Visual Basic is a con !

At last, after about twenty years the penny has dropped.

I've just realised why I struggle so much with the Visual Basic part of Visual Studio, which I'm told is actually VB.NET, it's because I'm still trying to program in BASIC.
That's the point isn't it? Visual Basic isn't BASIC... Anyone remember what the acronym BASIC originally stood for? Especially the 'B'.

"Ok guys, we've got this new programming language, we've used as many of the keywords from BASIC as we could so that we can call it Basic, after all... Go with the name you know !"
"If we use lower case letters nobody will notice... With all these other new languages springing up, if we call it Basic we'll sell a whole lot more than if we give it yet another new name".


Author's Note.
A phrase we here in the UK use from time to time is 'The penny has dropped' it means we've been slow to realise a truth.

It most likely stems from the old Victorian arcades of penny slot-machines. Pennies in those days (and up until 1972 in fact) were quite large and relativly heavy, made of a soft copper alloy which would often get damaged, these pennies would often stick in a machine necessitating a thump, or worse, to loosen them before the penny would finally drop allowing the player to play the machine.


Poppa.

lol that post reads like it belongs in chit chat ;)

VB is BASIC but much more besides. You can still write programs as they were in old-style BASIC but not if you want an event-driven GUI. BASIC couldn't do that so if that's what you want then there's no use complaining that VB is not the same as the original BASIC.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jmcilhinney

VB is BASIC but much more besides. You can still write programs as they were in old-style BASIC but not if you want an event-driven GUI. BASIC couldn't do that so if that's what you want then there's no use complaining that VB is not the same as the original BASIC.

---

Oh, I'm most definitely not complaining... Just voicing a frustration. I've completed several projects of which I was very pleased just using my own subset of VB.NET commands, but I've come to realise how very small my subset is. I'm certainly not knocking VB, I get a lot of fun out of trying to program my trivial little projects, spending hours at my PC often incurring the wrath of SWMBO.

Poppa.

Well if it makes you feel any better, VB.Net is more similar to BASIC than C,C++, PHP, JavaScript, HTLM, Java, ASM, C#, F#, MSIL, Oxygene, Haskell, Lisp, Pascal, Erlang, Ada, SmallTalk, Fortran, D, Python, COBOL, T-SQL, Eiffel, E# ,Brain****, and LOLCODE. I'm pretty sure they're a few more its quite dissimilar from :)

Have you ever actually read a How To on VB or just muddled through? It might not be a bad idea to work through something coherent and sequential. It might seem that some of it is cast below your level but there are definitely some fundamental concepts that you seem to have missed altogether. I'd suggest working through something like this:

http://www.homeandlearn.co.uk/net/vbnet.html

from start to finish. That should sort out some of the worst holes and then give you a better grounding to work from in future.

Moved to Chit Chat

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Niya

Well if it makes you feel any better, VB.Net is more similar to BASIC than C,C++, PHP, JavaScript, HTLM, Java, ASM, C#, F#, MSIL, Oxygene, Haskell, Lisp, Pascal, Erlang, Ada, SmallTalk, Fortran, D, Python, COBOL, T-SQL, Eiffel, E# ,Brain****, and LOLCODE. I'm pretty sure they're a few more its quite dissimilar from :)

---

Delphi maybe ?

:D

Pop.

Delphi is a dialect of Pascal according to the internet.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Niya

Delphi is a dialect of Pascal according to the internet.

---

Delphi is to Pascal pretty much as VB is to BASIC.

"Beginner's All-purpose Symbolic Instruction Code"

There! You have it.


Now why it doesn't sound basic, maybe the beginners too have evolved.

Delphi is a town in Greece. It's a good place to visit if you want to communicate with Oracle.

I love this site"Home and learn"! Well presented and has great support. It has been helping me jump from the very old school basic.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Poppa Mintin

At last, after about twenty years the penny has dropped.

I've just realised why I struggle so much with the Visual Basic part of Visual Studio, which I'm told is actually VB.NET, it's because I'm still trying to program in BASIC.
That's the point isn't it? Visual Basic isn't BASIC... Anyone remember what the acronym BASIC originally stood for? Especially the 'B'.

