Chronology Current Month Current Thread Current Date
[Year List] [Month List (current year)] [Date Index] [Thread Index] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Prev] [Date Next]

Re: A "universal" computer language?

You are correct; I simply forgot that trivial fact about
compiled codes. The same was true at the time of big
mainframes. It is too bad that still have cross platform
barriers. The cross platform compatibilities of new
versions of True Basic (see below) refer to the source
codes, not to executables, unfortunately.

Rick Tarara wrote:

... To be sure, there are separate versions for DOS, Windows,
Macs, OS2, LINNUX, even had one for the Amiga, but once
compiled you have an .exe (or equivalent) program that runs
WITHOUT needing the TrueBasic development package ....

.... The newest versions (Bronze, Silver, and Gold)
now are now so compatible between Windows (3.1/95/98/NT--all the same
code) and PowerMacs that I was able to port 10,000 line programs in only
an hour or two--(basically different path formats and some manipulation of
graphics used in masked, bit-mapped animations where the Mac uses a
'negative' of the Windows graphics.) What makes the big difference in these
newer versions is that the Windows and Mac versions can both read and
display both bitmaps (MS-BMP) and JPEG images.