Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!iuvax!pur-ee!mentor.cc.purdue.edu!mace.cc.purdue.edu!adf From: adf@mace.cc.purdue.edu (Brian Moore) Newsgroups: comp.databases Subject: Re: Clipper Summary: Clipper vs dbase Message-ID: <4175@mace.cc.purdue.edu> Date: 18 Feb 90 08:03:05 GMT References: <22844@usc.edu> Organization: Purdue University Lines: 31 In article <22844@usc.edu>, atieu@skat.usc.edu (Anthony Tieu) writes: > Need a review on Clipper, the dBASE compiler. Does it really > compile dBASE code into EXE files without modifications? How > is it in support, documentation, bugs, etc.? Any experiences, > good or bad? Clipper is close to dbase with some of the following differences: The edit and browse functions are not there. it is recomended that you use the ntx format for indexes "it's much faster" some functions have been changed to do what they should have done in the first place. you can have arrays. with DOS 3.3 you can have open 255 files. Additional functions. And Much Much More... The support people at Nantucket are fairly good at what they do, at least from my experience. My main problem with Clipper is the EXE overhead. If you were to compile a program with just a rem statement the file would be aprox. 150K. Growth after that isn't so bad, I wrote a 6500+ line program and I think the EXE size was about 350K. If you need more room the linker supports overlays. It's a rather nice system once you get use to it. > What is the latest version? The current version is Summer 87, but they are working on Clipper 5.0. Thats right Summer 87 ---> Clipper 5.0, I think every body is jumping on the 5.0 band wagon. (MSC 5.X, WORD 5.0, WP 5.X) +------------------------------------------------------------------------------+| Brian Moore | || Purdue University Computing Center | We are all just objects in a giant|| Internet: xadf@vm.cc.purude.edu | C++ Program. || Bitnet: XADF@PURCCVM.BITNET | |+------------------------------------------------------------------------------+