After giving PB/DLL a whole day of testing, i've come to some conclusions:
1) PB/DLL is pretty much bug free.
2) PB/DLL compiles fast and small.
3) PB/DLL was a waste of money.
I quickly realized it wouldn't be possible to port any of my more complex VB programs over to PB/DLL without a full re-write of code. After a few hours, and a few hours more of reading help files, I decided to port an EXTREMELY simple page-long VB program over. Unimaginable stress followed, and I ended up with an actual working copy -- just without a close program box. I'm sure it's possible as some of the samples are able to do it -- through extraordinarily complex lines of code. I must be cursed because even copying the cryptic code line-for-line from the examples rarely work for me. After today, I think I may have a basic understanding of PB/DLL -- it's fast, small, and bug free because it can't DO anything. I've finally given up since i've managed to get the source to compile without syntax errors, only to end up with a Destination file write error at the end of the compile. It'd probably be ok for CGI but i'm certainly not (even if I HAD the money) throwing down another $190 for PB/CC, and probably another $100 just to get database capabilities. I know, it CAN do PLENTY -- and it's a LITTLE bit easier than programming your own compiler. I was sold PB/DLL under the impression that it was Visual Basic minus the memory hogging and slow execution.. I feel like it would be more truthfully marketed as NOTEPAD.EXE that can compile ASM code.
1) PB/DLL is pretty much bug free.
2) PB/DLL compiles fast and small.
3) PB/DLL was a waste of money.
I quickly realized it wouldn't be possible to port any of my more complex VB programs over to PB/DLL without a full re-write of code. After a few hours, and a few hours more of reading help files, I decided to port an EXTREMELY simple page-long VB program over. Unimaginable stress followed, and I ended up with an actual working copy -- just without a close program box. I'm sure it's possible as some of the samples are able to do it -- through extraordinarily complex lines of code. I must be cursed because even copying the cryptic code line-for-line from the examples rarely work for me. After today, I think I may have a basic understanding of PB/DLL -- it's fast, small, and bug free because it can't DO anything. I've finally given up since i've managed to get the source to compile without syntax errors, only to end up with a Destination file write error at the end of the compile. It'd probably be ok for CGI but i'm certainly not (even if I HAD the money) throwing down another $190 for PB/CC, and probably another $100 just to get database capabilities. I know, it CAN do PLENTY -- and it's a LITTLE bit easier than programming your own compiler. I was sold PB/DLL under the impression that it was Visual Basic minus the memory hogging and slow execution.. I feel like it would be more truthfully marketed as NOTEPAD.EXE that can compile ASM code.
Comment