forum.vdsworld.com

[Skit3000]

[jules]

[jules]

[jules]

[marty]

I think to have self contained EXE with runtime is not a BIG must have, since like you said there is Alloy. And when I mentionned using Delphi 6 would bring more features to VDS, again I should have said that most components could be used like you said.

Some features of VDS I would like to see in the future:

- ActiveX support (were we could use ActiveX features like Flash, Windows Media Player, IE Browser, Mozilla Browser, and so many more...)

- XML Support (Reading/Writing)

- RichEdit Object integrated (Basic functionnality)

- DirectX functionnalities : Audio, Video, DVD...

Also there is many API functionnality from windows that could be added,
Blending, calendar, and more...

I think CR should add more default extensions if they dont want to grow the runtime too much. For example having the Browser DLL included was a great idea. I think more DLLs should be include for different purposes.

Anyway just ideas...

[jules]

ActiveX support would be very nice, but I don't know how to add it in VDS because it's an interpreter. I don't actually use ActiveX in my Delphi programs, but I think that when you do, you provide Delphi with a type library and it creates an object for the particular ActiveX you're using, which you then compile into the EXE. I don't think there is any kind of generic ActiveX support that could be compiled into VDS that would allow the VDS programmer to use any ActiveX object of his choosing. Another problem is that ActiveX uses typed variables whereas all VDS variables are strings. So if you could use ActiveX, it would be a bit like using the API, where you have to use int:x and bool:y to get the data converted into the right type. I think the solution to this is to create extensions which are wrappers to ActiveX objects that allow VDS to interface with them in an easier manner, just as VDSBRW50.DLL is a wrapper for the web browser ActiveX component.

XML support is something I thought VDS 5 should have, but I didn't have any ideas on how it should be done since I have never actually used it. I think this is something that could be included if people who actually use XML and want it in VDS 6 come up with a specification for how it should be implemented.

A RichEdit dialog element is certainly a possibility. I tended to avoid it because the rich edit control in Windows had a reputation for being somewhat buggy.

I think DirectX, like the IE Browser control, needs to be kept separate from the runtime because there are so many different versions around and they are not all compatible. If Microsoft releases a new version of DirectX you don't want to wait for the next version of VDS to take advantage of it.

Certainly I think a lot of the user interface enhancements that are currently only available in extensions or by API calls could be incorporated into the runtime. But I wouldn't rule out the possibility of new VDS commands and functions being implemented as DSUs that can be included in the applications that need them.

[CodeScript]

Well first thing is we should all be happy about a new version coming up. I guess it wasn' so easy a decision to take for CR.
If the runtime size is gonna increase then may be a one can consider integrating an option to create setups in the IDE itsef(alt arguments may be - there are too many third party utilities for this, we have a open source project etc). IMO this may reduce the burden of the final package and makes the VDS language complete in all respects. May be optionally one can consider allowing download of the runtime from a remote location specified by the user although I don't know if this can be done with a small setup stub in delphi(Unlikely).


Another consideration I wud second marty is Simple Active X stuff (either integrated or as an extension) although CR needs to consider the development costs/time invloved for this non-newbie feature.


Another thing is ready made "DSU" for Entry level users.


Also ability to make a simple dll (written in VDS) instead of DSUs wud be worth a consideration. The dll should be having a VDS extension interface so that in principle it is same as a DSU for the usual users but it can also be used for other langauges/applications etc like any win32 dll.


Ability to have mulitple threads is another one that may be on low priority.

DirectX may not be cost/time effective considering the intricacies involved and the large number of game development software already around.

It is hard for me to think of suggesting more features as the langauge is already rich in features needed by most of the developers.

Edit: I have seen many of the above has been already replied by Julian while I was typing tjis offline.

[jules]

Commercial Research had a VDS-based setup called V-Setup, but I don't know if it was ever updated for VDS 5. I personally never used it.

As you say, there are already many setup utilities, so there isn't much need for another. If size is a concern, I've been using Agentix Installer (http://www.agentix.org) which is quite inexpensive, but I recently learned that it barfs when run on Japanese Windows. I recently ran across another very small one, but I forget what it was now. The obvious solution is to create a self extracting Zip archive with a very small stub, which extracts everything (including the VDS runtime) to a temporary folder and then runs a VDS script to do the setup. I think that's pretty much what V-Setup did. It would probably add less than 30K to the size of the zip file. I doubt if it could be done in less than that if the facility was integrated into the runtime.

So why isn't there already a nice VDS-based setup script that could be run from an SFX in the manner I just described?

[jules]

The ability to create VDS extensions in VDS was something I thought about a while back, but after we had the DSU facility I couldn't really see the point of it. It would open up the possibility of creating DLLs that could be called from other programs, but the extension interface isn't designed for calling from other languages and it's far from ideal. I'm not sure that many people would want to do this.

The suggestion of making VDS multi-threaded arose when I wanted to create some servers in VDS. I have written a POP3 and a SMTP server in VDS but because they can only handle one connection at a time they aren't much practical use. The question is, whether many VDS users are interested in creating servers? The other benefit of multi-threading would be to allow multiple dialogs to work independently, which is hard to do without having one event loop for the whole program, which is usually a recipe for disaster. But perhaps this isn't considered much of a limitation either?

[Skit3000]

[jules]

[Skit3000]

[SnarlingSheep]

My use of the word developer was also slightly misleading, when I really meant the people that have a say in and/or program what is added and fixed.

[jules]

All registered users have a say. There is nothing to stop anyone emailing CR with feature requests. I also suggested the idea of creating a wishlist on VDSWorld where people could suggest ideas and everyone could vote for them.

If I state that I don't think a particular idea is worth the effort of development, it's just an opinion. But I do have more knowledge of how much work a particular enhancement is likely to take than anyone else. What might seem like a simple improvement could actually be more work than adding several new dialog elements.

[Serge]

hi jules,

what about an idea i raised last year (?) about vds compiling a custom dll according to the needs of the vds program written, and this dll will be distributed with our program or compiled into the 1 exe?

or something like Euphoria where there are libraries that you call before you can use the functions and commands you want to use, and the whole thing compiled into 1 exe ?

i find it a bit wasteful to include a run time that could be 1 Mb when i might only use some of the functions and commands - especially when there are programs out there that do what some of mine do but are a lot smaller

also, when your idea of a wish list forum becomes a reality, perhaps people could post their definite wish and folks can vote on them so as to give commercial research some idea of what their users want

or perhaps even a mailout to all the folks registered at vds?

serge