I find that by declaring variables the number of runtime errors due to
typos are greatly reduced, I therefore prefer the strictness of C++
datatypes you use, which slows development down. Most compiled languages
require you to explicitly state the type when creating variables. (C even
Enrique
Sorry Kerry (et al).
A full compiler doesn't really seem like the way to go.
I have to agree w/Brennan's suggestion.
Being able to take a script member export/compile it out as an new
type of 'Xtra' would be a great feature!
It's also something they could PUT ON THE BOX in the PR RELEASE!
A full compiler doesn't really seem like the way to go.
The more discussion I see, the more I tend to agree. There are Lingo
features that would be difficult or impossible to compile, especially do.
However...
Being able to take a script member export/compile it out as an new type
of
Kerry Thompson wrote:
Instead, we're stuck with 1980s technology--the same clunky, slow
interpreter that was used in old-style BASIC, like I was writing in 1982.
I started with Basica in 1982, too. When I think of my long travel through
the programming languages that I learned more or less
Kerry Thompson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote
I don't understand why this isn't at the top of Macromedia's list of
upgrades--there is no other single thing they could do to increase
performance more, at least for Lingo-heavy apps.
At the beginning of a project, the Powers That Be make a
Thanks for letting us pick over your code!
I kinda did this thing too see how fast (or slow) lingo really is.
I think i've got my answer
I hope the MM folks are planning to do something about that.
If anyone wants to use this code, feel free to do so, it's fun to play
with...
Thanks for
Hi all,
I've made me a mandelbrot fractal generator in lingo.
I use setpixel, a 320 by 200 points stage, and an 8 bit palette.
I do the setPixel ops on a variable wich i have initialised as an image.
However a mandelbrot with scale set to 0.02 wich fits the 320x200 image
takes 30 secs to
At 10:24 +0200 2001_07_03, Chris Aernoudt wrote:
Is there a faster way to plot an image than using setpixel??
Not that I know of, but remember to draw to an unattached imageObject
rather than directly into a member or the image of a member. Also you
might get speed increases by using an 8 bit
Chris Aernoudt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote
- --Ok, here goes
- --I've got some other scripts attached to be able to do a clickzoom, but
that's not important to the drawing
Just commenting out the 'setPixel' line, I can see that the script itself is
very slow. At first I thought you could
