🚀 go-pugleaf

In a message of <Apr 11 06:03>, Gary Stollman (1:282/31) writes:
 >From: garys@bluemoon.rn.com (Gary Stollman)
 >Newsgroups: comp.sys.atari.st

 >Hi all...I would like to know who out there is using GFA Basic to program 
 >professional quality programs with?  Anyone??  And if so, is it worth it 
 >for me to purchase GFA for DOS or Windows in order to enable me to port 
 >anything I werite commercially  for the ST to an IBM??  Any feedback 
 >would be greatly appreciated!!

Hmmm... This is the third message like this I've seen in the past month or so. 

Wonder what's going on....  Oh, well.

I've got both GFA/ST and GFA/PC along with QuickBasic Pro.  Personally, I tend 
to go the route of programming on the ST with GFA and then porting to 
QuickBasick.  The two are 98 percent compatable, as long as you don't do stuff 
like alert boxes in your GFA code.

I _may_ prefer QuickBasic on the PC because I've been programming in it longer 
(That long, terrible wait for a GFA/PC that compiled really hurt GFA!), but 
I've also run into a few things that 'hurt' portability.  QuickBasic uses it's 
memory more efficiently, for instance.  I've written code in GFA/ST that won't 
load into GFA/PC, but will load into QuickBasic.  And yes, it will run when 
it's loaded into QuickBasic.  Of course, it won't run in GFA/PC because I 
can't load it all in!  That's sort of a major bug. <grin>

There is a LOT of source for both programs available, so I think that's a moot 
point.  Enough examples exist to show the user how to do almost anything in 
both languages.  Help is also available for both languages from enough sources 
to make the matter moot.
  

 * Origin: FlightLine PointNet  (1:282/47.1)