home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: calliope.wln.com!usenet
- From: "Mark E. Davis" <perc@wln.com>
- Newsgroups: comp.lang.basic.visual.misc,comp.lang.pascal.delphi.misc,comp.lang.c++
- Subject: Re: "SHOULD I DUMP VISUAL BASIC?"
- Date: Wed, 14 Feb 1996 16:35:00 -0800
- Organization: Public emplyment relations commission
- Message-ID: <31227FB4.5212@wln.com>
- References: <4e9g08$3dp@maureen.teleport.com>
- <Pine.SUN.3.90.960126125658.2477C-100000@menger.eecs.stevens-tech.edu>
- <sundial.2191.00464727@primenet.com> <DLvxyq.62w@news.hawaii.edu>
- <4et3p7$79o@cloud9.net> <823335327.28831@williaj.demon.co.uk>
- <4f8akg$i3k@druid.borland.com> <W1eMJBAdliGxEwNI@pwhite.demon.co.uk>
- NNTP-Posting-Host: cerberus13.wln.com
- Mime-Version: 1.0
- Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
- Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
- X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.0GoldB1 (Win95; I)
-
- Pat White wrote:
- > In nearly 40 years in computing I've never come across anything in any
- > language definition that prevents compiling. That includes BASIC which
-
- I do some Fox (oh no..) programming also and have heard the stopper on
- compiling FoxPro is twofold. 1) Macro substitution creates code at
- run-time, and 2) the loosly type variables require some sort of
- wet-nurse app running to manage them (the interperetor).
-
- These are not my Ideas, I just whanted to share.
-