"Ok guys, we've got this new programming language, we've used as many of the keywords from BASIC as we could so that we can call it Basic, after all... Go with the name you know !"
"If we use lower case letters nobody will notice... With all these other new languages springing up, if we call it Basic we'll sell a whole lot more than if we give it yet another new name".


Author's Note.
A phrase we here in the UK use from time to time is 'The penny has dropped' it means we've been slow to realise a truth.

It most likely stems from the old Victorian arcades of penny slot-machines. Pennies in those days (and up until 1972 in fact) were quite large and relativly heavy, made of a soft copper alloy which would often get damaged, these pennies would often stick in a machine necessitating a thump, or worse, to loosen them before the penny would finally drop allowing the player to play the machine.


Poppa.

---

I too started with basic, so I realize the frustration. Try the home and learn site it really is helping me a lot.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FunkyDexter

Delphi is a town in Greece. It's a good place to visit if you want to communicate with Oracle.

---

That was a very pithy comment. In fact, it was a pythia comment.

The problem is not so much that it is a con it's that you stepped out for a bit. Had you been in the mix from VB1-VB6, then on to VB.NET, you'd have seen a steady transition as new features built onto existing ones and replaced others. The steady pace of change would be apparent. As it is, you effectively traveled through time, got older (darn it), and found that things had changed. That's the basic situation here.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shaggy Hiker

That was a very pithy comment. In fact, it was a pythia comment.

The problem is not so much that it is a con it's that you stepped out for a bit. Had you been in the mix from VB1-VB6, then on to VB.NET, you'd have seen a steady transition as new features built onto existing ones and replaced others. The steady pace of change would be apparent. As it is, you effectively traveled through time, got older (darn it), and found that things had changed. That's the basic situation here.

---

I hate the getting old part. I do the math 5+3=8...I am only 8. That is my prospective!

Yeah... it's been interesting to see the changes to BASIC over the years...
I've gone from Apple BASIC -> PC BASIC - GW BASIC -> VB3 (now that was a rough transition) -> VB4 -> VB6 -> VB.NET -> ??? who knows what the future will bring?
Along the way I also learned (in no particular order) Pascal, C, C++, C#, Ada, Fortran, COBOL, Assembler, SQL, HTML, Javascript, miniscule Java, PHP, and I'm sure there's something I'm missing.

To some extent, VB is still very much a basic language... it's just that it does so much more than it used to. It, just like me, evolved over time, learned new tricks and picked up new features along the way. So has C#, so has C++... so has most any language that is still relevant today... even COBOL and, yes Ada... guess what? there is a .NET implementation of Ada... A#... seriously... developed as part of a thesis project at the US Air Force Academy... Considering that Ada is supposed to be the de facto standard programming language in the AF, I don't find that all that surprising.

Bottom line is that with all the changes in technology, the languages also have to evolve and change so that they stay relevant, otherwise people will drop it in favor of something else and it eventually dies.

Unfortunately it does mean there isn't a "basic" language any more...which may or may not be a good thing...

-tg

Well there's always Small Basic, the other .Net Basic.

In my opinion, VB6 was the last true BASIC and ill explain why. Its cause applications can be written so much faster than in VB.Net. For every new version of VB.Net to come out, it ends up becoming more and more like java or C#. And its so much harder to work with than VB6. Its more of a learning curve for beginers. This is why VB6 continues to be widely used to this day even though MS abandoned support for it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jacob Roman

This is why VB6 continues to be widely used to this day even though MS abandoned support for it.

---

I find it interesting that, while Microsoft has ended official support for every old product and will eventually end support for all their current products, VB6 is the only product whose support has ended that is continually claimed to have been "abandoned". I've never heard anyone claim that Microsoft abandoned Windows XP. VB6 developers seem to think that they have some greater right than users of any other software Microsoft has ever created.

