TH>line compiler. I like that, because PowerBASIC, like QuickBASIC, come
TH>with crummy IDEs, IMHO. I wrote an IDE much more to my liking.
OD>Quick-Basic also runs off a command-line compiler...  And
OD>Quick-Basic's IDE simply RULES!
 TH> You sound like a guy who hasn't tried anything else. [grin]
I did.  I tried ASIC, Borland 4.0's IDE for Windows (which isn't that bad) 
and a few others like the one with TurboPascal.  None were as easy and simple 
as QB's..  I go near a variablename, hit F1, and I get to know what type it 
is, where it is used, etc.  Same thing with SUBs and Functions; you know all 
the required parameters by checking with the help.
 TH> Anyway, if you like your IDE, that's fine. I'm not here to sell you
It's Microsoft's.
 TH> But, I wrote my own editor anyway, because the programming exercise
 TH> was (and is) beneficial to me. A variation of that editor I am using
 TH> right now to write you this post. It has automatic, real-time 'word
 TH> wrapping as I type' capibility that I have never seen in other
 TH> editors.
You mean like WordPerfect or NotePad do?
OD>Give me ONE other IDE that actually CORRECTS you in real-time, and
OD>checks syntax like that?
 TH> Actually, I could program that in, but it is not really necessary.
Is.  It's the best way to code without wasting your time.
 TH> The complier will tell you. And since compiles are fast, a syntax
 TH> check is simply a click of the key away.
Do you always recompile when testing something?  I will only recompile 
everytime when I'm coding demos.  Otherwise I'll run from the IDE.
 TH> mispell a variable I'll catch it at compile time and not at run-time
With QB's IDE you catch it at code-time.
 TH> timesaver. Also, my editor supports and automaticall runs an
 TH> assembler, if I am working on an assembly file, or a C++ compiler, if
 TH> I have a .CPP file.
Ah, that's nice.  But what will it compile/run for?  What language?
 TH> In the area of developing BASIC programs, my IDE has a SUB and
 TH> FUNCTION, similar to the MS-IDE, but I display mine in color, so I
 TH> can tell the subs from the functions. PowerBASICs IDE doesn't do this.
In QB, the SUBS and FUNCTIONS are in different windows (modules) so going to 
a SUB/FUNCTION is the easiest.  I tried coding in C/C++.  I spend too much 
time just SEARCHING for the other functions in my project.
 TH> There are just a lot of features to tell about, and I'm not saying
 TH> that my editor is revolutionary and superior. It works better for me,
Well, I like to be able to come up with a piece of code real fast.  I found 
QB to be the most efficient for programming.
OD>Hey, talking about real-time interpreters... I know some
OD>BASICs relied on a BASIC chipset.. Do they still make
OD>processors with those chipsets?  Or compilers that actually
OD>use them?
 TH> Not sure just what you mean. In the early days (80s) a BASIC
 TH> interpreter could be found in ROMs in many PCs and XTs. Is this what
 TH> you are refering to?
Yes.  Do they still make motherboards that have those chips?
See ya around!
Omega@inorbit.com
--- Maximus 3.01
---------------