|
-
Nov 26th, 2001, 10:55 PM
#1
Thread Starter
Addicted Member
-
Nov 27th, 2001, 07:35 AM
#2
A Memory DC would have been more efficient. I had problems before, where Point would only give me -1, when the PictureBox was hidden. You dont get this problem using a Memory DC, and GetPixel().
Z.
-
Nov 27th, 2001, 09:38 AM
#3
transcendental analytic
Remove the DC layer and use the bimap directly, there's huge performance difference.
Use  
writing software in C++ is like driving rivets into steel beam with a toothpick.
writing haskell makes your life easier:
reverse (p (6*9)) where p x|x==0=""|True=chr (48+z): p y where (y,z)=divMod x 13
To throw away OOP for low level languages is myopia, to keep OOP is hyperopia. To throw away OOP for a high level language is insight.
-
Nov 27th, 2001, 04:00 PM
#4
Then you have to muck around with bitmap Headers, and all of that. Better even, you could preprocess the Bitmap, and write out a .raw file containing a single byte for each height value.
Z.
-
Nov 27th, 2001, 04:20 PM
#5
transcendental analytic
Originally posted by Zaei
Then you have to muck around with bitmap Headers, and all of that. Better even, you could preprocess the Bitmap, and write out a .raw file containing a single byte for each height value.
Z.
or learn C++
Use  
writing software in C++ is like driving rivets into steel beam with a toothpick.
writing haskell makes your life easier:
reverse (p (6*9)) where p x|x==0=""|True=chr (48+z): p y where (y,z)=divMod x 13
To throw away OOP for low level languages is myopia, to keep OOP is hyperopia. To throw away OOP for a high level language is insight.
-
Nov 27th, 2001, 04:37 PM
#6
Here's a quote I think you'll like kedaman =).
"It is practically impossible to teach good programming style to students that have had prior exposure to BASIC: as potential programmers they are mentally mutilated beyond hope of regeneration." - Edsger Dijkstra.
Z.
-
Nov 27th, 2001, 05:23 PM
#7
transcendental analytic
Originally posted by Zaei
Here's a quote I think you'll like kedaman =).
"It is practically impossible to teach good programming style to students that have had prior exposure to BASIC: as potential programmers they are mentally mutilated beyond hope of regeneration." - Edsger Dijkstra.
Z.
I'm a living miracle to survive that
Use  
writing software in C++ is like driving rivets into steel beam with a toothpick.
writing haskell makes your life easier:
reverse (p (6*9)) where p x|x==0=""|True=chr (48+z): p y where (y,z)=divMod x 13
To throw away OOP for low level languages is myopia, to keep OOP is hyperopia. To throw away OOP for a high level language is insight.
-
Nov 27th, 2001, 05:43 PM
#8
-
Nov 27th, 2001, 05:46 PM
#9
Good Ol' Platypus
I have learned C++ and I understand it, while before I was taught BASIC. Ta!
All contents of the above post that aren't somebody elses are mine, not the property of some media corporation. 
(Just a heads-up)
-
Nov 27th, 2001, 06:54 PM
#10
-
Nov 27th, 2001, 07:00 PM
#11
C++ and VB are quite different. When you get better, and learn more of the nuances, you being to understand that =).
Z.
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
-
Forum Rules
|
Click Here to Expand Forum to Full Width
|