VB.Net is more basic then the com versions of Visual Basic drag drop and a few lines of code and you have a simple program! Whereas creating the same program in the COM versions could be a nightmare.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jmcilhinney

I find it interesting that, while Microsoft has ended official support for every old product and will eventually end support for all their current products, VB6 is the only product whose support has ended that is continually claimed to have been "abandoned". I've never heard anyone claim that Microsoft abandoned Windows XP. VB6 developers seem to think that they have some greater right than users of any other software Microsoft has ever created.

---

Just a small correction. Windows XP is still under extended support until April 2014, and some are complaining about it now. Though I agree, no one has been vocal as VB6 community. Personally, I'm still maintaining some legacy projects in VB6 and I look forward to the day we either rewrite them in something else or abandon them.

I apologize to the board for posting myself twice... what can I say I'm a newbie. Sorry

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jacob Roman

In my opinion, VB6 was the last true BASIC and ill explain why. Its cause applications can be written so much faster than in VB.Net. For every new version of VB.Net to come out, it ends up becoming more and more like java or C#. And its so much harder to work with than VB6. Its more of a learning curve for beginers. This is why VB6 continues to be widely used to this day even though MS abandoned support for it.

---

I sincerely hope you're joking. There is no way on God's green earth you can develop equivalent applications faster in VB6 than in VB.Net. You might as well try to paint the sky red with paint brush. There is NOTHING that can be done in VB6 faster than in VB.Net...lemme say that again, there is NOTHING that can be done in VB6 faster than in VB.Net. I'll also add that there it can also be done better.

Before you write me off as some kind of nutty .Net fanboy ;)....Note that I have spent way more time in VB6 than in VB.Net. I've only been writing code in Vb.Net for a few years whereas I previously used COM based flavors of VB since VB2 I believe it was. VB2 was released in 1992 and I started .Net with 2008 so that's about 16 years in pre-VB.Net VB. Also note that I was really really really stubborn about leaving VB6 for VB.Net. I used to think as you did, that VB6 was Oh so perfect and that VB.Net couldn't offer anything that VB6 didn't already do well. Boy was I wrong!!!. VB6 now feels clumsy and dated. After you use VB.Net for a while, it really drives home just how clunky and awkward VB6 and its ilk really is. I could go on and on but I'll let the language speak for itself:-

vb Code:

Private Type Person
    Name As String
    age As Long
End Type
 
Private Sub Form_Load()
    Dim people() As Person
    Dim peopleUnder20() As Person
    
    ReDim people(0 To 6)
    
    people(0).Name = "John Henry"
    people(0).age = 15
    
    people(1).Name = "Merry Hopkins"
    people(1).age = 14
    
    people(2).Name = "Jonnah James"
    people(2).age = 13
 
    people(3).Name = "Richard Falks"
    people(3).age = 44
    
    people(4).Name = "Jenny Ming"
    people(4).age = 33
    
    people(5).Name = "Jerry Seinfeld"
    people(5).age = 25
    
    people(6).Name = "Heaven Drake"
    people(6).age = 10
 
    peopleUnder20 = GetAllUnder(20, people)
    
    For i = LBound(peopleUnder20) To UBound(peopleUnder20)
        List1.AddItem peopleUnder20(i).Name
    Next
   
End Sub
 
Private Function GetAllUnder(ByVal age As Long, ByRef people() As Person) As Person()
    Dim newArr() As Person
    Dim count As Long
        
    For i = LBound(people) To UBound(people)
        If people(i).age < age Then
            ReDim Preserve newArr(count)
            newArr(count).age = people(i).age
            newArr(count).Name = people(i).Name
            count = count + 1
        End If
    Next
 
    GetAllUnder = newArr
End Function

The above VB6 code creates a list of people and adds only those who are under the age of 20 into a ListBox. Here is the equivalent VB.Net version:-

vbnet Code:

