personally I wouldn't say you need the source code THAT much - I don't need to refer to it that much even now - the Delphi help files are very good at documenting everything. It's good to have it, though.For a beginner, I guess D4 is perhaps better, since as Dag says when you're starting having the VCL source isn't really important.
 
Thanks for the dynamite responses, guys-you've really helped a lot.I'll probobly go ahead and enroll in a C course next semester-my uni (as ya'll lovingly refer to it) says I have to take it before I move on to C++.   :(   Oh, well, I can always buy the book and study ahead...

[url="<a]http://www.pvcc.cc.va.us/[/url]" TARGET=_blank>This place  doesn't offer a ton of courses, but will get me by until I can move on to a "regular" university.  (these places are rather expensive, aren't they?)

Fice:  Sorry, no Delphi courses where I'm at-but that doesn't mean I'll not try it out, either.  I think I might have a disk here with an older version of Delphi on it.

Hey eerrrr, you ready to do some studying?
 
fice: Hmm, I think I'll try to download Delphi 6 from a friend with a high bandwidth connection. I dont know anyone with one though, so I guess I'll try Delphi 4 Standard.chowderhead: ....did you have to put it that way? Lol, I'm just gonna be learning it in my spare time.
 
People please, dont write sooo many words, I dont have nerves for reading it. And i would like to, coz it is about programming. But i cant  :-?Something from me:
As i see it, language can be easy, or good. Like with easy one itll be hard to code something good. But easy ones are good for start.  :)
So ill try to rate them, 1-easy 10-good. Higher number => harder & better.

2 - Basic(terminal)
6 - Pascal(terminal)
6 - Delphi
8 - C++(terminal)
8 - Visual C++
10 - Assembler

(terminal) means that it is old, dos like, you wont create any pretty windows with them

any corrections are welcome
 
Hmm, thanks mirex. I'm still having trouble getting hold of Delphi. I didnt know PC Plus did DVD cd's so I cant use them. I'll ask my computing teacher if I can use the school PC's to download it, and get it on disc somehow.
 
PC Plus only recently started doing DVD coverdisks, and they still do CD versions as well, though obviously the CD disk doesn't have as much on it as the DVD.Languages that're harder also aren't necessarily any better! Assembler is THE hardest "language" short of straight binary, but on a modern PC there's very little advantage to it over C++ or Delphi; modern CPU's do so much optimisation that hand coded assembler is only rarely any better. Plus, I'd put Delphi on a par with VC++ at least; doesn't have some things (Templates, Macros), but does have some other things (reliable RTTI, sets, etc). And unlike VC++ it runs on Linux   :wink: (Yes, I know C++ code runs on Linux, of course, but if you've written in VC++ it's probably not going to).

Likewise, an easy language isn't necessarily less good. I'm biased, of course (but with reason), but I'd say Delphi is very nearly as easy to learn as VB (not really much difference) - but you can do an awful lot more with it once you're familiar with the language.

Oh, and most languages nowadays can create visual programs. True, it's easier in Delphi, or VC++ (or C++ Builder), but even a command-line C++/Pascal compiler could be used to create a windows app.

[This message has been edited by ficedula (edited September 07, 2001).]
 
mirex: So Visual C++ has got 8 points? That's good! I'm going to learn it, or better: I've already started...  :D - Alhexx
 
I can hear dagsverre now.  :D
Microsoft manages to do everything possible wrong in their MFC framework. They have esentially stripped away what is beutiful with C++, you have to program directly to the Windows API instead of using some middle-layer like the rest of the world does. I feel it's a bit prehistoric, really... Also, the compiler itself lacks a lot of C++ features (for instance decent template support).
Click to expand...
[This message has been edited by Srethron Askvelhtnod (edited September 07, 2001).]
 
Originally posted by ficedula
Languages that're harder also aren't necessarily any better! Assembler is THE hardest "language" short of straight binary, but on a modern PC there's very little advantage to it over C++ or Delphi; modern CPU's do so much optimisation that hand coded assembler is only rarely any better.
Click to expand...
True to some extent. However, when you're programming something where every second counts, you might consider doing it with assembler. Besides, with Assembler you can do all the required optimizations immediately when new processors with new "features" are out. On a side note, I can't think of anyone sane enought to write in direct binary  :)
Originally posted by ficedula
And unlike VC++ it runs on Linux  (Yes, I know C++ code runs on Linux, of course, but if you've written in VC++ it's probably not going to).
Click to expand...
Exactly, I don't understand why you guys mix up Visual C++ & C++. Visual C++ is just C++ with lots of "graphics" and libraries premade for the Windows enviroment(another of Msft's sales gimmicks). Visual C++ is just "C++ packaged and endorsed for use with Msft products"  :D
Originally posted by Srethron Askvelhtnod as a quote of dagsverre
They have esentially stripped away what is beutiful with C++, you have to program directly to the Windows API instead of using some middle-layer like the rest of the world does
Click to expand...
Lol. With that you find a whole bunch of idiots in the world memorizing the MFC classes. When asked to do something different, they say, "Eh, it's not in my MFC manual, so it isn't possible. We'll wait till Msft thinks of a workaround"  :)
 
I didn't notice Java mentioned anywhere in this topic.  Java IS object oriented.  The syntax is very similar to C++.  There are tons of guides and examples for it on the web.  Its platform independant, for those of you guys and gals that don't know that means that "in theory" it could run on any computer. And best of all its free :-).[This message has been edited by GattMan (edited September 09, 2001).]
 
Yes ... for learning stuff, Java is great. The performance is far too slow to use for any serious applications (on the PC anyway), but syntactically it's a lot better than C++. Still not totally consistent, but better at least.
 
In my programing class in Highschool and and my Intro to CS class here at college, the focus has been mainly on Java.  In high school, spent sometime on basic and VB to get everyone used to the basic concepts of programing, then spent the majority of the time on Java.  Here at college, we are working on Sun Solaris Workstations using Unix to program in Java.  Java is very good to get yourself used to OO. Thats my $0.02.
 
Yeah, my uni taught us mostly Java as well. For learning OO I'd agree that Java's as good as any language, though I wouldn't use it by choice for many things.
 
fice: Good work on the post count.Man, this thread's actually staying on topic! Uhmmmm, dont mind me, carry on! See how long its goes...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top