Nieminen Mika wrote:
> 
> Remco de Korte <rem### [at] xs4allnl> wrote:
> : You type in some
> : text, press the button and out comes an include-file with the code.
> 
> : It's Windows95/98 only
> 
>   I don't want to be rude, but I just can't understand why.
>   Why is it so difficult to make the same thing with ANSI C or C++, compilable
> in any system? It just reads text and outputs text to a file. It needs
> no system dependant features. It's extremely simple to make this kind of
> program with ANSI C (I bet it's a lot simpler than making a windows program).
>   So why it has to be win95 only? Why it has to include system-dependant
> code which does nothing? Why?
>   Just wondering.

As for my point,(wintrees) I use a windows executeable since I find it
far easier to create a working GUI for my programs in delphi, the code
si DOS compatible, but it was hard to understand the program. I know,
java, fuck that(excuse my language) it doesn't work good enough for me.
it messes up too much, and even the examples have bugs in it preventing
me from using any GUI made in JAVA2 and run "as is".

Oh, as for C code, I don't have enough HDD for a c compiler. Good enough
reason? (I _do_ know ansi C, but since I don't use it for regular
development of programs, I don't have it on my HDD.) And I'd be back in
the same place as in DOS pascal, the gui prob. And , no, don't tell me
to "crap the gui" use a command line argument. I had it, and threw it
away, too many numbers ot remember without the virtual consoles of
linux. sowwy there.

You can get a pascal version of my prog. and then compile it yourself in
Linux, I think there is a pascal compiler that can take standard pascal.

Well, my arguments against using ansi C.
//Spider

Post a reply to this message