Re: IDL 5.4 Stability

[Med Bennett <mbennett(at)indra.com>]

Well,  I'm still using 5.0.2, circa mid 1997.  It's hard to know what the
"best" version for one's particular feature needs and stability is.  Maybe we
should have a vote as to what the best version of IDL is, taking into account
both features and stability. Since I haven't (I hate to admit it) gotten into
object graphics yet, I don't consider that functionality to be important
right now.

LC's No-Spam Newsreading account wrote:

> > >> That's why I'm still ysing 4.0.1 at home.... :-)
> > > And it does all you want? You must be easy to please!
> > Indeed, it does.
>
> Me too. I'm still on 4.0 on a DU 3.2 system which has reasons to stay
> that why. I'd like a stable cheap language.
>
> I would be more agreable to pay cheaper licenses (for instance linked to
> hours of usage, and "rechargeable") than the current floating licenses,
> and a small upgrade/maintenance charge for the rare cases (one is
> approaching) when I have to change the hostid in the license server file
> because I write off an old workstation. I'm really not interested in
> getting CDs of "upgraded" versions which give me lots of GUI oriented
> stuff I do not need, or changes which can be annoying (like the [] stuff
> for arrays) or worsened performance (our license server is tied to 5.1
> because 5.3 does not support OPTIONS.DAT, and I would carefully avoid to
> go to 5.4 since it does not write GIFs anymore).
>
> --
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> nospam@ifctr.mi.cnr.it is a newsreading account used by more persons to
> avoid unwanted spam. Any mail returning to this address will be rejected.
> Users can disclose their e-mail address in the article if they wish so.