On 3/22/06, Mark O'Neill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi Ken, > > <big snip> > > | The RB language is nice, but not worth the hassle. Due to the IDE I'm > | evaluating Qt, where I can use whatever IDE I like: emacs, > | BBedit, Eclipse, > | *OR* the Qt editor. If Qt takes 20% longer to develop the > | same project it > | will be worth it to me, as the RB IDE retards me by 50%. > > You sound very frustrated, and I can understand your > frustrations if there's something you need to do and > you're hitting a brick wall, but if Qt takes you 20% > longer to develop the same project then surely RB is the > one you should use...? (even if you do have frustrations > with it)
First, that 20% was prefaced by an "if". I expect Qt to be equal to RB or perhaps even faster in terms of development speed. But even IF it were slower, no I don't think that is a reason to use RB. There are other considerations than just speed, like cost, quality of my experience and quality of the final product. -k. _______________________________________________ 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>
