I said absolutely nothing about the language. By quality, I mean bugs, not that it's a "basic" language - because it's hardly basic.
But I believe that hobbyists will accept more bugs from their tool than professionals will. I do find something very interesting. On the beta list, I noticed the tone was more in favor of horsewhipping RS for all the bugs, whereas on the NUG here, I see far more defense of the tool. I don't have any theories as to why, but at first glance seems to be a positive thing. And Charles, I agree with you and even before receiving your message decided it was a bad idea. The question is quite simply not one worthy of an answer, so I wouldn't get one, and nothing would change because of it. -- Thom McGrath The ZAZ Studios <http://www.thezaz.com/> AIM: thezazstudios On Apr 6, 2007, at 4:41 PM, JC wrote: > 1. It's a bit of a false dichotomy assuming that a basic syntax RAD > development tool can't be marketed to both. _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode: <http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/> Search the archives: <http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>
