-=> Quoting Anton Sparrius to All <=-

 AS> Ok..flame you if you want you all "i love C++ and would never do
 AS> anything else", but does anyone use speed pascal??  And, wots your
 AS> opinion of it??

    I don't use Speed Pascal because I find VP much more reliable. I don't 
like the "requirement" to use a custom string type which is
defined in neither 
"C" nor "Pascal" to call OS/2 API's (I have no use for
the entire CSTRING 
type). Anything that can be done with CSTRING can be done with STRINGs or 
PChars (true "C" strings).
    The compiler bombs without notice for no reason (recompiling the same code 
after a subsequent open works fine, but may bomb again 4 compile attempts 
later).
    Don't like the "need" for 32bit text IO (made no speed
difference on my 
system but would require me to distribute the DLL and require the user to 
locate it accordingly).
    Find it generally difficult to use and VERY slow. It compiles poorly when 
it compiles. It's debugging features are non-existent or so buggy in 
themselves as to make IDE debugging unstable if at all possible. The 
executeable files it produces are too large.
    The only "good" thing about it, is the PM IDE (although I prefer text 
mode, there are times when I can appreciate a good PM app - which Speed's 
current IDE is not).
    Virtual Pascal on the other hand is still better in it's beta form than 
Speed is in it's release form.
    Please keep in mind that this is ONLY my opinion and may differ 
significantly from those of others. "I" would be more likely to consider a 
purchase of the VP release (later this month) that the SPEED release. I would 
also be more content to use the VP beta with it's known bugs rather than to 
use the current release of Speed.

Dave...


... THD ProScan support on the web, http://www.naples.net/~nfn03274
~~~ TGWave v1.12+
--- GEcho 1.11+