It creates a native image of the assembly for the current processor/OS
it was executed on.
Well native delphi code won't run too well without a number of
windows DLLs either, therefore native delphi code still requires a
framework. It is just that the .NET framework isn't always installed
by
There's a significant difference between splitting code across multiple
modules which are loaded dynamically and relying on one or more libraries to
create the fundamental runtime environment (as in, the necessary
infrastructure to actually transform the bytes in the application into
executable
My concern was not so much the code compilation as to more how fast (or
slow) it performs in relation to delphi..
often such things like Garbage collection, and interpreted code has a big
cost (depending on the type of app)
I guess one day I may have a play :)
On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 7:56 PM,
What ngen does is a fairly long way away from what aot does. For most of
the reasons you would want native code, ngen isn't much help. For a
starter, it looks like ngening is typically done at install time not at
compile time.
Sean
-Original Message-
From: delphi-boun...@delphi.org.nz
I have been doing a bit of .NET stuff the last month or morestill
learningdoing C# and I don't mind it too much and picked it up pretty
quick.
Its FAR better then VB.NET J
Yes there have been the odd little things that is a bit strange and they are
pretty much the same things I thought
This is (done at install time) because ngen is optimized for processor
and OS. NGen means the resultant assembly is faster. How much faster
is debatable since ngen doesn't seem that popular.
I haven't done .NET stuff for a long time sans a few C# prototypes
when required.
On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at
This is (done at install time) because ngen is optimized for processor
and OS.
I think there needs to be an in theory caveat in there somewhere. How
many different CPU/OS families does the .NET JIT compiler actually support
discretely? And does it really make a difference anyway?
Delphi
Currently I'm using BDS 2006, InfoPower Studio 2007, AceReporter Pro v1.71,
SMImport v2.56, JEDI (Jv, JVCL) v3.34 components in my application(s). If I
were to update to RAD 2010 I will have to upgrade these components as well.
To help me make the decision I would appreciate your suggestions.
Can't help with a link, but yeah, my recollection is the same; the
Delphi implementation spanked the C# one, even though it was the C# guys
who'd defined the context for the challenge.
-Original Message-
From: delphi-boun...@delphi.org.nz [mailto:delphi-boun...@delphi.org.nz]
On Behalf Of
Antivirus, version of virus
signature database 4435 (20090917) __
The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
http://www.eset.com
___
NZ Borland Developers Group
Seeing we are talking about the merits of .Net and garbage collection - let
me re-raise my question which no-one answered yet:
The D2007 IDE uses quite a bit of .Net code. I find it is consistently the
last thing to respond on Vista after a log-in or resume - 20-30+ seconds of
spinning wheel
To add to the language debate...
We are now doing more Java stuff... Have to say I enjoy the IDE
(Eclipse) more than Delphi's (2007), and I just seem to 'like' the
language better.
Have done a couple of small web related things, and also a couple of
small (just to try it out) applications
The D2007 IDE uses quite a bit of .Net code.
Afaik the IDE only uses .NET for the CodeDOM and some other bits and pieces
primarily involved in the modeling/refactoring support.
is it .Net overhead?
I think it's fair to say that it's .NET overhead of some form, although I
don't know how much
Don't forget that the garbage collection won't actually collect unless
the system is looking for more memory to use. This is why you might
see memory use grow to considerable amounts in older versions of the
IDE. I believe in the newer versions (of the IDE), they (embarcadero)
force collection a
The GC in .NET has evolved more and more facilities to configure and
tune it, which again raises the question in my mind... if GC is supposed
to be this great, automated memory management system, why does it need so
much tweaking and tuning?
... and why do I still have to dispose of certain
You might *try* to force a collection but...
1) the advice is you shouldn't.. The GC supposedly works best when left to
its own devices (which then begs the question, why even provide the
*facility* to force it, if it's better not to? Answer: because your
application knows how it uses memory
The GC in .NET has evolved more and more facilities to configure and
tune it, which again raises the question in my mind... if GC is
supposed
to be this great, automated memory management system, why does it need
so
much tweaking and tuning?
In typical use, it doesn't need any
I presume you're talking about her car...
Regards
Ian
Sean Cross wrote:
The GC in .NET has evolved more and more facilities to "configure" and
"tune" it, which again raises the question in my mind... if GC is
supposed
to be this great, automated memory management system, why
Yeah, I thought there was a joke there somewhere too, but I was too
scared to go and look for it... ;-)
From: delphi-boun...@delphi.org.nz [mailto:delphi-boun...@delphi.org.nz]
On Behalf Of Ian Drower
Sent: Friday, 18 September 2009 2:45 p.m.
To: NZ Borland
Ah yes. I know it's Friday but you have gone for the gutter very early.
