Xref: utzoo alt.religion.computers:2555 comp.windows.ms.programmer:3281 Path: utzoo!utgpu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!mcsun!ukc!slxsys!ibmpcug!mantis!mathew From: mathew@mantis.co.uk (Giving C News a *HUG*) Newsgroups: alt.religion.computers,comp.windows.ms.programmer Subject: Re: ap, Windows BASIC Message-ID: Date: 24 Jun 91 14:34:41 GMT References: <1991Jun22.152756.25499@mcs.drexel.edu> Organization: Mantis Consultants, Cambridge. UK. Lines: 22 kblackne@mcs.drexel.edu (Ken Blackney) writes: > I bought Visual Basic on Monday. I returned it Saturday. > I based my return decision on two factors: C++ is better > suited to my development needs and the Visual Basic user > interface violates my preferences (it violates sensible > design guidelines). This takes us back to my original point. GEM-based BASICs on the Atari ST encouraged people to produce programs with lots of gratuitous user-interface weirdness. From your comments about Visual BASIC, I am now even more confident of my original assertion that it will cause the same thing to happen in the PC Windows community. Perhaps the reason is that people who write BASIC don't read manuals, rather than that BASIC is an inherently bad language. Who cares? It's a valid objection to the introduction of Visual BASIC whatever the underlying reason. mathew