I would never want RS to be using the most current version.  One release
behind current would be ok though.


On 1/2/07 19:52, "Giovanni" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> I do see your point and agree, its just that if RS is not using the most
> current version, it is almost pointless to develop RB in RB. Hence the
> reason why bugs persist.
> 
> 
> 
> Daniel Stenning wrote:
>> On 1/2/07 19:34, "Giovanni" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> 
>>   
>>> I have been following the thread and having come from VS and VB, I dont
>>> get the point of Making RB from RB.
>>> 
>>> 1- Wouldnt C++ give you everything you need to create a massive
>>> developing tool?
>>>     
>> 
>> Obviously it would, but what better Kudos could a development tool have but
>> the fact that it was written in itself.  After all - Visual Studio is
>> written in VS,  and  gcc is written in  ...  Gcc  :)
>> 
>>   
>>> 2- Shouldnt RB test their stuff before releasing it? If they tested or
>>> debug the application and features they are releasing, shouldnt all this
>>> bugs be fixed?
>>>     
>> 
>> Testing stuff before a release applies whether or not RB is written in RB or
>> C++
>> 
>>   
>>> 3- Are we paying beta testers?
>>> 
>>> It seems to me that the issues should not be DEVELOP USING RB, it should
>>> be, why was this feature untested and who is responsible for those
>>> features and their releases.
>>> 
>>> I mean, after sitting here reading the threads, I have noticed that some
>>> of you are top notch programmers, why isnt RS paying attention or are they?
>>> 
>>> I fail to see why they have to develop in RB, if RB is bugged as it it,
>>> it also means that the products being produced by RB are also bugged?
>>> 
>>>     
>> 
>> There are very good reasons
>> 
>> 1)  it allows RS to experience their own tool DIRECTLY and therefore improve
>> it better,
>> 
>> 2) by using it to develop a "hard core" app themselves they are in a good
>> position to recognise where improvements need to be made to RB for
>> performance, memory management etc..
>> 
>> 
>> 3)  RB is a hell of a lot more productive to write code in thN to C++. This
>> results in the LONG TERM in more reliable RB releases and faster bug fixes.
>> 
>>  I know there are at this time a lot of outstanding bug and performance
>> issues,  but I do think that we will all see the benefits, given time.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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>
>> 
>>   
> _______________________________________________
> 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>
> 


_______________________________________________
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>

Reply via email to