INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR COMPUTER PROFESSIONALS

Log In

Come Join Us!

Are you a
Computer / IT professional?
Join Tek-Tips Forums!
  • Talk With Other Members
  • Be Notified Of Responses
    To Your Posts
  • Keyword Search
  • One-Click Access To Your
    Favorite Forums
  • Automated Signatures
    On Your Posts
  • Best Of All, It's Free!

*Tek-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail.

Posting Guidelines

Promoting, selling, recruiting, coursework and thesis posting is forbidden.

Jobs

Anyone still using CA-Realizer?

Anyone still using CA-Realizer?

(OP)
I have written a major application in CA-Realizer, which I am currently porting to 32-bit. Computer Associates no longer support the language. Is anyone still using it? Please talk to me.

RE: Anyone still using CA-Realizer?

Yes.  Although I'm concerned that windows 2000 may not run CAR.  We're using vb for new stuff but I've lots of CAR code written.  Moreover, CAR is still quickest for throw away code when doing research and stuff.

RE: Anyone still using CA-Realizer?

2
(OP)
Thank you, Curry

I hope you are wrong that Windows 2000 won't run CAR code. There is one command in CAR that no other language to my knowledge has, EXECUTE, which allows one to generate code dynamically. I have lost count how often I have used that command. With a few lines you create what would otherwise take enormous blocks of code.

Regards, Helmut

RE: Anyone still using CA-Realizer?

Hi there REALIZER lovers:
My name is Gerardo, I’m a commercial engineering and a amateur programmer.  Under DOS I used ca-clipper summer 87 and CA-Realizer 2.0d is my alternative under windows.  I’m very used to *.dbf format so realizer is a great tool.
I read a technical paper that ensures that realizer does not work under Win2000 specially because the new features of the windows displays.
I wander if it’s worth to continue developing programs under realizer or change to another “best supported” o common software.  I was trying to buy a Realizer 3.0 for more than 6 month but it was impossible.  What do you think? And if you change your software, what would you use in that case?
Have you evaluated the possibility of developing software’s under Linux... do you know any language for that use....

Best regards, Gerardo

RE: Anyone still using CA-Realizer?

(OP)
The beauty with DOS was that it was backward compatible. I have programs written under Dos 2.0 that still run under version 7. That was the strength of DOS and made Microsoft into what it is. Microsoft has abandoned the policy of backward compatibility and this could be its undoing.

Computer Associates should be encouraged to revisit Realizer and modify it so it compiles into Java byte-code. The ease of programming combined with platform-independence of Java would make it a powerhouse. It's not a trivial task but would make Realizer the tool of the just-started century.

RE: Anyone still using CA-Realizer?

(OP)
PS:

Contact Logit(Programmer). He wrote "No I am not using it, but have a brand new copy that I'd love to sell somebody." in the BASIC:Microsoft Forum on the same question.

RE: Anyone still using CA-Realizer?

Thak you very much.. butt how ca I contact

RE: Anyone still using CA-Realizer?

This is all news to me.  I was thinking of buying v3 of CA-Realizer, (having got v1 and v2), but if what you say is true (that Win2000 won't run realizer), then I guess its time to get on the Visual Basic or C++ bandwagon.  Its dissapointing though, because is actually fun to write code in RLZ and I don't know a thing about Visual Basic.  

RE: Anyone still using CA-Realizer?

I am using CA-Realizer 3.0 now, but i find it difficult to use the control especially the notebook control. Do anyone know there is any online manual for 3.0??

RE: Anyone still using CA-Realizer?

I've been using CA-Realizer v2 for about 10 years for an engineering application. I like CA-Realizer for its simplicity of programming and the charts that can be displayed. I've recently updated to Windows2000Pro and found that most of my programs run OK. The only thing that doesn't run is the Project Builder it refuses to create the EXE file of my application. It has difficulty with file path access. I get path not found errors, despite the path existing. I'm not sure whether the Win2000 NTFS file system is the problem. Have tried other partitions on my hard drive that are FAT32 file system, but get the same error. I am very disappointed to hear that CA are no longer supporting the CA-Realizer Language. Is version 3.0 32 Bit?
email: dlprice@pnc.com.au

RE: Anyone still using CA-Realizer?

