From: into@oblivion.nothing.com   
      
   haiticare2011@gmail.com wrote in   
   news:d2414eac-7733-4e86-90d5-5f98a10a4fb6@googlegroups.com:   
      
   > Assembler too detailed for coding, Basic too slow. C about   
   > right. jb   
      
   Depends on the "BASIC".   
      
   There's an open source cross-platform language called XBasic that   
   I've been using for probably 15 years now that's REALLY powerful,   
   and pretty darned fast because it compiles to machine code instead   
   of being byte code run time interpreted.   
      
   However, I recently changed to no longer recommending it to anyone   
   new as it's becoming stale. It's last official version is from 2002,   
   the documentation is just as old, and there isn't enough activity   
   and supporters anymore who want to make big improvements. There is   
   one individual who has his own branch who has kinda taken over things,   
   but even so it's mostly incremental updates. Not to put him down,   
   he's done a great job.   
      
   So I've been learning C++ lately. ugh... wait a PITA language. How   
   did it ever become so popular?   
      
   But to be honest, XBasic isn't a true BASIC, even though in many   
   regards it resembles it. I'd say it's a cross between BASIC and   
   C++. It has much of the power and flexibility of C/C++ yet retains   
   the ease of syntax of BASIC. As I've learned C/C++, I've recognized   
   a certain familiarity of certain concepts from XB. Yet other things   
   in C/C++.... ugh. (did I already say that?)   
      
   Brian   
   --   
   http://www.earthwaves.org/forum/index.php - Earthquake prediction & Earth   
   Sciences   
   http://www.skywise711.com - Lasers, Seismology, Astronomy, Skepticism   
   Sed quis custodiet ipsos Custodes?   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)