Delphi.NET ASP.NET WebSnap
Thomas Andersson
Thomas
"Karel Vandenhove" <kv...@compuserve.com> wrote in message
news:3cd23719_1@dnews...
David Clegg
news:3cd238eb_1@dnews:
> I would like an answer to this one as well.
42
--
Cheers,
David Clegg
dclegg_at_ebetonline_dot_com
Rich Werning
news:3cd238eb_1@dnews:
> I would like an answer to this one as well.
Me too - that's why I'm really looking foreward to the ".NET for Delphi
Developers" Preconference tutorial at BorCon. Only 2 weeks to go!
- Rich Werning
MD
level based on how WebSnap was designed!
MD
"Karel Vandenhove" <kv...@compuserve.com> wrote in message
news:3cd23719_1@dnews...
Jimmy [Used-Disks]
> .Net & its ASP.Net, C# are superb! I donot think if Delphi can get to
> that level based on how WebSnap was designed!
Well, you thought wrong ;). WebSnap is quite extendable.
Devloper Express' ExpressWeb Framework is a great example of how WebSnap
can be extended (it does not require WebSnap, but does support/extend
it). If you like ASP.NET and Web Forms, check out EWF:
http://www.devexpress.com/products/vcl/ewf/
> MD
--
- Jimmy
http://www.used-disks.com/programming/pascal
:
John Kaster (Borland)
> .Net & its ASP.Net, C# are superb! I donot think if Delphi can get to that
> level based on how WebSnap was designed!
As Jimmy said, I don't think you understand how WebSnap was designed. It is
extremely extensible, and was designed so from the start.
--
John Kaster, Borland Developer Relations, http://community.borland.com
$1280/$50K: Thanks to my donors!
http://homepages.borland.com/jkaster/tnt/thanks.html
Make a wish! http://qc.borland.com * Got source?
http://codecentral.borland.com
See you at BorCon 2002? http://www.borland.com/conf2002/
John Kaster (Borland)
> Me too - that's why I'm really looking foreward to the ".NET for Delphi
> Developers" Preconference tutorial at BorCon. Only 2 weeks to go!
Perhaps you should read the description of the tutorial again. Nowhere in the
description does it say "And you will be shown the feature matrix for
Delphi.NET"
Bob Dawson
news:3CD2D43E...@borland.com...
> Perhaps you should read the description of the tutorial again. Nowhere in
the
> description does it say "And you will be shown the feature matrix for
> Delphi.NET"
No, but hearing what Borland feels are the parallels "between the .NET
application architecture and the Delphi VCL" should give us some interesting
material for speculation<g>.
bobD
Alessandro Federici
> use C#) or will we still have to use WebSnap?
Obviously. Every .Net language can be used to do that.
With Delphi you might just have more options since there will be many VCL
ports.
--
Alessandro Federici
-System Architect
-Borland Certified Consultant
Homepage: www.msdelphi.com (home of the DSOAP Toolkit)
EMail: al...@msdelphi.com
*** Prevent the impending death of Internet radio! Log on
http://www.saveinternetradio.org ***
John Kaster (Borland)
> No, but hearing what Borland feels are the parallels "between the .NET
> application architecture and the Delphi VCL" should give us some interesting
> material for speculation<g>.
No doubt. (As though you need more material! <G>)
Karel Vandenhove
Delphi would not be integrated in the VS IDE, but would rather be a
different development environment.
But I think that the reason that so many people find the creation of ASP.NET
applications so attractive is the way the VS IDE does most of the work for
us and the fact that that the same development environment is used by and
known to a multitude of programmers.
Furthermore you can easily integrate (and debug) common stuff (Business
objects, data access components etc.) written in different languages. Thus
you can use the same IDE for different programmers in your team.
Therefore, for me, there is a big difference between Delphi.NET in the VS
Studio to create ASP.NET applications and ASP.NET applications created with
a Delphi IDE (imposing a different development environment for delphi
developers).
"Alessandro Federici" <al...@nospam.msdelphi.com> wrote in message
news:3cd2dc67$1_2@dnews...
Alessandro Federici
> >>Every .Net language can be used to do that.<<
> Studio to create ASP.NET applications and ASP.NET applications created
with
> a Delphi IDE (imposing a different development environment for delphi
> developers).
Point taken but Borland supposedly is the big followers of "standards" so
why wouldn't they
comply to the .Net ones creating something that can only be used from their
IDE?
I personally belive the compiler will integrate will VS as well. Why
wouldn't they do that?
It would just be foolish to lock people in a Borland IDE *only*.
At least this is what I think.
Michael Bolton
I like the fact that you can trace into SQL stored procedures.