(OP)
Hi, DP

Yes, v 3.0 is 32-bit. You can probably port most of your v2 code to v3. Watch out for a few minor pitfalls - for example, you can no longer use () for arrays, must us [].

The problem you found with Project Builder is interesting. I hope it is due to 16-bit architecture (e.g. path containing long names?) and not a problem with v3 in Win2000.

Buy, steal or pirate a version 3.0 and keep us posted how you are going with Win2000.

Regards, Helmut

RE: Anyone still using CA-Realizer?

Hi there all you guys!

I hope every one is Ok..  sorry for not following up the list... it’s a very long story.....
After all the discussing I’m decided to continue with CAR.. but I need to buy a 3.0 version...

Thanks....

RE: Anyone still using CA-Realizer?

Hi there , anyone knows were I can buy a CAR 3.0...... Please I need it soon
Bye

RE: Anyone still using CA-Realizer?

(OP)
Try http://www.cai.com/catalk.htm and give them a serve on one of the feedback channels. They MIGHT give you some service, but I doubt it, unless you are a billion$ government department.

RE: Anyone still using CA-Realizer?

Hello, today I have discovered this forum of ca-realizer  
excuse for my English  
I am self taught, amateur programmer and I use for several years  
I am trying to place in the system windows tray a popup menu but I don't get it.  
Somebody could help me.
Thank you

RE: Anyone still using CA-Realizer?

I have been using CAR Ver 3.0a casually for several years.
Am presently on Windows 98SE and slowly trying to convince myself to move to XP. I wonder if it will run on XP. Any answers or thoughts?

RE: Anyone still using CA-Realizer?

CA-Realizer 2.0 is used extensively here for in-house development on both Windows and OS/2. When CA stopped supporting it, all plans for ever using it for a commerical product were scrapped, although version 3.0a is still good for prototypes. Not using XP, I can't comment on it's suitability for newer version of Windows although it should work.

RE: Anyone still using CA-Realizer?

(OP)
Hi, SMPCS, your comment is like a breath of fresh air.

A commercial product based on Realizer is at:
http://www.engs-comp.com/mathserv/

If Microsoft has really abandoned its policy of backward compatibility, it could be its undoing.

CA should be encouraged to develop Realizer as a Java Byte Code compiler, similar to IBM's VisualAge for Java (see http://www-3.ibm.com/software/ad/vajava/), but with Realizer's intuitive and easy-to-use language and interface.

Thank you and best wishes, Helmut

http://www.engs-comp.com/

RE: Anyone still using CA-Realizer?

I am totally new to CA-Realizer - I've looked everywhere, but where can I get my hands on CAR? Is it free or what? Can it even be downloaded, or is there no point if I am running Windows XP Pro, which I am.

What next?

Or WILL CAR code convert to work in MS Visual Basic?

Sam Kelleher.

RE: Anyone still using CA-Realizer?

We also have a commercial package based on CA-Realizer 2.0d.  We went through a painful upgrade from 1.0 to 2.0, and as a result have not upgraded to 3.0 because the transition looked difficult.  We're in the throes of rewriting the app in Visual C++.  As a note to topics above, project builder in 2.0 broke because of directory entries for Windows NT 4.0 (the Realizer IsDirectory call fails under NT).  We've been developing on NT for years; we just maintain dual boot machines to boot in 98 to run project builder.  Once the project is built it runs fine under NT (most of the time anyway.)

For the issue of an "execute" statement, which I also love, check out Enable, from Cypress Software.  It's a less expensive VBA clone you can link into your application.  We've just started using it to replace the interpreter used in Realizer.

Terry Sauer

RE: Anyone still using CA-Realizer?

I have 2.0 and 3.0 with a patch. The conversion wasn't much trouble for the commercial programs I ported. However, I couldn't get Project Builder to create an installation disk with the proper files. I'm about to try again to be a little more compatible with the 32 bit world. This language was originally developed for a commodity trader porting trading systems (including graphs, live quote boards, and spread sheets from a main frame. Since this is exactly what I do, it's absolutely perfect. I agree that CA should consider building a Java interface.

