>I'm a scientist (Behavioral Neuroscience) and have used REALbasic for >several years. While REALbasic certainly is not a traditional >scientific programming environment, I've found that I can be very >productive. I've been able to throw together useful tools in as >little as an hour and made applications for a surprising variety of >tasks.
I am a hydrogeologist dealing with chemical analytical data and the need to graph that data. I did use Visual Basic quite a bit but found the cross-platform appeal of RealBasic too much to resist. As well, it has good graphics capabilities. >What are others' thoughts on the strengths and weaknesses of >REALbasic as a scientific platform? I found the switch from Visual Basic to Realbasic to be relatively painless. It is easy to program and I like the strong typing something which must be forced upon VB. A specific weakness of RealBasic I have found to be in rotating text - with triangular graphs it is nice to be able to rotate numbers and characters by values other than 90 degrees (e.g. 30 degrees). I have not been able to get RB to do that and produce sharp, clear text (VB can do this). I think that this is because RB rotates an image of the text whereas VB rotates the vector of the text. David _______________________________________________ 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>
