Hacker News Reader

Comment by mike_hearn | Hacker News Reader

You could use Java with Avian, which is a small embeddable, statically linkable JVM. It uses LZMA and aggressive dead code elimination to make tiny binaries. If you use it with SWT you get native widgets too, and they have an example which does exactly that weighing in at only one megabyte:

https://readytalk.github.io/avian-web/swt-examples/windows-x...

Creating such a tight binary isn't entirely point and click, but if you want a tiny self contained executable and don't want to assume a pre-existing runtime like .NET then your options are really only VB6 (classic), Delphi or VC++ and all of them will involve a lot of arcane wizardry too.

View on HN

> don't want to assume a pre-existing runtime like .NET

Don't all distributions of Windows include .NET by default?

"Windows is not a .NET Framework delivery channel either"

https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/oldnewthing/20110404-00/?p=... .NET could be disabled or some older version.

I've had to install .NET many times. Maybe it's due to people using older windows versions when the software uses a newer .NET version that isn't pre-installed

No, but you can bundle the installer for the version you need into your own installer.

Not "all" if you mean it literally. .NET came much later than Windows - maybe post-Win NT as well as post-Win 2K - others who know better can probably correct me or give a more precise date.

I remember meeting and talking with (or rather he did more of the talking) a senior Microsoft software engineer who was involved in the first .NET version, and he was telling me stuff about it. He may not have used the term .NET (can't remember), but I remember him saying that it used XML throughout (and also a lot of other stuff about its advantages). Very enthusiastic about it, he was. It was only some time later that I realized that what was now called .NET, was the same as what he had been referring to in his talk with me.

Also, Turbo Delphi Explorer (which was a stripped-down version of Delphi 6), came in two versions - the plain Win 32 version (non-.NET) and the .NET version. I remember, because I installed and used it some. Here's a blog post about a small utility I wrote with it (screenshot of the clock not there now, sorry):

http://jugad2.blogspot.in/2010/08/digital-clock-v10-in-3-lin...

> .NET came much later than Windows

Before .NET there was only Win 32, and before that, Win 16. (Worked some on both). Edit: Okay, there was and maybe still is WoW too (Windows on Windows), and even something called Win32s (or 16s) (IIRC, but I don't know or remember much about those).

Delphi does not really involve any "arcane wizardy" for basic applications - it really is drag/drop/code/compile/deploy a single .exe. Things only get a little more complicated once you "up the level of polish" to a commercial application that needs to deal with high-DPI and multiple image sizes, etc. But, that's a problem for any platform that uses raster images for toolbars, menus, etc.

I was a Delphi programmer for years: yes it makes self contained binaries. But at this point the VCL definitely counts as arcane wizardry unfortunately - it's hard to think of a more legacy technology except maybe COBOL. More's the pity.

Then you also know that the VCL is a wrapper around the Win32 API, which is still present in Windows 10 and used by every native Windows desktop application on the planet, including .Net applications. So, how exactly is it legacy technology ?

I think it gets harder to hire people with strong Win32 knowledge every year, and there were always far more apps written against Win32 directly than the VCL.

>Delphi does not really involve any "arcane wizardy" for basic applications

Agreed. Said as a guy who is not a GUI programming expert - just used VB's earlier versions in real life projects (but more as project manager than dev, on those VB projects), and VB and Delphi (both in multiple versions) and wxPython for some small personal GUI apps. Not had any problems with Delphi that can be called arcane. And Pascal is a pretty straightforward language, and Object Pascal just adds some (mainly OO and GUI and Windows API) stuff on top of that.

What you CAN do is not what you SHOULD do or the recommended way of doing it.

What you are saying may have made sense 15 years ago, but not today.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com