RE: Anyone still using CA-Realizer?

DECOMPILER, Anyone? I have lost the orignal Realizer 2.0 basic code to a program I want to convert to 3.0. I understand a decompiler was written for Realizer 2.0. Does anyone know where to get it?

RE: Anyone still using CA-Realizer?

I got CA Realizer V3(32 Bit)in Nov. 2001 by purchasing CA-Superproject 5. It came bundled on the same CD. No docs though. I printed off the Help files using HLP2RTF, resulting docs are V3 equivalents of V2 docs. The RLZ Source programs for Superproject Tutorial and Assistant are provided, and are well worth studying. All works fine so far in NT4.

RE: Anyone still using CA-Realizer?

Has anyone run CAR3.0 code under Windows XP?  Any problems?
We are a small shop with lots of CAR and VB6.0 programs and are worrying about languages.  Don't want to move to VB.net if we can avoid it but don't seem to have alternatives.

RE: Anyone still using CA-Realizer?

RESIST MS  Now that the Republican administration has let Microsoft off the antitrust hook, they right back at it. Once you have more money than anybody else, wouldn't you want some friends? Now you will have to pay full price for every MS software release--no discounts for upgraders unless you pay 150% of retail up-front, in which case you will get the upgrade free--but there is no guarantee there will be an upgrade. Nice. This means more buggy bloatware.
But there are things we can do. 1) I still use Ami Pro and still outperforms Word. 2)I am still writing economical code in Realizer. 3)I am going to encourage CA to port Realizer to a Java compiler. 4) I am going to support competing alternatives: Sun microsystems makes a fully compatible Office product --downloadable at Sun -- that it distributes free. 5)I am not going to upgrade past Windows 98-even on new machines. I believe there will be a backlash against MS bloatware and policy. There are enough rich guys out there mad at Gates and one of them is going to offer an operating system alternative. We just have to resist.

RE: Anyone still using CA-Realizer?

According to RLZOldie (see posting above) CA is still using the Realizer language kernel in its products.  What are the chances CA could decide to make CAR open source?  Could be good for CA and also good public relations for CA (not that they need it :).

RE: Anyone still using CA-Realizer?

As an alternative to VB.net, may I suggest the Euphoria programming language (http://www.rapideuphoria.com).  It has a small footprint and works very well (and quickly) on Linux, Windows, and DOS.  There is currently work being done to port it to other platforms.

I have to use BBx on HP-UX at my office because of our legacy app, but I have done some DOS-based enhancements using Euphoria.  I have also done several Windows-based apps with it.

RE: Anyone still using CA-Realizer?

We also have a large commercial software written in CAR 3.0a. We started with CAR 2.0 and upgraded to CAR 3.0a. I have no Project Builder problems with NT 4.0 or Win 2K.

I noticed TBOB's CAR to C++ conversion. Why C++ and not JAVA which is more platform independent. Will a CAR to C++ or JAVA or VB translator be somehing that this group will be interested to use. I have thought of writing a CAR to Java translator but it's a big job. My thinking is that the best way to learn a new language is to convert my CAR code to that language.

RE: Anyone still using CA-Realizer?

(OP)
I think this thread is getting somewhere:

1. Ask CA to open up the Realizer source - since they have abandoned it, what would be the problem?

2. Write a CAR2JAVA engine - not trivial, but would it make life easy for all those CAR projects out there!

Who will take the lead with CA?

http://www.engs-comp.com/

RE: Anyone still using CA-Realizer?

Has anyone used RLO files in CA-R?  What are they and what can we use them for?  I am new to CA-R and the client wants to know if these things can  be used on windows

RE: Anyone still using CA-Realizer?

Hello all,
I am comming in this forum for the first time.Very interresting.
I confirm that car 2 doesn't work under XP or W2000.
Car 3 works fine under XP.
If Somebody did wrote a comm port custom control I will be very happy to join him.
BG
G.Treels

RE: Anyone still using CA-Realizer?

Hello all,
I am comming in this forum for the first time.Very interresting.
I confirm that car 2 doesn't work under XP or W2000.
Car 3 works fine under XP.
If Somebody did wrote a comm port custom control I will be very happy to join him.
BG
G.Treels

RE: Anyone still using CA-Realizer?

