forum.vdsworld.com

[CodeScript]

I am just wondering about the fate of a person who gets a VDS app without the runtime dll i.e vdsrun30 or 40 or 50.dll. He will search all the net find something about visual Dialogscript yet cannot find the runtime library and will curse for the situation . And this is most likely his first encounter with VDS and what does he feel ?. Now take the case with visual basic if such a situation should arise he can download the runtime from several sites including their home page.

Would it not be nice to provide the link to these runtimes at the homepage.
Also if the exe would display a message like - "Could not find vdsrun50.dll. Please download it from http://www.***.com and place it in your application directory"
Second one may be difficult but I don't know about the first.
Would it not increase the populatrity and user friendliness?. Just a food for thought - so i placed it here.

I don't deny the responsibilty of the person who distributed the exe to include the runtimes .
If I am wrong in posting this moderators - kindly delete it.

[FreezingFire]

You are right, CodeScript. If you do not have the runtime you will get
the following error:



I think posting the runtimes at www.dialogscript.com might help if they
do not have the runtime.

[CodeScript]

[vdsalchemist]

Umm you should not distribute the Exe without the runtime??? I hate the fact that every VB application out there never includes the runtime and then I have to go and get the silly thing. You should distribute all dependencies that you know is not going to be on the Users OS. I think that if you tell your customer "Oh BTW you have to download the runtime in a seperate download." looks very sloppy and says that your product is incomplete. This is only my opinion so don't go flaming me for it. I almost always include the runtime with my Exe's. Yes it makes the download bigger but the user is going to need the runtime anyway and it looks better that they don't have to download another file and then try to figure out where to put that file. Alot of users do not know how to get past the Windows Desktop and yet they figure out how to install a application but they don't know where that application is because todays webbrowser's allow you to run the installs directly.

[FreezingFire]

I agree Mindpower, I always distribute the runtime with my programs.
That's why I think the executables should be made to be integrated,
I don't understand why they aren't. Would it be impossible to do that?

[CodeScript]

[CodeScript]

[Skit3000]

[FreezingFire]

But, as I've said about 62 times before, Alloy is a great product, but I
don't want the runtime to be extracted, I want it to be inside the executable.

Perhaps having an integration option like VDS 2.x had would be best.
A lot more people would probably buy if it had this option. Delphi executables
include a runtime package, right? They're about 172 kb for executable
if I remember correctly.

[PGWARE]

Delphi exe's are self contained, however there is an option to use runtime files if you want to distribute small exe's with a shared runtime option, but most people just use the single exe option.

[FreezingFire]

But isn't the runtime package included in the executable?

[SnarlingSheep]

That's usually what self contained means FF

[FreezingFire]

Yup, that's what I said in the first place.

[vdsalchemist]

Actually I think it depends on what version of Delphi you are talking about. Maybe some of the old versions used a runtime but I believe that the newer versions of Delphi compile without a runtime of anykind since the introduction of inline assembly. I believe that Delphi Exe's are P code. Also the reason that Delphi Exe's are so large is because of the components and modules that the programmer has included in their exe. I have seen Delphi Exe's as small as 5 and 7 kb. So I don't think a runtime DLL can fit in that small of a Exe.
As for VDS'es runtime being truly integrated this will prob. never happen. VDS uses a *.dll as a runtime and as long as it does it will always need to be extracted to the drive to be called by the Exe. I don't know if I am at liberty to say exactly why it has to use a DLL but I believe I know a really good reason why. As long as VDS is an interpreted language it will rely on a runtime of sorts. Even Java relies on a runtime and I never hear Java programmers complain this much about it. Also many many other languages rely on a runtime and I really don't see what the big deal is with using a product like Alloy and extracting the runtime to the drive? I just don't see your arguments about the advantages of having the languge compile as integrated or extracting the runtime to the drive? There is no advantage that I can see with having the Exe extract the runtime or be the runtime. VB has been doing this for years and Mr. Gates does not complain when he gets those huge checks from the sale of VB every month. Millions of programmers out there program with VB and none of them care that is has a runtime or not...They just tell you to go and download it which I hate because I know for a fact that they can make it part of their install package.

Also there are many setup packages out there that are free that will work to install your software. I guess to me it is just another file to send out just like all my other files.

[CodeScript]

I agree with you mindpower but my main point was making run time easily available to everybody if needed.
OK unless commercial research decides to give the option of OPTIONALLY including the run time with the exe when needed it's difficult.
I think PE Bundle gives the option of advanced bundle where the dll is directly extracted to the programs memory space and not written to disk and i think this works with VDS 4.x don't know about 5.x. But again here if the app contains many exes running together this will add to the burden on memory.