Purebasic datenbank driver#

But they are paid (and very expensive) and creating quite large EXEs. You should learn and write a much more to obtain the same result.ĭelphi and C++ Builder aren't so hard. #include #include #include #include // #pragma comment(lib, 'user32.lib') - for MessageBox, required if lib not added in the compiler options Tool for this should be quick, native and simply. And 'temporary' soft writing for experiments with undocument libx, hacks, etc.And other soft requiring a performance and light weight.Adware and 'legal adware' (with neccessary license agreement). Adware should eat a little CPU time, RAM and disk space and shouldn't require a third-party platform.

Purebasic datenbank driver#

Driver just will not work if will require a. Also very undesirable to require a few third-party DLLs weighing a few MBs at all. Installer shouldn't require a third-party platform. Where native and third-party independent development is necessary? I just help you orient that language is best for your purposes.

Really.Īlso I am not a spammer advertising a commercial product on CodeProject. I do not work for the authors of PB. And, PureBasic is bes t for most native purposes. You can use Delphi, a few C++ implementations, and a few more PLs. Python and Java is better for cross-platform development, not least because not compiling to platform-dependent executable format on many OSes.īut, if you want write native applications, not requiring a third-party dlls and platforms, or native and cross-platform applications, you can't use C#, Java, Python. C# is more convenient and powerful than PB for writing Windows applications. I don't think that PureBasic better than all of these PLs. I writing in more than 10 PLs including C#, Java, C++ and other main-stream PLs.