MD
http://msdn.microsoft.com/vstudio/productinfo/evalguide.asp . As a serious
developer, I would like to know a product like Delphi, what and how it can
help me to develope an enterprise-class (this means that from security to
database to reporting and including electronic digital signature... You name
it) web application out of the box. I understand very well how to extend a
class from the existing class library. This is not what I need. I need a
product that has enough tools in its own right without seeking help from
other 3rd parties for common tasks. In summary, I would like an equivalent
reviewer's guide for Delphi.Net similar to the one I showed you above. Not
just a 6 or 7 pages advertisement.
MD
"Jimmy [Used-Disks]" <ji...@NILSMAPused-disks.com> wrote in message
Delphi Guy
> I personally belive the compiler will integrate will VS as well. Why
> wouldn't they do that?
> It would just be foolish to lock people in a Borland IDE *only*.
> At least this is what I think.
And then why would anyone want to pay for VS.NET and then for
Delphi.NET in additional to that? People will just go startight to
VS.NET and pay once. IMHO, it won't be a smart business decision for
Borland to fully integrate with VS.NET IDE.
--
SM
B.Hettrick
"MD" <Mich...@Yahoo.Com> wrote:
>If you do not mind to read, I would like to invite you to this site:
>http://msdn.microsoft.com/vstudio/productinfo/evalguide.asp . As a serious
>developer, I would like to know a product like Delphi, what and how it can
>help me to develope an enterprise-class (this means that from security to
>database to reporting and including electronic digital signature... You name
>it) web application out of the box. I understand very well how to extend a
>class from the existing class library. This is not what I need. I need a
>product that has enough tools in its own right without seeking help from
>other 3rd parties for common tasks. In summary, I would like an equivalent
>reviewer's guide for Delphi.Net similar to the one I showed you above. Not
>just a 6 or 7 pages advertisement.
>
>MD
Well considering that "Delphi.net" has not even been released
why are you demanding a Reviewer's Guide, why can't you
investigate the .Net framework, CLR and CLS at the above-
mentioned site and 'read between the lines'.
It seems to me that Anders Hejlsberg has taken the Delphi
heritage and used some of the constructs to influence the
framework and facilites provided by the .Net CLR and C#.
I didn't find anything 'alien' or unsurmountable, even existing
unmanaged code is supported.
I can see a very nice mapping between the existing Delphi
constructs and .Net and I'm sure Borland saw this long ago.
Early life in the .net environment will require tools that
as seamlessly as possible help developers port existing
applications and this has been a Borland speciality in the
past.
Be patient, the more you investigate .Net the less 'scary'
it becomes.
Regards,
Brian
Alessandro Federici
news:MPG.173d10206...@newsgroups.borland.com...
> Alessandro Federici wrote...
> And then why would anyone want to pay for VS.NET and then for
> Delphi.NET in additional to that? People will just go startight to
> VS.NET and pay once. IMHO, it won't be a smart business decision for
> Borland to fully integrate with VS.NET IDE.
You forgot a basic and very common scenario: people who subscribed to the
MSDN.
Most (all) Delphi shops I know have that so they automatically already have
VS.Net.
ak
<<sigh>>
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&threadm=3c717a0f_2%40dnews&rnum=1&prev
=/groups%3Fq%3Dak%2Bdelphi.net%2Basp.net%26hl%3Den
(watchout for wrapping url)
"Alessandro Federici" <al...@nospam.msdelphi.com> wrote in message
news:3cd316c4$1_1@dnews...
ak
"Alessandro Federici" <al...@nospam.msdelphi.com> wrote in message
news:3cd316c4$1_1@dnews...
israel r t
> You forgot a basic and very common scenario: people who subscribed to the
> MSDN.
> Most (all) Delphi shops I know have that so they automatically already have
> VS.Net.
Damn !
I knew that I should not have let that MSDN subscription expire !
I'll have staff ring up on monday and renew the subscription.
Peter McMahon
True, true - the less material you give us, the more there is to speculate
on ;-)
P
Paul Qualls
"In the box" with CSharp writing asp.net, buying Delphi (pro or enterprise)
and then welding on a 3'rd party web development tool is simply no
comparison to the integrated IDE/web debugger/etc that you get with visual
studio.net.
I will stick to Delphi for some really low level stuff, but for the time
being, it makes more sense fiscally as well as timewise to use VS.net for
me.
pq
"Jimmy [Used-Disks]" <ji...@NILSMAPused-disks.com> wrote in message
news:Xns9203It89001C04Dj...@207.105.83.65...
MD
"B.Hettrick" <b...@movingtech.com> wrote in message news:3cd353bf$1_2@dnews...
