While this may be heresy
ambassador at fourthworld.com
Wed Mar 14 10:32:33 CDT 2007
> Well, in my opinion straight out of the box they are about the same.
> If you are used to other more traditional programming languages like
> C/C++, Pascal or Basic then you will probably have a harder time
> getting your head around the way that RunRev works. This is made even
> harder since the documentation for RunRev isn't that good and because
> there are silly problems that can bite you.
> However, once you get into RunRev and start developing your own way
> of doing things (for instance I have my own Message Manager and
> Application Framework), then RunRev *really* starts to pay off. You
> can get things done really quickly, I'd say probably 50% faster than
> in RealBasic.
I'd say that's a generally fair assessment as far as the programs
themselves go, but regarding documentation errors and omissions it's
worth noting that a review of their mailing list and forum archives
shows that RealBASIC isn't immune from such things.
Given that errors and omissions are common to nearly every product
that's ever shipped, that's not surprising nor necessarily a bad mark
against RB. But neither has it prevented many folks from getting real
work done in Rev. All languages have pitfalls and gotchas, and when
learning any new language nothing can help more than participating in a
forum of its experienced users.
The productivity gain of 50% seems reasonable given the amount of
platform-specific code one is asked to write in RB, the absence of chunk
expressions, and the generally lower-level nature of the language (see
Fourth World Media Corporation
Ambassador at FourthWorld.com http://www.FourthWorld.com
More information about the use-livecode