REALBasic 值 50 美元吗？
作为一名拥有 12 年以上经验的 Windows 和 Web 开发人员以及“家庭”Mac 用户，我想知道是否值得购买 REALBasic 供个人使用。 我经常想涉足 OS X 的开发； 我懂 VB、Java、C#，但不懂 C、C++ 或 Objective-C。 我心里没有一个具体的项目，也没有学习 Objective-C 的动力，所以我想知道 RB 是否足够简单且足够好，可以让我开始使用一些小型应用程序。
以下是我的担忧/问题：
我在“现实世界”中还没有听说过太多有关 REALBasic 的信息 - stackoverflow 上只有一个标有“realbasic”的问题 - 那么，它是一个可行的开发环境吗？只是一种“玩具”语言/IDE？
使用 RB 编写/编译的应用程序是否存在任何怪癖或陷阱？
有没有用 RB 编写的商业应用程序？
As a Windows and web developer of 12+ years and an "at home" Mac user, I'm wondering if it's worth it to get the REALBasic for personal use. I've often wanted to dabble in development for OS X; I know VB, Java, C#, but not C, C++, or Objective-C. I don't have a specific project in mind and haven't been motivated to learn Objective-C, so I'm wondering if RB would be easy and good enough to get me started with some small apps.
Here are my concerns/questions:
I haven't heard much about REALBasic in the "real world" - there is only one question on stackoverflow tagged with "realbasic" - so, is it a viable development environment, or is it just a "toy" language/IDE?
Are there any quirks or gotchas with apps written/compiled with RB?
Are there any commercial apps out there that are written in RB?
如果你对这篇内容有疑问，欢迎到本站社区发帖提问 参与讨论，获取更多帮助，或者扫码二维码加入 Web 技术交流群。
绑定邮箱获取回复消息
由于您还没有绑定你的真实邮箱，如果其他用户或者作者回复了您的评论，将不能在第一时间通知您！
发布评论
评论（11）
如今，50 美元并不是多少钱，而 REALbasic Personal 绝对物有所值。 甚至，这也是一笔划算的交易。 对于你说你想做的事，它应该是完美的。
REALbasic 的当前版本非常强大。 他们可以将项目保存为文本文件格式，以便与源代码管理一起使用。 我每天在多人团队中将它与 Subversion 一起使用。 它完全面向对象，具有自省功能，多年来一直拥有扩展方法（C# 仅在 .NET 3.0 中使用它们），包括 SQLite 作为其内置数据库等等。
当然也有缺点。 它还没有创建 Cocoa 应用程序（现在是 Carbon），它没有像其他 IDE 那样多的内置控件，它使用相当多的 RAM，并且自动化构建比应有的更难。 尽管如此，REALbasic 与玩具语言相去甚远。 它只是背负着一个坏名声:-)
但是，我保证您将在使用 REALbasic 的几分钟内创建您的第一个 OS X 应用程序。
更新：自 2013 年起，REALbasic 现在被称为 Xojo（该语言仍然是不过是一样的）。
$50 is not much money these days and REALbasic Personal is absolutely worth it. It's a bargain, even. For what you say you want to do, it should be perfect.
The current versions of REALbasic are quite robust. They can save projects in text file format for use with source control. I use it with Subversion on multi-person teams every day. It's fully object-oriented, has introspection capabilities, has had extension methods for years (C# only got them in .NET 3.0), includes SQLite as its built-in database and much more.
There are downsides of course. It doesn't yet create Cocoa apps (they are Carbon right now), it doesn't have as many built-in controls as some other IDEs, it uses quite a bit of RAM and it's harder to automate builds than it should be. Still, REALbasic is a far cry from a toy language. It's just saddled with a bad name :-)
But, I guarantee you'll have your first OS X app created within minutes of using REALbasic.
Update: As of 2013, REALbasic is now known as Xojo (the language is still the same, though).
具体回答你的问题...
当然，对于大多数类型的应用程序来说，这是一个可行的环境。 我目前在家里和工作中都使用它。 我在整个企业中开发并分发了跨平台应用程序，以协助我们的数字资产管理工作、使用 Applescript 进行营销自动化，以及无数有效的小应用程序来帮助我度过每一天。
在操作系统问题得到解决之前，没有什么是一点防御性编程无法解决的，也没有什么是不能完成的。 但这与大多数语言都是一样的。
绝对地。 但我认为商业应用程序宣传其构建的开发环境并不常见。
@ARKBAN
这是不正确的，并且已经存在很长一段时间了。 REALbasic 导出为 XML 和 VCP 格式。
我不会添加下载页面的链接，因为担心我的回复被标记为垃圾邮件。 我想你可以从这里解决这个问题。
干杯
To answer your questions specifically...
Sure, it's a viable envirnoment for most types of applications. I currently use it at home and at work. I have developed and distributed cross-platform apps across the enterprise assist with our digital asset management efforts, marketing authomation with Applescript, plus a gazillion effective little apps that get me through my day.