Public Class Form1
 
    Private Sub Form1_Load(sender As System.Object, e As System.EventArgs) Handles MyBase.Load
        Dim people As New List(Of Person)
 
        people.Add(New Person With {.Name = "John Henry", .Age = 15})
        people.Add(New Person With {.Name = "Merry Hopkins", .Age = 14})
        people.Add(New Person With {.Name = "Jonnah James", .Age = 13})
        people.Add(New Person With {.Name = "Richard Falks", .Age = 44})
        people.Add(New Person With {.Name = "Jenny Ming", .Age = 33})
        people.Add(New Person With {.Name = "Jerry Seinfeld Henry", .Age = 25})
        people.Add(New Person With {.Name = "Heaven Drake", .Age = 10})
 
        ListBox1.Items.AddRange((From person In people Where person.Age < 20 Select person.Name).ToArray)
 
    End Sub
End Class
 
Public Class Person
    Public Property Name As String
    Public Age As Integer
End Class

Look at that....hell even the forum agrees with me....It didn't even need a scrollbar for the VB.Net version. I'd sooner chew off my own fingers than go back to VB6 God hear me lol.

[EDIT]

Btw...It took me 20 minutes to write the VB6 version and 1 minute to write the VB.Net version.

Now I'll admit my VB6 is quite rusty and I had a few hiccups as a result of forgetting certain absurdities in VB6 like the fact that For...Each can only work on primitive types, having to go back and create a counter variable just for Redim Preserve, having to move the type declaration to the top because VB6 would not resolve it if it wasn't and having to declare the type private because VB6 or rather COM doesn't allow you to pass around VB6 UDTs publicly. Doing this reminded me of just how clumsy VB6 really is. Anyways, in my peak VB6 days I would have written that in about 5 minutes....still a lot longer than it would take in VB.Net.

You know what....I challenge you or any other VB6 programmer to present a problem that you believe can be solved in VB6 faster and/or better than in VB.Net.

[EDIT]

I'll tell you the one thing I can think of to get that out of the way. Writing structures. If given a structure like the bitmap file format header structure, VB6's Get and Put can read and write them as is. VB.Net requires a little more effort.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Niya

You know what....I challenge you or any other VB6 programmer to present a problem that you believe can be solved in VB6 faster and/or better than in VB.Net.

[EDIT]

I'll tell you the one thing I can think of to get that out of the way. Writing structures. If given a structure like the bitmap file format header structure, VB6's Get and Put can read and write them as is. VB.Net requires a little more effort.

---

There are undoubtedly some things that VB6 can do more easily than VB.NET but I think that, when it comes to creating a useful application, a VB.NET developer will be able to finish the job sooner than an equally skilled VB6 developer. If you want to take all the shortcuts that VB offers, e.g. Option Strict Off, then you could do it more quickly still but, even following best practice, almost all useful applications will be built as quickly or more quickly in VB.NET. Even the the things that take some effort in VB.NET can be wrapped in a component with a simple interface and then the second time you do it it takes virtually no time at all.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jmcilhinney

...will be built as quickly...

---

True if you're talking about spreading a button on a form to show a MessageBox but anything approaching even the slightest complexity would be faster done in VB.Net.

Quote:

---

There is NOTHING that can be done in VB6 faster than in VB.Net

---

...other than opening the ide in the morning ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FunkyDexter

...other than opening the ide in the morning ;)

---

Greatness always has some cost ;)

Just wondering:confused:
In you opinion if you are a newbie why would or won't you start in vb.net? I read this thread everyday and now am questioning my decision to start with vb.net.

I think VB.Net is an excellent choice for a newbie. It's a verbose language so it's easy to read. It's feature rich so there's plenty of scope for growth as you want to improve. And it has probably the best ide available (say what you like about MS, visual studio has been way ahead of the competition since VB4... and probably before that but that's as far back as I go).

About the only downside is that you will have to live with a bit of occasional (miss-informed) snobbery from some quarters. C++ programmers will dismiss you as a cretinous simpleton for your inability to keep track of pointers chained 6 levels deep and Java programmers will pillory you for buying into the evils of Microsoft. Meanwhile C# programmers will get paid just a little bit more than you for writing exactly the same code and VB6 programmers will continue to whitter on about "footprints". But hey, while you're learning VB.Net you should also be learning general programming theory and that's transportable to any platform you like.

