11 Apr
2011
11 Apr
'11
9:03 a.m.
On 7 April 2011 02:14, Chris M <chrism3667 at yahoo.com> wrote:
I know I have Quick Basic 3.n, and maybe even Quick C
somewhere.
Quick C had become popular w/developers (not for primary use) long after M$ canned it.
Not sure why, maybe they just liked the IDE. And liked using it for quick and dirty
tasks.
I spied QB 4.5 on eBay, brand new (someone placed a bid, I won't at this juncture).
Is there any big difference between early versions of QB or QC? Early version of Visual
C++ for instance are doggish compared to later ones, but that's a different world.
QB3 was a sort of upgraded GW-BASIC with a compiler.
QB4 was a major update. It's a block-structured language, no line
numbers, no colon-separated multiple statements per line, with named
procedures, local and global variables, recursion etc.
It was a leap to get used to it, but I rather liked it.
Already straying offtopic, a book I own states that
Delphi could be used to write Visual Basic, but not the other way around.
Neither way, AFAIK. Delphi=updated Borland Object Pascal, not a BASIC.
I'll assume Quick C could be used to write Quick
Basic, but what about the other way around?
Again, neither, AFAIK.
--
Liam Proven ? Info & profile: http://www.google.com/profiles/lproven
Email: lproven at cix.co.uk ? GMail/GoogleTalk/Orkut: lproven at gmail.com
Tel: +44 20-8685-0498 ? Cell: +44 7939-087884 ? Fax: + 44 870-9151419
AIM/Yahoo/Skype: liamproven ? MSN: lproven at hotmail.com ? ICQ: 73187508