>
> Well considering that "Delphi.net" has not even been released
> why are you demanding a Reviewer's Guide, why can't you
> investigate the .Net framework, CLR and CLS at the above-
> mentioned site and 'read between the lines'.
>
Will there be a release of a beta 1.2.3.. or at least a product document
to describe some sorts of "plan" to show what it is ? How it fits in with
.Net framework and etc...? I do not expect an enterprise prodct like the
one shown here: http://community.borland.com/article/0,1410,28649,00.html. A
brief one snap-shot does not tell a whole lots for a product that costs $2K!
MD
MD
> MD wrote:
>
> > .Net & its ASP.Net, C# are superb! I donot think if Delphi can get to
that
> > level based on how WebSnap was designed!
>
> As Jimmy said, I don't think you understand how WebSnap was designed. It
is
> extremely extensible, and was designed so from the start.
>
"Extensibility" is the term in OO that is used by guys like you (Borland) or
any 3rd party vendors who contribute their own methods to the product for
money. For general purpose application developers like me, I truely do not
need it even though I can do it. This eliminates additional tasks when come
to new versions and compatibility issues. Recently I handled a Delphi
project (medium size) that required ten plus 3rd parties VCLs, 3 of them
could not be found may be they went bankrupt and the project had to be
rewritten because of undocumented open-source VCLs (one of them). This is
what I meant when saying I am not interested in "extending" a base class. I
would like to give you a simple example: GM builds a car, it has everything
in it, customer sees it, likes it, then buys it and be able to drive it
immediately out of the dealer show room. Very simple! Why should I wory to
"extend" my engine capability buy going to xyz suppliers for what I need!
So, lets get back to VS.Net Enterprise (I use Developer Enterprise) and
Delphi 6 Enterprise: Install them and use them out of their box: Please do
not tell me to buy EWF - I think VS.Net does what it advertises!
MD
marc hoffman
> It is extremely extensible, and was designed so from the start.
i think not many people (including me) understand that <g>
Arthur
>As Jimmy said, I don't think you understand how WebSnap was designed. It is
>extremely extensible, and was designed so from the start.
Assembly is extrememly flexible and extensible too - Dont mean I use it much these days.
And come to think of it, edln was expandable too. Since it only use single characters there is a lot of room for new commands! Think about how many commands one could make if it used more letter combinations!
Ohh lets make edln WordSnap!
Robert T. Howell
ASP.NET
> applications so attractive is the way the VS IDE does most of the work for
> us and the fact that that the same development environment is used by and
> known to a multitude of programmers.
I've been writing ASP.NET applications in VS.NET for about two months. I do
find the creation of ASP.NET applications to be attractive. However, I find
the VS IDE to be frustrating and clumsy. I really can't wait to see what
Borland comes up with because living in the VS IDE has been quite
disappointing. Also Microsoft's ASP.NET controls are lousy. Here are a few
reasons why Borland can make writing an ASP.NET application easier:
1. The number of Web Form controls in the Toolbox is very small. Microsoft
has implemented the bare bones. ASP.NET does not even come with a TreeView
control out of the box. Borland has a great opportunity to provide many
more Web Form controls. Many of the non-visual controls such as TAction
would be very helpful.
2. The controls are inconsistent. The properties and events are named
differently on different controls. And if you download the Mobile Internet
Toolkit you will find that Microsoft's mobile team did not communicate very
well with the ASP.NET team. ASP.NET has a "Button", "HyperLink", and
"DropDownList". The mobile toolkit has a "Command", "Link", and
"SelectionList". Why are these controls named differently? I won't even go
into the fact that the same properties and events on these controls are
named differently in the two component sets.
3. Sometimes the Object Inspector look-a-like does not stay in sync with
the control that I click on. Editing properties sometimes takes a few extra
clicks.
4. I can't copy and paste non-visual controls onto a page unless the page
that I am pasting to already has non-visual controls. This is a dumb bug
that I would expect to be fixed considering the number of beta testers that
used this thing.
5. The IDE does not visually support some of the ASP.NET components. You
can create a "User Control" (similar to Borland's TFrame, but not as useful)
and put in on many of your pages, but when you place it on the pages all you
see is a big gray box with the name of the control!
6. There is a MultiPage control that is similar to a Page Control, but
there is no way to graphically add pages, view the pages, or add controls to
the pages. Again, all you see is a big gray box with the name of the
control.
7. The Toolbox that contains all of the controls can list the controls from
top to bottom with one control per line. But there isn't even a scrollbar
so I can scroll to controls that don't fit. You have to click on one of the
controls and use the arrow keys on the keyboard.
