On May 18, 2005, at 10:54 PM, Ben Lilburne wrote:
Yep, the performance of the language is fine, and the "power" of the
language is the same, in total, as any other turing-complete
programming language.
Of course. The compiler will surely improve, but there is nothing
inherently wrong with the language.
The 3D API in RealBasic could be improved significantly, in
capability, rendering quality and performance - it's simply not used
enough to justify that development by Real Software.
If you haven't already, there are a boatload of RB3D bug reports that
can be signed. This is one of the ways RS gauges interest. It's a
chicken/egg thing. RS would like to see more applications that use
RB3D, but the incomplete API makes that difficult (but NOT impossible).
Seeing a growing number of votes in the bug base is another way to get
their attention
If you have a serious (that means you intend to release, not
necessarily sell) project that you started and have major snags caused
by RB3D, talk to RS directly.
There is no particular language feature that is needed for a 3D API
which RB does not already have.
Definitely true.
--
Joseph Nastasi
Pyramid Design - a software development firm
http://www.pyramiddesign.us
Voice 609 601-0814 Fax 609 601-0815
Products:
A-OK! Spacecraft Simulation System - http://aok.pyramiddesign.us
A-OK! The Wings of Mercury
FTP Suite for REALbasic - http://ftpsuite.pyramiddesign.us
Proud Sponsors of REALbasic Olympics 2005
_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode:
<http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/>
Search the archives of this list here:
<http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>
|