Massimo Valle wrote:
On 12/ott/06, at 23:03, Bryan Lund wrote:
Regarding the new compiler, I'd be curious to know where are the
news. Really, how is different from the previous?
One of the primary reasons, as I understand it, for RS needing to have
spent time on the compiler was for maintainability. And I think the
results of that is very, very obvious. We have multiple new targets
in an amazingly short amount of time.
This seems like propaganda to me.
Maintainability of the compiler is not something you can call a feature
to advertise. I admit that the compiler is faster to compile and
maintainability can bring advantages.
Maintainability is not a new feature. But it does lead to good things.
I'm not sure why that's propaganda...
But, if you talk about a new compiler, I'd expect to see a smart
optimized compiler and linker. Not something that still force me to
store the argument of a for...next cycle into a variable to avoid
calculation at every loop.
Not something that fails to determine correct plugin dependencies and
bloat my applications with unnecessary code.
And to do that it takes a ton of RAM and CPU time too.
It seems like you're disregarding any good things because of the bad
things (or, really, things you just disagree with).
I really wonder if we are talking about the same tool.
There is a thread in this list (a couple of days old) about the 2006r4
IDE which crashes a lot. Seems I'm not the only experiencing crashes.
I use RB primarily on Macintosh (various models) Mac OS X 10.4.8 - English.
I wonder if these issues are more Mac-centric then. Could be. Could
also be usage. Do you have bug reports with some repro steps?
-Bryan
_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode:
<http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/>
Search the archives of this list here:
<http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>
