>>  >> No question for me -- it would be FB^3 PGPro. But, that's only
>>>>  experience talking.
>>>>
>>>
>>  >Tedd,
>>
>>Tedd doesn't put "<my> experience talking" there. :)
>
>Well... in that context, who's experience would it be? It is implied
>that it is <my> experience and not the experience of the <entire
>universe>.

Ooh, I take your 2 cents and raise you a Quarters.  I could say, I am King
of The World. But it isn't implied that <I Think> I am king of the world. I
might be. Depending on what the meaning of world, is. (Clinton "is" heckle)


>>Since this is an issue, Start two. A PG version, and a plain vanilla
>>version. :) Bail out of the one that soon presents problems above the other
>>one in too high a proportion. This would be a good solution if effort was
>>the main concern.
>>
>>Sometimes I wish I had used PG to do things, but I always like the control
>>I have with a standard Runtime project. Debugging someone else's PG project
>>always drives me crazy. Debugging a regular FB Program, that I can handle.
>
>You know, I'm always perplexed by people who say things likes that.

Be perplexed no more. It is a function of familiarity.

A matter of time spent in my case. If I knew PG well, wouldn't be a
perplexion. (new word, don't complain wordmongers)

I personally don't see that much difference between an extremely well
>written FB program and a PG Program. The only real difference I see
>is in the GUI in window design and the like. But, if one looks at the
>way STAZ has designed PG to handle buttons, windows, cursors, and a
>million other things, it really comes down to recognizing a system
>that works. It's a logical system that has been thought out to work
>under all circumstances.

I don't disagree with that.

>In contrast, one can reinvent all these things so that they feel like
>they have control, but it's not control -- it's really just
>understanding what's happening.

I like understanding what's happening.  I used to be able to use code and
not have to understand it, but nowadays I write so much Custom stuff, or
need to expand somebody else's code that I need to know it all through and
through.

 After all, if you write the code
>yourself, then you understand what the code does. Whereas, if STAZ
>has written the code, then it's harder to understand what he is doing
>-- which is, and has been, amazing -- and maybe that's the problem.

So, If I do understand what Staz has written, then I am amazing too. :)

All bickering aside, methinks you are being too phellegenic here.

Send me your millions, stop the madness.

Robert Bob