Regards
Sean Cross
CIO
Catalyst Risk Management
PO Box 230
Napier 4140
DDI: 06-8340362
Mobile: 021270 3466
Visit us at http://www.catalystrisk.co.nzhttp://www.catalystrisk.co.nz/
Offices in Auckland, Hamilton, Napier,
An interesting analogy (and why is it that automotive analogies insist on
cropping up in software development matters?).
Your car manufacturer presumably doesn't tell you that in most cases you
should just ignore those settings - they are there specifically and
precisely to add functionality.
This report is interesting - particularly the GARBAGE conditional define.
I've only done a little coding in C#, but I have to say that I do like
Garbage collection. It makes code much cleaner and easy to read. It
would be nice to be able to do a similar thing for exception handling
code -
Hi All
I seem to remember that there was an AT command that when you sent a fax via
a modem, it sent out the fax handshaking signal.
At the moment, when I send a fax via the modem to a real fax (that I had
to bring up from the basement...no kidding either) I have to press the start
button on the
Hi Jeremy
Haven't your people heard of encrypted email?
Hi All
I seem to remember that there was an AT command that when you sent a fax
via a modem, it sent out the fax handshaking signal.
At the moment, when I send a fax via the modem to a real fax (that I
had to bring up from the
Hi Jeremy
Here's a comprehensive list of the AT commands..
http://www.computerhope.com/atcom.htm
Regards
Ian Drower
Jeremy Coulter wrote:
Hi All
I seem to remember that there was an AT command that when you sent a
fax via a modem, it sent out the fax handshaking signal.
At the moment, when
yes they have. But as I explained in an earlier email, its about change
process for them. If they are payingwe are doing.kicking and
screamingbut doing :-)
The issue is more complicated than just change management tho too.
Jeremy
On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 4:10 PM, Todd Martin
Sure it isn't the actual fax. Auto answering not activated or something.
On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 2:03 PM, Jeremy Coulter jscoul...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi All
I seem to remember that there was an AT command that when you sent a fax via
a modem, it sent out the fax handshaking signal.
At the
no its not the fax. I established that before I bothered asking.
Jeremy
On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 4:18 PM, Jeremy North jeremy.no...@gmail.comwrote:
Sure it isn't the actual fax. Auto answering not activated or something.
On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 2:03 PM, Jeremy Coulter jscoul...@gmail.com
Thanks Ian. I have my USRobotics modem manual with the AT Commands in it. I
just am nto sure which one it is..
On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 4:16 PM, Ian Drower ian.dro...@idsystems.co.nzwrote:
Hi Jeremy
Here's a comprehensive list of the AT commands..
*http://www.computerhope.com/atcom.htm
An interesting analogy (and why is it that automotive analogies insist
on
cropping up in software development matters?).
Your car manufacturer presumably doesn't tell you that in most cases
you
should just ignore those settings - they are there specifically and
precisely to add
I was trying to be funny rather than accurate :)
Likewise. Tomorrow is the weekend. :)
It's an analogy that breaks down pretty quickly.
Automotive ones usually do, yet they also seem deceptively applicable when
we first come up with them. I'm as guilty as anyone on that score. :)
He
Hi Jeremy
Its a long shot, but in the Async pro tools ver 4.07 from Turbo Power,
now on source forge, there's a significant number of components that
handle faxes still...
maybe a prod around in that will show up what initiates a fax send ..
Regards
Ian
Jeremy Coulter wrote:
Thanks Ian. I
I guess that's why GC doesn't appeal *to*me*... I appreciate the power and
flexibility that manual memory management provides but at the same time I'm
not always forced to put up with the drudgery that that entails.
So GC offers me nothing much that I don't already have but takes away
As far as Garbage collection in Delphi, I have sometimes wondered why there
isn't something along the lines of a RTTI list of objects that have been
created by the program in code (rather than autocreated by the Application),
then it would be quite easy to go thru the list and figure out
Actually FastMM also tells you exactly what you did not free, and where..
so.. no memory leaks.. Its amazing how frequently you can forget a try
finally.. but.. they all get picked up the moment I run the app.
On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 5:33 PM, Kyley Harris ky...@harrissoftware.comwrote:
Ben
The full FastMM version can show a detailed list, however the version
included with Delphi by default can show you the classnames and size
of the leak. Just set the ReportMemoryLeaksOnShutdown global variable.
On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 3:34 PM, Kyley Harris ky...@harrissoftware.com wrote:
Actually
yes, I include the full version in my apps. you just have to set the
compiler defines properly
On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 5:41 PM, Jeremy North jeremy.no...@gmail.comwrote:
The full FastMM version can show a detailed list, however the version
included with Delphi by default can show you the
37 matches
Mail list logo
