🚀 go-pugleaf

In alt.lang.basic, hutch@bellman.lanl.gov (John Hutchinson) writes:

>In article 4902@sctc.com, bright@sctc.com (David A. Bright) writes:
>>I would like information on Visual Basic (the Windows variety).  Can anyone
>>give me pointers to books, magazine articles, or ftp-able documents that
>>describe VB?    [ ... stuff deleted ... ]
>>a lot of the tedium for you.  For those of you bemoaning the constant BASIC
>>bashing, I'll admit to programming in C at work; however, I am not averse to
>>using "off-beat" languages (I've been known to dabble in ICON, Forth, and
>>other lesser-known languages).

VB an off-beat language?  No wonder we don't have our own group yet! :-) :-)

>David, VB has been reviewed in a number of computer magazines this past year,
>however just this last month, two major magazines reviewed the three top
>selling Windows BASIC packages... VB, The Realizer, and GFA BASIC.  Check out
>the Nov 92 issues of Computer Language and Byte.  Both reviewers tended to
>give the nod to VB over the other two, due in large part to its ease of use
>and complete, relatively seamless package.  No one has reviewed VB 2.0 yet
>as it is not yet released (I think). 

Good suggestions...  BasicPro magazine just did a very good article on VB 2.0.
From the article (and my upgrade literature) MS seems to have fixed some
of my "complaints" about VB 1.0.  They've improved the debugger, easier
properties window, added 256 color support (?) and mdi child support!
They still compile p-code rather than a true exe yet so the #@!@##! runtime
dll is still there, at least they've made it faster (maybe by VB 3.0???).

I can't tell you much more about VB2.0 yet though as I'm awaiting my upgrade...
As for VB 1.0 I usually use it rather than TPW or C.  I dunno if that tells
you anything...  :-)  Once you get out of the old BASIC programming mindset
(straight-line execution) and into the Windows event-oriented way of doing
things VB becomes an exceptionally easy to program for Windows!

- Galen -
galenr@hpgrla.gr.hp.com