tmy6405@acf5.NYU.EDU (Ted Young) (07/21/89)
In article <576@ac.dal.ca> burkhold@ac.dal.ca writes: > > Does anyone have any comments on the advantages of using Microsoft's >BASIC compiler Version 6 over using the QuickBASIC 4.x family of compilers? >A brief list of pros and cons would be appreciated. Thanks. If you want to do anything in OS/2, BASCOM 6.00 is your only choice. Other than that, here's some pros/con: PRO: BC6 comes with a bunch of NOxxx.OBJ files which, when linked with your program reduce the size of the final .EXE. For example, if you know that you're not gonna do any graphics, LINK in the NOGRAPH.OBJ file and you'll cut out some unnecessary code. You can make your own BRUN.EXE runtime files, so that if you use some routines across a number of EXE files, you can save space by not having to link it with each file. The manuals are a lot better, and come in a 3 ring binder. You also get Codeview and Microsoft's M editor (well, M could be a con -- I sure don't use it). If you don't have a math co-processor (or are writing a program for machines that don't have one), you get a faster math package with BC6. It's 40-50% faster than QB4, but not as fast as QB2&3 (can't have everything, I guess). CON: It's more expensive. (That's all I could think of.) Basically (sorry), if you're going to be doing anything serious with BASIC, then get BASCOM 6, otherwise it may not be worth the extra $$$. --- Ted M. Young, 3801 Hudson Mnr Terr, Riverdale, NY 10463-1111 tmy6405@acf5.nyu.edu CIS: [76703,4343] or 76703.4343@compuserve.com "Experience is the hardest teacher; first you get the test, then the lesson."
burkhold@ac.dal.ca (08/15/89)
Does anyone have any comments on the advantages of using Microsoft's BASIC compiler Version 6 over using the QuickBASIC 4.x family of compilers? A brief list of pros and cons would be appreciated. Thanks.