Nothing that a little defensive programming can't take care of and nothing that can't be done until the issues with OS are resolved. But that's the same as it is with most languages.
Absolutely. But I don't think it's really commonplace for commercial applications to advertise the development environment in which they were built.
@ARKBAN
This is incorrect and has been for quite a while. REALbasic exports to XML and VCP formats.
I'll spare adding a link to the download page for fear of my response being tagged as spam. I think you'll be able to sort it out from here.
Cheers
作为一种语言，REALbasic 比大多数语言更简洁，并且具有 C# 刚刚在最新版本中添加的习惯用法（例如扩展方法）。
该跨平台框架非常易于使用，并且可以很好地集成到 IDE 中。 集成是如此顺利，以至于往往会掩盖框架真正的 OO 本质以及将事件设计到语言中的优雅方式 - 有些人将其视为 VB6 的克隆，但这是非常错误的。
与 Visual Studio 相比，IDE 缺少一些功能，但也更易于使用并且视觉噪音更少。 它有一些功能，尤其是历史记录和导航，优于 Visual Studio，并且使处理大型项目变得异常容易。
对于业余编程来说，我反对它的一个主要观点是，它可能会占用大量内存，在 RAM 小于 1GB 的机器上运行效果不佳。 话虽如此，我很高兴在 1.5GHz、1.25GB PPC PowerBook 12"（我的旅行机器）上使用它，前提是我很小心同时运行的其他内容。
我还在 Visual Studio 和 XCode 中工作 -两者都无法与在 REALbasic 中将程序组合在一起的轻松程度相比。
As a language, REALbasic is cleaner than most and has idioms that C# has only just added in recent versions (such as extends methods).
The cross-platform framework is very easy to use and well-integrated into the IDE. The integration is so smooth it tends to obscure the true OO nature of the framework and elegant way in which events have been designed into the language - some people dismiss it as a VB6 clone but are very wrong.
The IDE lacks some features compared to Visual Studio but is also far easier to use and with less visual noise. It has a few features, especially the history and navigation, which are superior to Visual Studio and make it surprisingly easy to get around a large project.
The one major point I'd hold against it for hobbyist programming is that it can be quite memory-intensive, running poorly on machines with less than 1GB RAM. Having said that, I use it quite happily on a 1.5GHz, 1.25GB PPC PowerBook 12" (my traveling machine) provided I'm careful what else I'm running at the same time.
I also work in Visual Studio and XCode - neither compares to the ease of being able to fling programs together in REALbasic.
如果您想为支持的平台开发简单的 GUI 应用程序，RealBasic 的价格为 50 美元是很划算的。 它不是最先进的开发环境，但对于某些工作来说它绝对是正确的工具。
If you want to develop simple GUI applications for the supported platforms RealBasic at $50 is a bargain. It's not a state of the art development environment, but for some jobs it's absolutely the right tool.
如果没记错的话，OpenSong 是用 RealBASIC 编写的。 我玩过演示版，虽然有一些我喜欢的地方，但我认为你最好使用分布更广泛的东西。
它不是一种“玩具”语言，您可以用它进行一些认真的开发。
If memory serves, OpenSong is written in RealBASIC. I've played with the demo, and while there were things that I liked about it, I think that you'd be better off working with something a little more widely distributed.
Its not a "toy" language, and you can do some serious development with it.
对于家庭、个人使用，我会考虑。 我以前用过它，对于这种用途来说它很好。 但是，我不能说我会把它作为多开发团队甚至大型单开发项目的首选。
For at home, personal use, I'd consider it. I've used it before and it's fine for that type of use. However, I can't say I'd have it as my first choice for multi-dev teams, or even large single-dev projects.
当然是。 上次我检查时列出的价格是这个数字的 6 倍多。 我想说，花 50 美元，你自己去了解一下是值得的。
这一切都取决于，对于业余爱好，也许对于一些小型企业来说，它可能是一个很好的工具，即使只是为了模拟 UI。
RB 基本上可以做 Carbon 能做的所有事情，所以对它能做的事情并没有真正明确的限制。
很难在 Objective-C 和 Xcode 中推荐 REALBasic 而不是 Cocoa，但我可以想象我会这样做的情况。 你的情况不太清楚，我无法提出任何建议。
REALBasic 比推荐的 Mac OS X 工具链要容易得多，它的优点是与 VisualBasic 有点相似，并且可以交叉编译到 Windows 甚至 Linux。
除此之外，它们看起来比我想象的要大，它们是碳，而不是可可
可能吧，但我不知道。
Yes, definitely. Last time I checked it was listed for over 6 times that. I would say, for $50, it is worth finding out for yourself.
It all depends, for hobby stuff, and perhaps some small business it can be a great tool, even if just to mockup UI.
RB can basically do everything Carbon can so there's not really a clear limit to what you could make it do.
