Author Topic: Why do you care that much about BASIC part in the name of a language?  (Read 5974 times)

Aurel

  • Regular Member
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 272
    • View Profile
..hehe ...yes sounds trivial and funny but is TRUE  >:(
 ;D
..and this is also TRUE:
Why should I waste my time for Lua or Julia if I can do things faster and easier in BASIC".
« Last Edit: 26. August 2016, 20:01:35 by Aurel »
new basic pro forum on;
http://basicpro.spacefor.site/smf/
GUEST posting enabled

Tomaaz

  • Guest
..and this is also TRUE:
Why should I waste my time for Lua or Julia if I can do things faster and easier in BASIC".

OK. I understand that this is your opinion. But tell me why. Show me examples etc.

John

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 362
    • View Profile
Quote
The mentality ... it's like the difference between using the IUP toolkit and win api to create and manage the GUI of a program.

IUP is great and cross platform. The Windows GUI API is a crock of sh*t.

Tomaaz

  • Guest
IUP is great and cross platform. The Windows GUI API is a crock of sh*t.

I'm pretty sure that is exactly what Marcus meant. ;)  I'm also pretty sure that everybody will agree with that. Apart from Aurel, of course. ;)

John

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 362
    • View Profile
Quote
and, for me, it still won't be BASIC.

I have gotten by all this confusion with simply saying I use traditional BASIC.



jj2007

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 124
  • MasmBasic rocks
    • View Profile
    • MasmBasic - faster than C
Tomaaz,

You are basically right 8)

The name shouldn't matter. Simplicity should. Besides the "keep it simple" philosophy, there is also an acquired common set of commands that matters for many people, including me. You may remember that I had started a "CoreBasic" thread in the defunct bp.org forum, asking to identify no more than 100 commands that are common to all Basic dialects.

Output to the console is print, not printf(), see, cout or shout or whatever. Such small aspects may sound trivial, but was würdest Du sagen, wenn ich hier statt Englisch in Deutsch schreibe. Not everybody is happy to learn a new language just because the author of a programming language believes that couting is better than printing. BASIC in the name is a reassuring message - "don't be timid, you'll understand most of this language immediately because it's BASIC syntax". That is not the case for most languages that do NOT have Basic in the name, like Python, Ruby, Julia, Ring, whatever. Here, the message is "you'll have to learn a new language". Not a problem for people for whom it's language #1, but if you have used a dozen Basic dialects in your coding career, you appreciate the familiarity of the syntax.

In short: There may be better Basic-like languages around, but there are valid reasons why people like the Basic in the name :)

Aurel

  • Regular Member
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 272
    • View Profile
Quote
IUP is great and cross platform. The Windows GUI API is a crock of sh*t.
This is typical nonsense and everyone who ever code something on
windows knows that there is no better option over winApi for GUI programming.
Ask Mike for example..
IUp is let say nice option for Linux.
I know very well when i tried to create simple browser with
IUP -o2 version..its like a nightmare ::)
new basic pro forum on;
http://basicpro.spacefor.site/smf/
GUEST posting enabled

John

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 362
    • View Profile
Quote
everyone who ever code something on windows knows that there is no better option over winApi for GUI programming.

Everyone knows writing device drivers is best done in ASM. What is your point?

Cybermonkey

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 573
    • View Profile
    • Home of EGSL
That's why probably no one ever wrote anything about DiscoRunner (http://discorunner.com/) here.
Best regards,
Cybermonkey

John

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 362
    • View Profile
Thanks for the link!

I'll give it a try.

Tomaaz

  • Guest
This is typical nonsense and everyone who ever code something on
windows knows that there is no better option over winApi for GUI programming.

Is using WinAPI the easiest way? No. Is it the fastest way? No. These are the two most important things about BASIC, so combining BASIC with WinAPI is well... insane? ;D What next? Let's use WinAPI with Scratch to teach 10 years old kids to code.  ;D

In short: There may be better Basic-like languages around, but there are valid reasons why people like the Basic in the name :)

Valid?  ;)

That's why probably no one ever wrote anything about DiscoRunner (http://discorunner.com/) here.

 ;)

Aurel

  • Regular Member
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 272
    • View Profile
Quote
Is using WinAPI the easiest way? No. Is it the fastest way? No.
..and as usual you point into wrong directions i was talking to John
about IUP and WinApi not about BASIC
by your definition then PureBasic is insane....
look i know that this topic is your usual way to get unswers you already know...
so mister tomek show us one great program written in
let say Julia who is sooo much basic-like and that is better than BASIC version
..oups...sorry don't know that ?  ;D

OH MY i don't see that you are basically right...beeep  ;D
« Last Edit: 26. August 2016, 23:49:36 by Aurel »
new basic pro forum on;
http://basicpro.spacefor.site/smf/
GUEST posting enabled

Tomaaz

  • Guest
i was talking to John
about IUP and WinApi not about BASIC

Were you talking about the WinAPI that is focused mainly on C or were you talking about wrapper libraries (I think John was talking about the WinAPI)? Do you know that IUP supports calling native WinAPI?

by your definition then PureBasic is insane....

Really? That's very interesting. I've tried PureBasic on Linux. I was running exactly the same pieces of code and it worked the same way. Were I using WinAPI? ;) Or the way that PureBasic works is a bit different that you want me to believe it? Isn't it that PureBasic adds another layer which interacts with low level elements both on Windows and Linux (perhaps, slightly different in each case)?

And yes - combining BASIC with pure WinAPI is like embedding Assembler in Scratch code. Insane. ;)

John

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 362
    • View Profile
Quote
And yes - combining BASIC with pure WinAPI is like embedding Assembler in Scratch code. Insane

If you're going to go through all the trouble of interfacing directly with the WinAPI, you might as well just write your application in C/C++ in the first place.

PowerBASIC was one of those that interfaced with the rest of the world at low level.

jj2007

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 124
  • MasmBasic rocks
    • View Profile
    • MasmBasic - faster than C
And yes - combining BASIC with pure WinAPI is like embedding Assembler in Scratch code. Insane. ;)

I do that all the time, and have done so the last 25+ years. Why should that be insane? It's easy, and often the most elegant way to do things.