On Feb 15, 2006, at 9:47 AM, Phil M wrote:
On Feb 15, 2006, at 7:02 AM, Peter K. Stys wrote:
I tend to agree with Troy. I wrote a complex imaging app for the
lab, which could not have been possible without Xcode: RB is just too
slow (why it can't be just as fast as C I don't know. Array access,
math ops and logical comparisons should be compiled to identical
binaries, no?). I can't imagine doing an FFT in RB. I find myself
prototyping complex image manipulations in RB, then porting the
most-used ones to C for speed (and the speed increase you gain is
substantial).
That is why for a nearly ideal situation, you would use REALbasic for
the UI and a C/C++ plugin for the CPU intensive calculations. You
could write a Photoshop-like program if REALbasic if you wrote all of
the image filters and conversion routines in a C/C++ plugin, or even
better yet a tool which could be written independent of RB and be able
to take advantage of multiple CPU/cores.
Another thing about tis thread is that, yes, you can do that today (and
in the future if you want) but it would be nice to NOT have to do this
as REALbasic itself would be fast enough, capable of using multiple
cpu's, etc.
At least that's what I think the the gist of some of the points made are
_______________________________________________
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>
