Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Lazarus – A Delphi-compatible cross-platform IDE

lazarus-ide.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 187 posts

Re: Lazarus – A Delphi-compatible cross-platform IDE

#151

Post by exikyut »

alex-e wrote: post #141
rcarmo wrote: post #73

I mentioned Lazarus in other threads a few days ago (since my kids are playing around with it) and it's great to see it as a top-level post. Some random thoughts: - It's somewhat amusing to realize that in 2017 this is pretty much the easiest way to do a desktop app (besides RealBasic/Xojo which I've yet to try - was put off by their mandatory registration) - I wish we had RAD environments like this for more language…

Speaking of the bloated slack client, there's a new native desktop app for Slack, Skype, and many others: https://eul.im It's only 4 MB and uses ~100 MB RAM.

Wait, how are you doing Skype?

Re: Lazarus – A Delphi-compatible cross-platform IDE

#152

Post by 0xbear »

Tom4hawk wrote: post #100
0xbear wrote: post #56

Now someone just needs to clone C++ Builder and we'll be all set. Power of C++ with the simplicity of Delphi.

QT Creator is really nice.

QT is really expensive for commercial use though. And it's not as easy as Builder was. Builder basically gave you Delphi capability but in C++. You could focus 100% on the problem you're solving rather than on the UI -- true component based RAD. Drop a few components, wire them together, then add your code to do what they can't do.

Re: Lazarus – A Delphi-compatible cross-platform IDE

#153

Post by jcelerier »

bigtunacan wrote: post #140
dkersten wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not apples to apples, but its a pretty good tradeoff for C++ IMO: you get super high turnaround times because the bulk of the UI tweaking cycle is in QML or the RAD tools and you only need slow-compiling-C++ where native performance is required. For me, while I like fast compile times as much as the next person, its not a deal breaker -- the workflow/environment and library features are. Ie can they easily deliver th…

It's not a good trade off for the end user. As it's not native you end up with a much slower running application with more memory overhead and bloat. Lazarus is compiled to small native applications that are easily installable for the user, fast, with both small memory and disk space usage. I say this next piece as both a developer and an end user; developers of desktop applications are getting out of hand with how t…

> As it's not native you end up with a much slower running application with more memory overhead and bloat.

For Qt that's just not true: you can reach 1080p / 60fps fluid animated UI on small embedded boards such as raspberry pi's. All the rendering is done using a nifty OpenGL pipeline.

Re: Lazarus – A Delphi-compatible cross-platform IDE

#154

Post by throwaway7645 »

hdhzy wrote: post #149
throwaway7645 wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As awesome as Lazarus appears to be here, Rebol is even more amazing in my opinion. There is no designer, but the GUI DSL is mind bending. Red is a Rebol inspired language that is also tiny with a compiler as well so you can build a nice cross-platform-native GUI and distribute it as a tiny executable (~1.5 MB). You can see the GUI stuff for both Rebol and Red. There's a YouTube video by Nick Antonnacio (spelling) th…

Do you mean this: https://youtube.com/watch?v=D50XULVZaYY ? Looks nice!

That one and this one:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=lR5Fzv6DP0I

That guy can build some simple apps FAST! It helps that Rebol has built-ins for everything.

Re: Lazarus – A Delphi-compatible cross-platform IDE

#155

Post by HelloNurse »

samuell wrote: post #104
adrianlmm wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've created small projects in Lazarus and you are right in all points except in the small binary part, also I would add that it comes with db drivers for Postgrees, MySQL and Firebird SQL out of the box.

If you compare to the "modern" way of building cross-platform apps: Electron ... with its 100s of MBs, I'm definitely regarding Lazarus binaries as small :)

Electron is degenerate, not "modern". XUL was modern.

Re: Lazarus – A Delphi-compatible cross-platform IDE

#156

Post by tomc1985 »

jenkstom wrote: post #148
pjmlp wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We doing Windows, OS X, iOS and Android development still enjoy RAD.

Perhaps clarification is needed. The glory days of RDAD (rapid database application development). While there is probably something that approaches the simplicity and speed of Delphi's glory days, I haven't found it. I can think of at least one Delphi developer who went in to management rather than deal with the scaffolding nightmares of current systems. A lot of us followed Anders Hejlsberg when he left Delphi behin…

I was thinking more VB (that's my background) but I'd include Delphi in that set as well. VB was a pain in the ass at the time but, even as a beginner, it still let me churn out programs at a breakneck pace.

