Dave Walker wrote: > Norman, > > QT might produce a portable result, but it is much harder to program. > > DAve >
There are no real problems of portability with .NET nowadays. (Mono and dotGNU have taken care of those) and you can even use QT from Visual Studio and run the result in Mono (Although the QT designer sucks worse than a Dyson Vacuum Cleaner :-) ) Mono won't allow access to My Namespace for now (which many people use for low level functions but that can be circumvented in more ways than one). QT on the other hand as Norman mentions has a significant learning curve. helloworld.c to windowed program doesn't get done in under a minute like with C#. Net may therefore be the way to go. (I use both VS.NET 2005 + 2008 and SharpDevelop + SDK ) - The latter combination is free and much faster to install and use than VS.NET (Not as complete and with several small bugs but it gets the job done) Phoebus _______________________________________________ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
