Re: KDP2 on Intel MACS
- From: "Carl G." <cginnowzerozeroone@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2007 09:36:06 -0700
"James Klein" <jameseklein@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:C2E864AA.13F%jameseklein@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On 8/15/07 4:33 AM, in article
1187177603.638527.221370@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "Helpful person"
<rrllff@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Jim,
I'm curious. You say you are programing in REAL BASIC. I assume this
is compiled.
Yes fully compiled.
I've always been curious about Microsoft Visual Basic which (when I
was using it) was almost truly Object Orientated and was also
compiled. It was a wonderfully easy environment to learn and use.
Real Basic is very similar to Visual Basic from a programming standpoint.
Do you know how the speed of computation for Visual Basic compares to
C?
I don't but with the current and future speed of newer processors plus the
continuing increase in speed of compiled Real Basic, I'd venture to say
that
for most if not all future programs, the execution and even compile speeds
will not be an issue.
Jim
REALbasic is very similar to Microsoft's Visual Basic.Net. Both are
object-oriented programming (OOP) languages. The standard version of
REALbasic currently costs $99. There is a professional version available
for $500, which adds the ability to compile cross-platform (Windows, MacOS,
and Linux), advanced database capability, and other features. Last time I
checked, the Visual Basic.Net Express version was free. The professional
versions were comparably priced.
From my point of view, the biggest difference between REALbasic and VisualBasic.Net is the form of the compiled executables. REALbasic creates a
single EXE file and doesn't need separate DLL files or a runtime executable.
This makes delivery and installation easier. The disadvantages are that
REALbasic can not take advantage of the Microsoft Common Language Runtime
(CLR): making it harder to use CLR libraries, combine code written in
other languages (e.g., C#), and doing run-time compilations. REALbasic may
also be a bit behind in adding the latest OOP features (but not much, and I
can certainly code around the limitations). Both REALbasic and Visual
Basic.Net support operator overloading, so technical programs that use
complex numbers, vectors, matrixes, etc., can be written clearly (e.g., you
can multiply a complex matrix by a complex vector with code as simple as:
vector2 = matrix1 * vector1, once you write the appropriate classes).
Speed-wise, the results vary with what is being done. In my tests
(performed some time ago), I believe I found Visual Basic.Net slightly
faster. This may be because Microsoft's Just In Time (JIT) compiler could
optimize the code for the machine it is being run on, while REALbasic
compiled the code for a larger class of machines, and could not take
advantage of some optimizations. I will have to rerun my benchmarks on the
latest version of REALbasic.
Carl G.
.
- References:
- Re: KDP2 on Intel MACS
- From: Helpful person
- Re: KDP2 on Intel MACS
- From: James Klein
- Re: KDP2 on Intel MACS
- Prev by Date: Re: KDP2 on Intel MACS
- Next by Date: Lens design questions
- Previous by thread: Re: KDP2 on Intel MACS
- Next by thread: Re: KDP2 on Intel MACS
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
|