February 23rd, 2013, 04:49 PM
Basic for QT...Basic for QT...Basic for QT...
February 22nd, 2013, 10:00 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, 03:33 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, 04:44 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, 05:36 PM
And many moved to Java for just those reasons.
February 16th, 2013, 05:04 PM
Yep. Like a new model of a car that looked great until they ruined it. :)
February 16th, 2013, 03:05 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, 11:06 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, 07:56 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, 01:24 AM
That's simple...Create vb7 and add the functionality, while maintaining the basic vb6 framework.
February 13th, 2013, 10:32 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...