🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <+btnxzl.whedon@netcom.com> whedon@netcom.com (Bill Whedon) writes:
stuff delete...

>
>On second thought, just to get your feet wet, VB might not be such a bad
>choice.  It certainly does get you right into Windows, and insulates you from
>much of the nastiness of bits and bytes.  Also, VB in particular, and most
>modern BASICs in general, have evolved to be nearly indistinguishable from
>Pascal, anyhow, so if you can use VB and avoid GOTO and GOSUB/RETURN, hey,
>why not?!  I still recommend C/C++ as the "serious" language, though.  But
>whatever you choose to do,
>Have fun!
>Bill Whedon   whedon@netcom.com
>

Bill Whedon's post will probably start another round of Pascal 
vs. C war.  Comparing Basic with Pascal (i.e. Turbo Pascal) is
totally invalid.  Show me the object oriented programming 
extensions of Visual Basic.  This is not to say that VB is a 
inferior tool.  On the contrary, it is very useful for fast 
prototyping of applications.  On the token, Turbo Pascal for 
Windows is a very "serious" language for Windows programming.
With it, you get access to all of the Windows API calls, as
well as Borland's Object Windows library.  In addition, TPW 
beats the pants of BCC and MSC for compile time.  And with
smart linking, TPW apps are much smaller the their BCC and 
MSC equivalents.  

Now I realize the above statements will spawn responses that BCC and
MSC allow you to optimize your code for speed.  My point is
that TPW should not be tossed aside as a non-serious programming
language.  If you prefer TP, with TPW you do not have to learn
a new programming language to do Windows programming.

Ray Konopka
konopka@aristotle.ils.nwu.edu