For years I have been a math junkie. I have written the math to build a complete cabinet (kitchen, utility, floor , wall mount) and it works great for me. But because these programs are generally sold in separate parts(doors, frame, counter top) and are way to pricey. Not to mention the egging on from my son. I want to develop it better. It will probably take another 7 years. But that is ok. I call it the amateur cabinet builder. I set out to learn vb because I could not find a starving programmer.

Thanks for the input!:wave:

Are you talking about product configuration software? If so that was a significant part of my last job. We used to do Conservatory Blinds and Shutters and you'd be amazed at how many possible configurations there are for a seemingly simple product. For us the only way we could achieve it was to write 90% of the logic in code which always stuck in my craw because it meant we had to re-engineer the software every time the product range got tweaked.

About the only way you could make it properly flexible would be to use attribute value pairs. I still think that idea has legs but there are REAL problems implementing it as a pattern. Oddly enough, I think the pattern's also applicable to marketting and CRM (which is my other "area of expertise") if you can get past the implementation issues.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FunkyDexter

C++ programmers will dismiss you as a cretinous simpleton for your inability to keep track of pointers chained 6 levels deep and Java programmers will pillory you for buying into the evils of Microsoft. Meanwhile C# programmers will get paid just a little bit more than you for writing exactly the same code and VB6 programmers will continue to whitter on about "footprints".

---

This is signature worthy truth right here!

[EDIT]

Its now in my sig...

My test model is in excel. It only calculates board feet and cuts. It does not render drawings yet. I have written building order notes. I based my concept on american construction these are not frameless. For now I am happy just to please myself. I have tested the math in others homes. There are many different configurations.

Thanks for your thoughts
Perhaps I should have started a new thread I don't want to take away from the original topic

Quote:

---

It only calculates board feet and cuts

---

Oh I think I get it. By the way, if you've done anything that optimises the cuts (e.g. get as many doors as possible out of a single sheet of wood) then definitely wrap it up into an application because there's money in them there maths. It's quite easy to do in 1 dimension but once you get into 2 or more it's quite tricksy and there are alot of manufacturing companies out there who'll happily pay for it.

Quote:

---

Its now in my sig...

---

aww, shucks, my habitual cynicism has finally made me net-famous.:D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FunkyDexter

aww, shucks, my habitual cynicism has finally made me net-famous.:D

---

Don't you forget your non-famous friends up there now ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BecauseIcan

I apologize to the board for posting myself twice... what can I say I'm a newbie. Sorry

---

It's not being a newbie, it's a feature of the forum, currently. There are times when it hits pretty much everybody these days. This really began with the software upgrade last summer, and has gotten progressively better since then, but still remains.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jmcilhinney

If you want to take all the shortcuts that VB offers, e.g. Option Strict Off, then you could do it more quickly still

---

I doubt that you could speed up development by even a second by turning Option Strict OFF. In fact, I would guess that you would actually slow down because you would have to stop and think to get out of the habits that Option Strict requires. Option Infer is the same way. If you leave if OFF for a long time, then turn it ON, it's VERY hard to take advantage of that minor increase in speed. This is what I like best about those options: Leave them in the correct configuration and pretty soon you will just be writing better code in such a way that even if you turned them off, you would continue writing well.

Actually Jmc is right. Option Strict On does slow you down. I write code with it off because its really breaks my flow when I have to CType and DirectCast everything. When I'm close to completing or actually finished with a specific class or set of classes I sometimes go back and place it on top of the code file and then clean up all the errors it catches. Surprisingly, they're not that many. Usually I get about 3 - 4 errors. Even when in my "flow" I have a habit of using DirectCast/CType, but sometimes I forgo it when I'm not sure I'm going to stick with a particular piece of code. I usually need to test it quickly and change it quickly and Option Strict On gets in my way in under these circumstances. My coding style can be described as "develop while I code". I keep a vague concept of what I want to achieve in my head and sculpt the code live. I can't afford to be stuttered by the IDE at that time. I can tolerate it when everything has been fleshed out and its just a matter of refactoring here, changing the name of a property there. You know, like tidying up.