8. The way you place controls on pages (or forms) varies depending on what
type of application you are writing. If you have used VB in the past and
have been annoyed with the click-and-size functionality that is required
then you know what I am talking about. If you attempt to do that with an
ASP.NET page then you will get nothing. If you want to drop a control on an
ASP.NET page without having to size the control then you have to drag the
control to the page while the mouse is held down. If you write Windows
applications and Web applications in VS.NET then you will understand how
annoying the lack of consistency is.
9. Some of the controls by default are named starting with a capital
letter, others start with a lowercase letter. This is extremely annoying
considering that C# is case sensitive.
10. The dialog boxes for some of the control properties are sloppy and
confusing.
11. The "IntelliSense" can't beat Delphi 6's code completion. And there is
no Ctrl-click functionality to find declarations in source code.
12. The "Class View" (similar to the Code Explorer) is not relative to the
code I'm viewing it, making it much harder to jump to the function I'm
looking for.
13. There is no equivalent to the Object TreeView.
Microsoft in no way has made "the ultimate IDE". Yes, it is better than the
previous version of VS, but that doesn't say much. Without knowing if
Borland will support graphically building ASP.NET applications, if they do,
given their track record, I believe that there is an excellent chance that
it will be better than Microsoft's attempt.
------------------------------------------
Robert T. Howell (at work)
rth314 (at) hotmail.com
------------------------------------------
Jimmy [Used-Disks]
> You are write, EWF does a good job, however, for the price of what you
> get "In the box" with CSharp writing asp.net, buying Delphi (pro or
> enterprise) and then welding on a 3'rd party web development tool is
> simply no comparison to the integrated IDE/web debugger/etc that you
> get with visual studio.net.
EWF isn't really "welded on". It's just as integrated as ASP.NET AFAICT
(correct me if I'm wrong though). EWF also comes with components that
ASP.NET doesn't as well as better versions of existing ASP.NET
components.
> it makes more sense fiscally as well as timewise to use
> VS.net for me.
VS.NET Pro = $1,079
D6Pro + EWF = $1,300
--------------------
Difference: $ 221
So if you make $40/hour and EWF's components save you just over five and
a half hours of development time (which is quite possible) then EWF was
worth the price.
> pq
Jimmy [Used-Disks]
> "Extensibility" is the term in OO that is used by guys like you
> (Borland) or any 3rd party vendors who contribute their own methods to
> the product for money.
I doubt any solution will meet *all* your needs - that's why
"extensibility" is important. Yes, ASP.NET meets more needs than WebSnap,
but if it weren't extensible you would one day find your self left high and
dry.
Alessandro Federici
> Please do not tell me to buy EWF - I think VS.Net does what it advertises!
Maybe you wanna make sure you know who you talk about when you compare
DevExpress to a small 3rd party developer who might have failed.
Their stuff is used by MS itself and they are starting to make a sign also
in the MS market.
So yes, go and BUY EWF
DRS
[...]
> So yes, go and BUY EWF
When are you going to do your writeup of the various Delphi based RAD Web
tools?
--
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur.
#319
John Kaster (Borland)
> > "John Kaster (Borland)" <jka...@borland.com> wrote in message
> > news:3CD2D47A...@borland.com...
>
> > Please do not tell me to buy EWF - I think VS.Net does what it advertises!
Please be careful when attributing quotes. I didn't say this.
> Maybe you wanna make sure you know who you talk about when you compare
Maybe you wanna make sure you know who you're quoting. <g>
Alessandro Federici
> Alessandro Federici wrote:
> > > "John Kaster (Borland)" <jka...@borland.com> wrote in message
> > > news:3CD2D47A...@borland.com...
> Maybe you wanna make sure you know who you're quoting. <g>
Ok. Netiquette is over for me.
Rosimildo da Silva
>>>>"John Kaster (Borland)" <jka...@borland.com> wrote in message
>>>>news:3CD2D47A...@borland.com...
>>>
>
>>Maybe you wanna make sure you know who you're quoting. <g>
>
>
> Ok. Netiquette is over for me.
LOL ! -- Alessadro, stop it. Have a glass of wine and relax.
I have lost my temper a few times with JK, but it is
always rewarding to dialog with him.
marc hoffman
> > Maybe you wanna make sure you know who you talk about when you compare
> Maybe you wanna make sure you know who you're quoting. <g>
and he surely wasn't quoting you, but MD
Alessandro Federici
Allright! Somebody still understand how to read posts <G>
marc hoffman
<g>
John Kaster (Borland)
> Allright! Somebody still understand how to read posts <G>
Perhaps you should reread the post to which I responded. With the quoting
style you are using there, it looks like I said something I didn't, and that
you are quoting MD having me say it.