Fleath//, spot on.
It kills enthusiasm as well. Someone who is really rapt with PureBasic posts something that they think will make it better still and gets treated as a pariah. Now they have a bad taste instead of a good one. All they wanted was to suggest an improvement for their new love.
Also the best way to get really crappy putdown posts about PureBasic is to attack a post that is critical, be it constructive or destructive. That leads to more, and positions become entrenched, the thread goes ballistic and the google bot quietly collects it all up for the whole surfing world to see.
Hands up everyone who has jumped someone for saying something critical.
* raises hand *
Note to me: Stop doing it.
small 2D shooter with some impressive effects
-
mp303
I've done a bit of RAD development, not much actually. I currently do large object-oriented PHP portal websites for a living.Kale wrote:If you think that any language is gimped purely because it lacks OOP support, you dont know what your on about. period. I think you are too used to using RAD crap (drag and drop objects, etc...) to see any other way. :roll:
But that pointless and irrelevant argument aside:
I've been programming for 20 years - about 10 years professionally / for a living. I've used all manner of programming languages, including several BASICs, PHP, ASP, JavaScript, ActionScript, Pascal/Delphi, some Java, and a little C / C++.
For someone who has done as much OOP as me, a language with no OOP features does feel inferior and seriously crippled. I guess beginners and hobby-level programmers don't feel like that, because they don't know the difference.
mp303:
Nice Explosions indeed ( i bet that was some fiddling ... ) =)
btw have you looked into theese ... after once again coding some CMS with php at work coming back home theese started to look more and more handy =) ( ofc. you got to write your own lil "classes" ).
http://www.purebasic.fr/english/viewtop ... sc&start=0
(/*&(*/&*ç%/* !!
/rude php tho lol.. i catch myself using ;'s at end of commands ... *g*
Thalius
Nice Explosions indeed ( i bet that was some fiddling ... ) =)
btw have you looked into theese ... after once again coding some CMS with php at work coming back home theese started to look more and more handy =) ( ofc. you got to write your own lil "classes" ).
http://www.purebasic.fr/english/viewtop ... sc&start=0
(/*&(*/&*ç%/* !!
/rude php tho lol.. i catch myself using ;'s at end of commands ... *g*
Thalius
"In 3D there is never enough Time to do Things right,
but there's always enough Time to make them *look* right."
"psssst! i steal signatures... don't tell anyone!
"
but there's always enough Time to make them *look* right."
"psssst! i steal signatures... don't tell anyone!
"mp303 wrote:For someone who has done as much OOP as me, a language with no OOP features does feel inferior and seriously crippled. I guess beginners and hobby-level programmers don't feel like that, because they don't know the difference.
lol, You just insulted a whole heap of people.
It could be argued that beginners and hobby-level programmers can't program in procedural languages because they need the hand-holding of ultra-high level IDEs like VB. I'll put this button here. I'll type "Click" in the text. I'll select the OnClick action. I'll type a line of code. I'm a genius.
Taking your logic to an extreme, asm coders are dimwits!
Look, comparing languages is pointless. Each follows it's own course. No approach is superior, nor inferior. Implementations can be better or worse, but the approach is different, is all.
And each of us, given a choice, uses the language with which we are most comfortable.
You should learn to quit whilst you're ahead.
* sigh - I just broke the resolution I made one post back *
Dare2 cut down to size
-
mp303
Who did I insult?
Are you going to tell me that this forum is full of programmers with many years of experience with lots of different high-level programming languages? I think you'd be wrong.
Basic was named "basic" for a reason. Because it's a good programming language for beginners to get acquainted with programming.
PB is great for the same - I can present the basics to my ten-year old at home, and he's actually getting it. He'll start programming his own little games within the next year or so.
But if at some point he takes an education and learns to program like a professional, he'll be sadly disappointed that he'll have to look for another programming language to continue growing. The games industry, or any other software industry, does not hire people who can't do OOP.
Frankly, I get the impression that a lot of you people just simply don't want to learn more advanced (or for that matter any other) ways of programming. That's fine by me - but why are you trying to hold everyone else back? Are you afraid that you'll no longer be "hot sh*t" when everyone else starts writing huge, kick-*ss applications in PB? :roll:
Are you going to tell me that this forum is full of programmers with many years of experience with lots of different high-level programming languages? I think you'd be wrong.
Basic was named "basic" for a reason. Because it's a good programming language for beginners to get acquainted with programming.
PB is great for the same - I can present the basics to my ten-year old at home, and he's actually getting it. He'll start programming his own little games within the next year or so.
But if at some point he takes an education and learns to program like a professional, he'll be sadly disappointed that he'll have to look for another programming language to continue growing. The games industry, or any other software industry, does not hire people who can't do OOP.
Frankly, I get the impression that a lot of you people just simply don't want to learn more advanced (or for that matter any other) ways of programming. That's fine by me - but why are you trying to hold everyone else back? Are you afraid that you'll no longer be "hot sh*t" when everyone else starts writing huge, kick-*ss applications in PB? :roll:
mp303 wrote:Who did I insult?
Are you going to tell me that this forum is full of programmers with many years of experience with lots of different high-level programming languages? I think you'd be wrong.
Basic was named "basic" for a reason. Because it's a good programming language for beginners to get acquainted with programming.