[QUOTE=FunkyDexter;4388051]Oh I think I get it. By the way, if you've done anything that optimises the cuts (e.g. get as many doors as possible out of a single sheet of wood) then definitely wrap it up into an application because there's money in them there maths. It's quite easy to do in 1 dimension but once you get into 2 or more it's quite tricksy and there are alot of manufacturing companies out there who'll happily pay for it.

I have some of the math worked out for how many from board length/feet mostly right now it tells length, width, thickness and number to cut..ahh a love in progress.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Niya

Actually Jmc is right. Option Strict On does slow you down. I write code with it off because its really breaks my flow when I have to CType and DirectCast everything. When I'm close to completing or actually finished with a specific class or set of classes I sometimes go back and place it on top of the code file and then clean up all the errors it catches. Surprisingly, they're not that many. Usually I get about 3 - 4 errors. Even when in my "flow" I have a habit of using DirectCast/CType, but sometimes I forgo it when I'm not sure I'm going to stick with a particular piece of code. I usually need to test it quickly and change it quickly and Option Strict On gets in my way in under these circumstances. My coding style can be described as "develop while I code". I keep a vague concept of what I want to achieve in my head and sculpt the code live. I can't afford to be stuttered by the IDE at that time. I can tolerate it when everything has been fleshed out and its just a matter of refactoring here, changing the name of a property there. You know, like tidying up.

---

I have the opposite philosophy... I'd rather be bugged by the IDE now when I'm coding and get it right. Even when I'm doing quick and dirty development. I hate having to go back and correct all the little things after the fact... to me, I'd rather spend 5 minutes up front getting the code clean than 15 minutes afterwards "correcting" it...

Just my style.

-tg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Niya

Actually Jmc is right. Option Strict On does slow you down. I write code with it off because its really breaks my flow when I have to CType and DirectCast everything. When I'm close to completing or actually finished with a specific class or set of classes I sometimes go back and place it on top of the code file and then clean up all the errors it catches. Surprisingly, they're not that many. Usually I get about 3 - 4 errors. Even when in my "flow" I have a habit of using DirectCast/CType, but sometimes I forgo it when I'm not sure I'm going to stick with a particular piece of code. I usually need to test it quickly and change it quickly and Option Strict On gets in my way in under these circumstances. My coding style can be described as "develop while I code". I keep a vague concept of what I want to achieve in my head and sculpt the code live. I can't afford to be stuttered by the IDE at that time. I can tolerate it when everything has been fleshed out and its just a matter of refactoring here, changing the name of a property there. You know, like tidying up.

---

The point I was getting at is that if you are in the habit of working with types correctly, you'd have a harder time working with them incorrectly, despite the extra typing. You didn't contradict that, you supported it. For you, the habit is working with Option Strict OFF, and you find it breaks your flow to do the type changes. If you are used to working with Option Strict ON, you'd probably have to stop and think before even noticing that there would be a shorter way without strict typing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BecauseIcan

I have some of the math worked out for how many from board length/feet mostly right now it tells length, width, thickness and number to cut..ahh a love in progress.

---

The problem is a variation on the knapsack problem, in which case there is no direct mathematical solution. I think I have an old thread over in the .NET CodeBank that solved the problem using a genetic algorithm to seek an optimal solution (you can never be sure you have THE optimal solution). That one was also about filling orders based on various types of stock pieces. I forget whether it was wood, or pipe, or something else, though.

I will take a look at that
thanks Shaggy Hiker

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Niya

I'll tell you the one thing I can think of to get that out of the way. Writing structures. If given a structure like the bitmap file format header structure, VB6's Get and Put can read and write them as is. VB.Net requires a little more effort.

---

Hmmm.... Get and Put, is that like Peek and Poke ?

Ah, those were the days !

:D

Poppa.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BecauseIcan

Just wondering :confused:
In you opinion if you are a newbie why would or won't you start in vb.net? I read this thread everyday and now am questioning my decision to start with vb.net.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jmcilhinney

Have you ever actually read a How To on VB or just muddled through? It might not be a bad idea to work through something coherent and sequential. It might seem that some of it is cast below your level but there are definitely some fundamental concepts that you seem to have missed altogether. I'd suggest working through something like this:

http://www.homeandlearn.co.uk/net/vbnet.html

from start to finish. That should sort out some of the worst holes and then give you a better grounding to work from in future.