Re: Lazarus – A Delphi-compatible cross-platform IDE

#157

Post by bigtunacan »

jcelerier wrote: post #153
bigtunacan wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not a good trade off for the end user. As it's not native you end up with a much slower running application with more memory overhead and bloat. Lazarus is compiled to small native applications that are easily installable for the user, fast, with both small memory and disk space usage. I say this next piece as both a developer and an end user; developers of desktop applications are getting out of hand with how t…

> As it's not native you end up with a much slower running application with more memory overhead and bloat. For Qt that's just not true: you can reach 1080p / 60fps fluid animated UI on small embedded boards such as raspberry pi's. All the rendering is done using a nifty OpenGL pipeline.

To clarify, I was referring to the language choices here. Comparing Lazarus as opposed to Python in the particular case, as well as referring to even worse performance on Electron/NodeJS.

I certainly was not intending to imply that Qt is not performant as it certainly is. Qt is the default UI for Lazarus applications as well, but it does support other UI toolkits (such as Tk) out of the box.

Re: Lazarus – A Delphi-compatible cross-platform IDE

#158

Post by dkersten »

bigtunacan wrote: post #140
dkersten wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not apples to apples, but its a pretty good tradeoff for C++ IMO: you get super high turnaround times because the bulk of the UI tweaking cycle is in QML or the RAD tools and you only need slow-compiling-C++ where native performance is required. For me, while I like fast compile times as much as the next person, its not a deal breaker -- the workflow/environment and library features are. Ie can they easily deliver th…

It's not a good trade off for the end user. As it's not native you end up with a much slower running application with more memory overhead and bloat. Lazarus is compiled to small native applications that are easily installable for the user, fast, with both small memory and disk space usage. I say this next piece as both a developer and an end user; developers of desktop applications are getting out of hand with how t…

EDIT: reading your reply to sibling comment, I think I probably misinterpreted what you are referring to here so my below response maybe is replying to the wrong thing.

Regarding your first paragraph, Qt/QML performance is very, very good, memory use isn't insane (in my personal experience at least), rendering is solid 60fps and animations are ultra smooth. Maybe Lazarus is better, but not being a good tradeoff for the user, at least in Qt's case, just isn't true.

Regarding your second paragraph, I completely agree, it those are C++ developers using frameworks like Qt doing that. They're primarily web developers who are using what they're familiar with (JavaScript) to develop desktop applications. An Electron application is very different from a Qt application.

Even with QML, which uses JavaScript, the bulk of the Qt framework is written in C++, the declarative QML is compiled to a scene graph on load, the rendering is done in OpenGL and shaders, and any heavy lifting or performance sensitive code can be done in C++ (Qt makes it VERY easy to call C++ from JS and JS from C++). Typically only non-performance-sensitive glue logic is in JS. This is very different front Electron and Qt (even with QML) is still primarily a C++ framework.

Re: Lazarus – A Delphi-compatible cross-platform IDE

#159

Post by microcolonel »

int_19h wrote: post #83
microcolonel wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> My feeling as well. In my heart I am really happy that Lazarus (and Harbour, the Clipper-compatible compiler) exist, but being rational the days of desktop applications are over. Oh boy, I hadn't heard about Harbour until now; earlier today I was looking at the Wikipedia page for id Tech 5, and it says it uses Clipper so I was really scratching my head wondering how they pulled that off and why. Now I know, thanks…

Wait. Why would a 3D game use Clipper? What for?

That's what I was wondering, I'm thinking of tracking down whoever added that to the Wikipedia page, because I don't know how they found out.

Re: Lazarus – A Delphi-compatible cross-platform IDE

#160

Post by Jack4E4B »

Tomte wrote: post #57
Jack4E4B wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That headline made people read... and your current title is not fully accurate. It is a Delphi inspired Pascal for sure, but not fully compatible, more like a free alternative.

Exactly. Your title was clickbait and dishonest. We don't accept that here.

Okay let us use some logic, I assume you are a logical person.

"Proving That Pascal Is Alive and Kicking Ass" contains the following logical assertions:

p1 Pascal is alive p2 Pascal is kicking ass, which any urban dictionary will tell you means it is just awesome, and beating the compeition. p3 is the actual statememnt: P1 AND p2 = p3 They are ALL TRUE. Where is the click bait? It is 100% true, you are only objecting to the word choice. Which was bu the way accurate, just not boring like your current title.

Post reply on HN