PB is great for the same - I can present the basics to my ten-year old at home, and he's actually getting it. He'll start programming his own little games within the next year or so.
But if at some point he takes an education and learns to program like a professional, he'll be sadly disappointed that he'll have to look for another programming language to continue growing. The games industry, or any other software industry, does not hire people who can't do OOP.
Frankly, I get the impression that a lot of you people just simply don't want to learn more advanced (or for that matter any other) ways of programming. That's fine by me - but why are you trying to hold everyone else back? Are you afraid that you'll no longer be "hot sh*t" when everyone else starts writing huge, kick-*ss applications in PB? :roll:
You big headed twat! I think you are the one that's very wrong to think beginners use BASIC languages. A lot of programmers that frequent these boards are extremely knowledgable and experienced.I hope one day i can be as Uber as you. :roll:Frankly, I get the impression that a lot of you people just simply don't want to learn more advanced (or for that matter any other) ways of programming.
--Kale
I don't recall actually saying anything against OOP in this thread, or trying to hold people back for fear of becoming a small fish in a big pond. lol, that is quite funny.
I did suggest that the same argument or debating approach you use can be used to argue the other case.
Are you going to tell me that this forum is full of programmers with many years of experience with lots of different high-level programming languages? I think you'd be wrong.
I think there are quite a few people here who have the credentials, in fact quite a few have credentials you lack, based on the resume you posted. Some of them are even very good with low level languages - which makes them people to really respect.
And I do think you are being (mildly) offensive and insulting to people here. In a superior and pompous sort of way.
This is entertaining.
Dare2 cut down to size
Whoooah!! Everyone calm down! 
OOP is, for the most part, standard in most modern languages. It doesn't have to mean you must use it, but it is standard in almost all professional languages. Most professionals would not have interest in a procedural only language. That is a fact, but I do believe there are some amazingly intelligent people that use PureBasic and PureBasic produces some amazingly fast and compact executables and that is one of its appeals. I think including some basic OO in PureBasic would be a great benefit to it and would broaden its appeal. However, OOP should always remain optional for those who do not like it.
BTW, is PureBasic developed in C or C++? Does the source code for PureBasic include any classes?
OOP is, for the most part, standard in most modern languages. It doesn't have to mean you must use it, but it is standard in almost all professional languages. Most professionals would not have interest in a procedural only language. That is a fact, but I do believe there are some amazingly intelligent people that use PureBasic and PureBasic produces some amazingly fast and compact executables and that is one of its appeals. I think including some basic OO in PureBasic would be a great benefit to it and would broaden its appeal. However, OOP should always remain optional for those who do not like it.BTW, is PureBasic developed in C or C++? Does the source code for PureBasic include any classes?
Last edited by theNerd on Wed May 31, 2006 4:24 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Re: small 2D shooter with some impressive effects
mp303, that's really cool!
(bonk2.zip - not the OOP discussion)
(bonk2.zip - not the OOP discussion
)Good programmers don't comment their code. It was hard to write, should be hard to read.
Kale, I think you are being unnecesarilly harsh regarding OOP. There are literally millions of people who completely disagree with you and use it for game making and business applications.
If Fred were ever to add basic OOP you would not be forced to use it - promise - but let others have different opinions than yours.
If Fred were ever to add basic OOP you would not be forced to use it - promise - but let others have different opinions than yours.
Im not against OOP, but i strongly feel that PB doesn't need it. Also when people start saying the the lack of OOP makes a language inferior (i.e. PB), they are ill informed.theNerd wrote:Kale, I think you are being unnecesarilly harsh regarding OOP. There are literally millions of people who completely disagree with you and use it for game making and business applications.
If Fred were ever to add basic OOP you would not be forced to use it - promise - but let others have different opinions than yours.
For example, this guy reckons he can't progress any further with his game because PB is not advanced enough for him to use. Thats total tosh. I have the source to Bonk and looking at it, it's structure is mediocre at best. Creating arguments saying they cant use whatever language for advanced stuff because it lacks OOP, is just plain wrong.
--Kale
Jumping in with both feet ...
I thought Quake 3 was pure C, not C++, thus not OOP. Granted, Quake 3 is like Doom, nothing but an engine demo, but I think the point still comes across.
I think it would be nice if Fred started a 2nd compiler or language that is OOP based, as well as keeping PB developed. Granted we would have two camps, but those who like OOP and code only in OOP, yet uses PB at the moment and on the side, would probably jump on the OOP version ...
Fred? Any chance on doing this? Heck, he could even charge more for the OOP language ..
I thought Quake 3 was pure C, not C++, thus not OOP. Granted, Quake 3 is like Doom, nothing but an engine demo, but I think the point still comes across.
I think it would be nice if Fred started a 2nd compiler or language that is OOP based, as well as keeping PB developed. Granted we would have two camps, but those who like OOP and code only in OOP, yet uses PB at the moment and on the side, would probably jump on the OOP version ...
Fred? Any chance on doing this? Heck, he could even charge more for the OOP language ..
I agree that some great games can be made without OOP but PureBasic is used for more than games. It is a general purpose language and I think a simple implementation of classes would greatly enhance the language.
Shannara's idea might not be a bad idea but I am not sure Fred could support the continued development of two seperate, cross-platform languages.
Shannara's idea might not be a bad idea but I am not sure Fred could support the continued development of two seperate, cross-platform languages.