Re: Serious development
Kay kindly replied to my request for data:
>>exactly which tools to use ... GUI aspects
>I suggest you leave the gui till last, and go forth with the rest of the
>code.
Not so easy. As far as I'm concerned, having a GUI is an *essential* part of
prototyping this thing. It's an inherently complex application - say, on the
complexity plane of a programming language with a large library of routines
- and, take my word for it, it NEEDS a GUI to be usable. As a rough
comparison (although my app isn't exactly a game), although maybe one
*could* play SimCity using text mode or some kind of "script" interface with
the game engine, would it be especially fun and engaging, and do you think
*even the developers* would have cared to work with it given such interface
limitations?
And not that I would go so far as to let the UI drive my design, but I think
I will have a better end product by developing the UI in tandem with
everything else. It must all fit together hand-in-glove fashion (the user's
hand in the program's glove), ultimately, and the sooner I can start
"fitting the glove," the better.
>>OOP or not?
>Personally, i would not do OOP, Turbo Pascal left a bad taste in my mouth
>with what oop was implemented in version7. To me, oop slows down the
>application, too. Ymmv.
Well, that's Turbo Pascal. Eiffel translates directly to C and is supposed
to be snappy performance-wise (as well as having cool features that you
probably haven't dreamed of, unless you've read Eiffel propaganda as I
have).
However, here budget comes into play. For Eiffel, one must plunk down $$$,
with the cost of MSVC on top of that to compile the translated code. (But
there are several Eiffel vendors, and my comments apply to ISE, the company
run by the language's inventor. Maybe the cost is less elsewhere.)
George Henry
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Get more from the Web. FREE MSN Explorer download : http://explorer.msn.com
|
Not Categorized, Please Help
|
|
