Pasi T Mustalahti writes: > On Fri, 29 May 1998, Dennis Plunkett wrote: > > > At 01:33 PM 29/05/98 +0800, you wrote: > > >Hi all > > >Does anyone have experience with the PbasicPRO compiler? > > >Is it worth getting, and does it su > PTM: I'm for the Basic. It was originally to be a SIMPLE way to write code > for a person who doesn't want to learn high level programming. In the PC > world I have allways wondered why they didn't take Basic for the command > prompt language and to be used in the .BAT -files. They had the code > allready in the PC's PROM, so it would not be hard to do. There got to be > something wrong with IBM and Micro$oft. > The ROM basic was not something that you could leave without rebooting. It also did not use ASCII character sets; it used a compacted 7-bit word and some other things that made it easy to say ``that won't work for batch files.'' > I'n not against C, I have used it myself very much, but writing user > interfaces and character string manipulatin is still easier with a good > basic (I wonder why they don't have QuickBasic any more for the PC) > Not if you know C, imho. -- Matthias Granberry Gonff@windmillbbs.com Caffeine, nicotine, and execution all serve as "normalizing agents". -- "Attention Deficit Disorder"