Have also written commercial software using RLZ. Started in v2, now working with 3.0a.

Love the program, wish CA hadn't dumped it, but hey, isn't the first time for them, or the last.

Unfortunately, now having to port application to VB6.

*shrug*

RE: Anyone still using CA-Realizer?

I think that there may be some possibility to get CA to move realizer to open source, seems like a good business move if there is a demand.

RE: Anyone still using CA-Realizer?

Open source CAR would be great!

Moreover, it would generate some excellent public relations for CA and could be helpful to CA, particularily if they plan to continue using the CAR kernel.

What would help CA decide?

RE: Anyone still using CA-Realizer?

I sent CA an e-mail, we'll see if I can get a name / contact about Realizer.

RE: Anyone still using CA-Realizer?

Below is the e-male I sent:

I would like to understand the direction that CA is taking with CA-Realizer.  I see that your are still using the Realizer kernel in some of your products.  I believe there is a market position left unfulfilled and a business / relations opportunity to open Realizer up as public source.  It is / was a strong product, but was not marketed aggressively against VB / Delphi.
 
You have taken another direction with your development products.  I don't see any overlap with Realizer, instead I see a way to gain small market share and re-establish CA as an aggressive high technology company contributing to the open source revolution.
 
To whom in your company could I address these types of comments?

RE: Anyone still using CA-Realizer?

I'm still using an application that I wrote in this product.  I like the application very much, but of course I dislike that CA discontinued another of the products that it purchased from someone in the course of take over's.

I'm using v2.07 and I see that someone mentioned a higher version in here and I'm going to ask if it is available to me through this site?

I wrote the advanced application with several dialogs/windows in it and many subfunctions.  I'm very pleased with it, but when will it stop working on the O/S's that are coming out?  I don't want to loose all the effort that I put into it.  I'm not very happy about the prospect of re-writting the application in yet another language (whether another version of BASIC or another language alltogether).

I've just joined this site and will spend a little time looking around.  I have a technical background and considerable years in writing applications and programs.

Thanks

Roger.

RE: Anyone still using CA-Realizer?

(OP)
Firstly, I think the format of this forum is fantastic and tek-tips.com is to be congratulated. I started this thread on Jun 18 1999, and it is still going strong.

Secondly, the contributions by so many in favour of CA opening its abandoned Realizer code to open source is to be encouraged. CA-Realizer is sharper, faster, and easier to use than VB. It has features that VB is openly discouraging because they allow you to build a programming language on the back of the language, like I have done with MATHSERV, see:
http://www.engs-comp.com/mathserv/index.html

Thank you all for taking so much interest.

http://www.engs-comp.com/

RE: Anyone still using CA-Realizer?

I have a friend that is in need of a copy of CA-Realizer and has been unable to find one for sale. Anyone have a copy they wish to sale? The lastst version would be preferred but will consider older versions as well.

Or if you know of someone with a copy. Thanks

RE: Anyone still using CA-Realizer?

I need to repeat my message that was posted earlier in this thread....  Please, I need an answer to this:

I'm still using an application that I wrote in this product.  I like the application very much, but of course I dislike that CA discontinued another of the products that it purchased from someone in the course of take-over's.

I'm using v2.07 and I see that someone mentioned a higher version in here and I'm going to ask if it is available to me through this site?  I would like to get a new version that is compatable with ME.  Yes, ME!  It is the OS that I like over 98SE and I don't want the latest OS's.

I wrote the advanced application with several dialogs/windows in it and many subfunctions.  I'm very pleased with it, but when will it stop working on the O/S's that are coming out?  I don't want to loose all the effort that I put into it.  I'm not very happy about the prospect of re-writting the application in yet another language (whether another version of BASIC or another language alltogether, even though COBOL would be my first choice, but it is expensive).

I've just joined this site and will spend a little time looking around.  I have a technical background and considerable years in writing applications and programs.

Thanks

Roger.

RE: Anyone still using CA-Realizer?

