Re: to Rob (perhaps I'm a little bored, but...)
- Posted by irv at ELLIJAY.COM Oct 09, 1998
- 543 views
On Fri, 9 Oct 1998 15:59:10 -0400, Robert Craig <rds at EMAIL.MSN.COM> wrote: >Ralf writes: >> Yes, we do have win32 support, we can call >> DLL's .. but it seems its gonna be up to David Cuny to determine >> of the whole Win32 platform has any point at all... it doesnt >> do much usefull on itself. >> And things have to be *practicle* .. if you dont have a visual >> resource manager with your win32 platform, its not considered to >> support win32.. and I must agree to that. > >Certainly there's a lot we can do to improve the support for >the WIN32 platform, and I thank David for what he has done so far. >But I really think David has *already* accomplished something that >the fancy-pants all-singing all-dancing GUI IDE Visual >programming packages have failed at: >he's made it really simple for a non-professional >to write a simple Windows GUI program. > >When I first sat down a couple of years ago to make >a very simple WIN32 program using Visual C++, I had >an unbelievably frustrating time trying to learn the system. >Sure, you can design your GUI elements visually on the screen. >That's great. But that's where the fun ends. For your trivial program >the system generates thousands of lines of incomprehensible code... Rob: You need to try Delphi - very little actual coding is required, and it's easy to understand. Visual Basic is ok, too, except not fast enough to satisfy some clients' needs. When I must write a Windows program, I can use either of these languages, with the assurance that I won't get 50% or 75% or 90% finished, and then run up against something that is "not yet implemented", and have to scrap the project. The thing is, I seldom _need_ a Windows program. Just about everything is already available, usually as shareware, so it's really a waste of time to reinvent the wheel. And, I think most of us will agree, that having to deal with Windows takes all the fun out of programming. Regards, Irv >