"write pages of code that can be done with
lisp in four lines?"
The number of lines of code are not the issue. The
issue is the limitations of the API/language, and the
qualifications and skills of the one who is writing the
code.
Many things I do with ObjectARX, cannot be done with
40,000 lines of LISP, or any number of lines of LISP for
that matter, because those things can't be done with
LISP.
It's not about a language 'preference', because that
implies that all of the langauges/APIs are equivalent
in terms of capabilities, which is not the case.
--
http://www.caddzone.com
AcadXTabs: MDI Document Tabs for AutoCAD 2004/2005/2006
http://www.acadxtabs.com
"James Maeding" wrote in message news:4945525@discussion.autodesk.com...
cool, I'll read that too.
I read parts of Dan Appleman's book "Moving to VB.net" and am convinced its a next generation language.
I went to an AU class last year that made me think you might as well learn ARX if you want the power of the acad .net
API.
That was discouraging as who out there has time to write pages of code that can be done with lisp in four lines?
Its like you have to have major serious need before going to .net, the other languages are still very powerful.
Time and stability are the issues, and very few have either to spare.
Nathan Taylor <>
|>Any .NET language can use the AutoCAD .NET API. You can also still use the ActiveX API. There is more power in the .NET API.
|>
|>Here is a free book on upgrading from VB6 to VB.NET.
|>http://msdn.microsoft.com/vbrun/staythepath/additionalresources/upgradingvb6/
|>
|>Regards - Nathan
James Maeding
Civil Engineer and Programmer
jmaeding - athunsaker - com