In article <391333B4.E567C11F@videotron.ca>, pk <thi### [at] videotronca> 
wrote:

> Oh, well... You could probably do a Basic interpreter(not gwbasic...
> QBasic would be good...)... It's got fast results, is turing complete,
> not hard to learn, and isn't too hard to interpret, if you drop all
> unneeded functions...

I have never seen BASIC referred to as "fast" before...and I fail to see 
the point in supporting a language like BASIC when an extension of the 
existing syntax would be sufficient.


> Or, you could also allow system calls... (function(system("/[whatever]",
> x))

How would that be useful for this application? Or are you talking about 
something similar to the current "DLL" functions?

-- 
Christopher James Huff - Personal e-mail: chr### [at] yahoocom
TAG(Technical Assistance Group) e-mail: chr### [at] tagpovrayorg
Personal Web page: http://chrishuff.dhs.org/
TAG Web page: http://tag.povray.org/

Post a reply to this message