---

This was good advice... Thank you.

(Now I have to go out and buy a binder that'll hold at least 230 sheets of A4, printed on both sides ! )


Poppa.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by honeybee

I am not a complete idiot. Some parts are still missing. .

---

There isn't a Smiley with a big enough grin !.

Pop.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FunkyDexter

...other than opening the ide in the morning ;)

---

I use - Tools, Options, Startup, "At Startup" = "Show empty environment".

I don't care about all that other stuff...I just want to get to work.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Poppa Mintin

This was good advice... Thank you.

(Now I have to go out and buy a binder that'll hold at least 230 sheets of A4, printed on both sides ! )


Poppa.

---

You won't be disappointed I promise. It is well worth the paper and binder. Great support:)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Poppa Mintin

Hmmm.... Get and Put, is that like Peek and Poke ?

Ah, those were the days !

:D

Poppa.

---

Peek & Poke = Memory reads & writes...
Get & Put = File-based reads and writes...

So ... yeah, in a way, they are similar...

-tg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Poppa Mintin

...is that like Peek and Poke ?

---

Oh you brought back some memories there chap....I remember being amazed at being able to turn on the Caps Lock using Peek/Poke. In those days such a thing was strictly the domain of gods(C/C++/ASM programmers). Turning on the Caps Lock from a baby language like QuickBasic made you feel a little godly.

Ok... without looking it up... does anyone remember what TRON does and what it was used for? And no, the answer is not Light Cycles or Disc Wars.... Long before Flynn, TRON was command that did something specific... and even has a complementary.

-tg

TRON, Tron, hmm............Err...........There is something vaguely familiar about it but I just can't....Arrrg!! Imma have to Google that.

[EDIT]

Damn....I knew there was something familiar about. I came across it a couple times during the old days but I never used it as part of my development process. I can vaguely recalling reading it in some help or something.

Theres TRON and TROFF. It means Trace On, and Trace Off. And its used for finding errors or debugging. I used it in Amiga BASIC back in the day when I was 10 years old.

I came across it here:-
Attachment 98885

I always used to go digging around in the docs when I was young. There were so many strange commands, I think I only ever used about half of them. Certain functions were a little beyond me at such a young age. Tracing and things like ISAM tables were things I never played with but I would have definitely read about them and not understand a lick about what they meant some of the time.

You know you are getting old when please reminisce about basic or any PC oriented computer language. I got started on the IBM mainframe. First question someone thinking about buying a PC would ask is "why do I even need one". The internet just connected mainframes and many off the people here were in diapers or a gleam in thier Dad's eyes.

Lol those were the days! God I wish I still had old programs I wrote back in those times. It would be funny to see how much has changed in terms of coding style. I remember writing entire programs using nothing but global variables. My functions and subs NEVER had any parameters. I would use global variables to pass values into subs/functions. I was so young and foolish lol

The Amiga BASIC I used allowed you to have the program talk like a robot using the command SAY TRANSLATE$ statement and the string in quotes, only it must be written how it sounds.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Niya

Lol those were the days! God I wish I still had old programs I wrote back in those times. It would be funny to see how much has changed in terms of coding style. I remember writing entire programs using nothing but global variables. My functions and subs NEVER had any parameters. I would use global variables to pass values into subs/functions. I was so young and foolish lol

---

I'd take today's environment anytime. All the tools available, all the help on the internet and forums, turnaround time for changes, etc. To add a new text box label on the IBM mainframe on-line cobol program (CICS) you would.

1. Fill out the data sheet for the screen layout.
2. Make the changes to the map assembly and each position had to be accounted for.
3. Assemble the map and get it moved to the correct library.
4. Do a NEWCOPY so CICS knew you changed something.
5. Test it.

That opposed to just painting it on the screen and moving it around if you want.

It the classic "the good old days were not really that good" :)