Hi All, A bit of rivalry of different approaches is a good thing. I like to keep an open mind and judge these issues on a case-by case basis. Nobody's prejudices deserve to be law. Not even Paul Bourke's, who is a leading virtuoso** *both* in computer graphics and and in Mac programming, toolbox included. Bob Covington <t88@...> remarks > LINETO can be rewritten in FB 3 to be twice as fast or better > using a custom routine, for example. It is too slow for realtime > 3D use. Hmm. I didn't know that. Does that use PPC assembler? Statz' neat 5 lines of toolbox code can indeed replace Franklin's neat 10 lines of C (or FB). Both are very clear. But what is the speed ratio? Joe Wilkins opines > Apple has done a very thorough job, and most of > it is faster, now that we have access to PPC, > than any C code anyone can come up with, so why > not spend all of this energy exploring the > enormous potential of the Toolbox, and leave the > "convoluted" C thinking where it belongs - on > PCs. C comes from unix and the 1970's. So forget PCs. Let's say linux to be more relevant; linux is in effect open source unix. The big argument for classical C like Franklin's code snippet is that will be good 25 years hence -- as it was 25 years ago. I know of no distinctly better way of salting away a neat algorithm for future use. (Except maybe plain English; I say maybe since translation to and from English is problematic.) That is why I want two-way access C <==> FB. Bob Covington <t88@...> adds: > I have posted a Bezier curve demo and source at > http://www.mindspring.com/~artlythere/fb.html At it Future Baby programmers!-- B'ezier curves, informally known as French curves, are essential for programming good hooters. I'm only half kidding. They were really introduced for French autobody design --- by French engineers B'ezier and de Casteljau. Cheers Larry Siebenmann ** PS. Check out Paul C. Bourke's web site (via any search engine). Truly sensational.