Its hard to recommend REALBasic over Cocoa in Objective-C with Xcode, but I can imagine cases where I would. Your case isn't clear enough to me to make any recommendation.
REALBasic is a lot easier to pick up then the recommended toolchain for Mac OS X, and it has the advantages that it is somewhat similar to VisualBasic, and that it can be cross compiled to Windows and even Linux.
Other than that they seem a larger than I would think they need to be, they are Carbon, not Cocoa
Probably, but I am not aware of any.
如果您希望创建跨平台应用程序，REALbasic 是一个很好的使用环境，它远不是一种“玩具”语言。 有许多使用 RB 编写的商业应用程序。
该 IDE 不是最好的，但它很好，并且可以在团队环境中与 Subversion 配合使用进行版本控制。
MBS 和 Einhugur 插件的可用性打开了 RB 并为您提供了一些非常强大的功能。
我当前所有的商业应用程序都是用 RB 编写的 - 没有人要求退款，因为它是用 RB 编写的:-) 如果应用程序以合理的成本完成要求的工作，那么没有人真正关心这种语言。
无论如何，尝试它不会花费太多:-) 你可以在 Arten Science 网站上看到我的东西。
REALbasic is an excellent environment to use if you wish to create Cross Platform applications, it is far from a 'toy' language. There are many commercial applications written with RB.
The IDE is not the greatest but it is fine and works well with Subversion for Version Control in a team environment.
The availability of the MBS and Einhugur Plugins opens up RB and gives you some very powerful functionality.
All my current commercial apps are written in RB - and no-one has asked for a refund because it was written in RB :-) If the apps do the job asked of them at a reasonable cost then nobody really cares about the language.
It won't cost you much to try it anyway :-) You can see my stuff at the Arten Science website.
REALbasic 是一门很好的语言，对于那些不想立即学习 Objective-C 的人来说，可以用它来开始 Mac OS X 编程。 当我拥有 Windows PC 时，我开始使用 REALbasic Pro，这也是我购买第一台 Mac 的原因（这是测试我为 Mac 创建的应用程序所必需的）； 现在我只有两台Mac，并且我不再使用REALbasic。
我停止使用它的原因是 Apple 免费提供 Xcode，而我更喜欢使用允许我创建 Cocoa 应用程序的 IDE，而不是只允许我创建 Carbon 应用程序的 IDE。 另一个原因是，为了做一些更复杂的事情，它需要你有插件来完成直接无法完成的事情（实际上有两个很好的插件可以使用）。
简而言之，REALbasic 物有所值； 如果然后有适用于 Windows 的 REALbasic 和适用于 Mac 的 REALbasic，您可以使用为这两个平台开发的一些代码。
当然，使用 REALbasic 开发的软件很少，并且通常只有了解 REALbasic 的人才能了解应用程序是否是使用 REALbasic 制作的，特别是如果应用程序向最终用户公开 RBScript。
REALbasic is a good language, and it can be used to start programming Mac OS X from who doesn't want to learn Objective-C immediately. I started to use REALbasic Pro when I had a Windows PC, and it was the reason I bought my first Mac (which was necessary to test the applications I created for Mac); now I have only two Macs, and I don't use REALbasic anymore.
The reason that I stopped to use it is that Apple gives Xcode free, and I prefer to use a IDE that allows me to create a Cocoa application, rather than an IDE that only allows me to create Carbon applications. The other reason is that for doing something more complicated, it requires you to have plugins to do what it is not possible to do directly (actually there are two good plugins which can be used).
To make it short, REALbasic is worth the price you pay for it; if then have REALbasic for Windows and REALbasic for Mac, you can use some of the code you develop for both the platforms.
Certainly, software developed using REALbasic is few, and only who knows REALbasic is normally able to understand if an application is made with REALbasic, expecially if the application exposes RBScript to the final user.
Java 随每个 Mac OS X 一起提供，它还带有 Cocoa 的本机绑定（尽管我相信自 10.4 以来它们就不再更新）。 就我个人而言，我使用 Java 和 SWT 在 Mac OS X 上开发应用程序（也必须在 PocketPC 设备上运行），我发现 Mac OS X + PostgreSQL + Eclipse + Java 是一个很好的开发环境。 您也知道这一点 - 但如果您每天在工作中使用它，这可能是不选择它的原因:-)！
Java comes with every Mac OS X, it comes with native bindings for Cocoa (although they're not kept up to date since 10.4 I believe). Personally I've used Java with SWT to develop applications on Mac OS X (that also had to run on a PocketPC device) and I find Mac OS X + PostgreSQL + Eclipse + Java a nice development environment. You also know it - but this may be a reason to not choose it if you use it at work every day :-)!
我认为 mono 将是在 Mac OS X 中使用的更好的平台。
知识更容易转移，平台更广泛使用并且它是免费的。
I think mono would be a better platform to use in Mac OS X.
The knowledge is easier to transfer, platform more widely used and it's free.