Anybody else tried FreeBasic (aka fbc)?

[Lennart Sorensen]

On Wed, Oct 05, 2005 at 10:54:43PM -0400, Walter Dnes wrote:
>   I've recently begun a personal pet project where I need to process a
> honking big text file and produce a relatively smaller, but still quite
> large text file.  I need a *COMPILED* language for that.  I need to have
> multiple filehandles reading from the same input file.  I need to do
> string-handling and number-crunching.  If..THEN..ELSE, SELECT CASE, and
> various looping constructs are required.

ocaml has very nice string, list and other type handling, and IS
compiled.  It runs pretty darn fast too.

>   I do *NOT* need "abject ornamentation".  I do *NOT* need multiple
> inheritance that creates an object that's both a tooth paste *AND* a
> floor wax.  Bill Gates' "Visual Basic" abortion has "embraced and
> extended" Basic and given lean/mean compiled Basics an undeserved bad
> reputation.

The object oriented parts of ocaml are entirely optional addons to caml
(a specific version of ml) that you don't need to use.  The language
woks very well on it's own.  The compiler is generating very nice fast
binaries, and it has many nice libraries available for use.  It's string
and list handling makes working in C seem like torture.

Lennart Sorensen
--
The Toronto Linux Users Group.      Meetings: http://tlug.ss.org
TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns
How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://tlug.ss.org/subscribe.shtml