February 23rd, 2013 03:49 PM
Basic for QT...Basic for QT...Basic for QT...
February 22nd, 2013 09:00 PM
and
QT for Basic is a perfect example of how the vb6 style can survive just fine, regardless of platform. So regardless of OS and this dll and that dll, QT will be there as if nothing...
February 22nd, 2013 02:33 AM
You make good points, but I still say that the deficiencies in vb6 are only because they dumped it and didn't add more to that language. There is no reason why vb6 could not have gone with full...
February 21st, 2013 03:44 PM
.
Not so true since there are many mathematical processes and processes in general that do not lend themselves to parallelism, or where parallelism is very limited. So a "fast" language should...
February 17th, 2013 04:36 PM
And many moved to Java for just those reasons.
February 16th, 2013 04:04 PM
Yep. Like a new model of a car that looked great until they ruined it. :)
February 16th, 2013 02:05 AM
I totally agree about the multi-threading in .Net. I have used it myself and the performance increase was really cool (roughly 20%). But I was vastly annoyed at the awful performance of GDI+. That...
February 15th, 2013 10:06 PM
But it is hard to claim that vb"7" (aka .Net) is an evolutionary change in the vb line. It really is a drastically different language. And clearly, there has been a huge backlash from customers who...
February 14th, 2013 06:56 PM
Well, your arguments are well stated and in principal I cannot disagree with your opinions. However, there is also no reason why such "one-line" functionalities could not have been added to vb6 in...
February 14th, 2013 12:24 AM
That's simple...Create vb7 and add the functionality, while maintaining the basic vb6 framework.
February 13th, 2013 09:32 PM
I completely disagree with that, respectfully. Any programming language as seen from the programmer's standpoint has nothing to do with the way it is written underneath. That is why QTforBasic can...
