Evening Dave, > QT might produce a portable result, but it is much harder to program. Well, I like it but I have to admit to not programming in .net (any language) so I can't really compare.
It's a wee bit harder than Borland C++ Builder, for instance, but I like it. I have a couple of program running under QT on Windows (if I must!) and Linux - and the source code is exactly the same. I'm not an expert by any means though. I did try Fox Toolkit and wxWindows aka wxWidgets (Microsoft got stroppy!) and of the three I liked wxWidgets under wxDev-C++ which was so like Delphi it was quite strange! But that can't be run on Linux (wxDev-C++) so I went (back) to QT. Cheers, Norman. _______________________________________________ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