Hi, I am using Realizer 1.0 since 1991 (Within tech., before CA)with industrial applications. I use ISA and PCI bus cards and never have a problem with windows 3.1/3.11/95/98/xp. Under XP/2000/NT you need to compile the program (Project)in the root directory. The problem is with new hardware like USB or comm high speed, like 115K, or 32 char. file names(you can use the DOS format for server applications). It would be good to have Java version of Realizer. Regards.   

RE: Anyone still using CA-Realizer?

Thank you for the response "sisco79901".  Now if I can find a newer version of the CAR software then the one I have (which is v2.07).

Anyone have a better version?  Full copy of it, with all the fixn's?  Thanks to all.

Roger.

RE: Anyone still using CA-Realizer?

Bonjour,

I use CA-R since 1991, and CA-R 3.0 since the end of 1995.

Infortunatly, I lose the install CD, but I still make projects on Windows 2000. Only Formdev have troubles.

I have seen on CA Website that CA-R is still present.
http://ca.com/products/realizer.htm.

 

RE: Anyone still using CA-Realizer?

Thank your for that link.

But when I select it, and go there, I find no further information to go to.  If I click on anything on that page that I attempt) I no information that is of service comes up.

I get the feeling that CA wants this to die a miserable death just like most of the products that they buy out!

Roger.

RE: Anyone still using CA-Realizer?

Interesting thread. I have used CA Realizer 2.0 since it was first launched. It was at that time vastly superior to VB. And we still think it is a joy to use. However I´ve run onto a problem: my hard disk was upgraded and when I tried to reinstall it, I found that install floppy #7 bust. Tried all sorts of techniques and tricks without success, to my frustration. I tried to find somebody at CA to provide support, and the result was bad: I was passed from person to person and nobody gave me a positive answer. I was just about to trash the whole package and switch (against my will) to VB when I came accross this thread. Does anybody have contents of install floppy #7? I would be immensely grateful.

RE: Anyone still using CA-Realizer?

The floppy #7 was dedicated for the install on OS2

RE: Anyone still using CA-Realizer?

I Still have CA V1.0 on disk and version 3.0 upgrade on CD Rom.

RE: Anyone still using CA-Realizer?

Thanks Jeanno for the very helpful hint.

RE: Anyone still using CA-Realizer?

Well I get mixed messages here.  Is the CAR 2.07 running under XP or not?  If not, is another version running under XP and is that one available?

Thanks again.

Roger.

RE: Anyone still using CA-Realizer?

CAR 3.0a runs fine under XP. Don't know about 2.07.

RE: Anyone still using CA-Realizer?

Roger, be sure to let us know if you locate CA-R 3.0

Been looking for over a year now.

Kermit

RE: Anyone still using CA-Realizer?

I'm currently using CA-R 3.0a in WinXP to produce 3D velocity profiles.  The problem is I keep getting this error:

At PROC ManualOption, line 491 in s:\hydrotechnical\workarea\summer_2005\prog05\cromap.rlz.
?-> FileOpen(outf,staname,_write)
Unable to open "s:\hydrotechnical\perf\gf03\unit3\zz\gf03.out".   

The funny thing is, is that this exact program worked on my laptop which has WinNT on it. The file locations are the same and everything.

Can someone please shed some light on why this would no be working on XP all of a sudden.

Thanks

 

RE: Anyone still using CA-Realizer?

I run many programs daily under both XP and Win2000.

Whenever I've seen that message it was because either:
1 - the file was somehow corrupted or zero size, or
2 - it was an incorrect path


Red Flag This Post

Please let us know here why this post is inappropriate. Reasons such as off-topic, duplicates, flames, illegal, vulgar, or students posting their homework.

Red Flag Submitted

Thank you for helping keep Tek-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts.
The Tek-Tips staff will check this out and take appropriate action.

Reply To This Thread

Posting in the Tek-Tips forums is a member-only feature.

Click Here to join Tek-Tips and talk with other members!

Resources

Close Box

Join Tek-Tips® Today!

Join your peers on the Internet's largest technical computer professional community.
It's easy to join and it's free.

Here's Why Members Love Tek-Tips Forums:

Register now while it's still free!

Already a member? Close this window and log in.

Join Us             Close