Would be good if PureBasic change is name?

[Fig]

The most important thing in the programming language is the name.
A language will not succeed without a good name.
I have recently invented a very good name and now I am looking for a suitable language.

This is half serious question of course, please take no harm in it... (this is a pure rethorical question)

[Mohawk70]

The most important thing in the programming language is the name.
A language will not succeed without a good name.
I have recently invented a very good name and now I am looking for a suitable language.

This is half serious question of course, please take no harm in it...

No. Purebasic has been around, with an active userbase ( which is still growing ) for 20 years.

If you want to actually accomplish something, invent your own programming language which you can designate by the "very good name" you "invented".

Sent from my LGLS991 using Tapatalk

[IceSoft]

Oh dear!
More "Of topic" as the sentence a moskito is flying around my house

[Fig]

The most important thing in the programming language is the name.
A language will not succeed without a good name.
I have recently invented a very good name and now I am looking for a suitable language.

This is half serious question of course, please take no harm in it...

No. Purebasic has been around, with an active userbase ( which is still growing ) for 20 years.

If you want to actually accomplish something, invent your own programming language which you can designate by the "very good name" you "invented".

Sent from my LGLS991 using Tapatalk

You may not have noticed this was a quote from one of the most important person I know , not mine.
Knuth is an oracle, I think everybody should meditate on his sentences. (but i am sure you don't even know him and of course you never read what he wrote...)

About Pb, the 'Basic" in the name is a serious problem from my point of view, don't you think ? On one hand it attracts old fart beginers but in the other hand it repulses fresh out of school programmers.
I am not talking about the confidential users list whom are active on pb actually, i was refering to make the language sounding less ridiculous when popping in a conversation.

[Mohawk70]

That's because those "fresh out of school programmers" who would be "repulsed" by it ...

1. Are too ignorant to realize a name has nothing to do with the value of the product ( as in the old saying "You should never judge a book by its cover" )

2. Oblivious of the fact that you should use the tool most suited for the job at hand.

3. Have a lot to learn

4. No matter how much you learn, # 3 still applies.



Sent from my LGLS991 using Tapatalk

[Kurzer]

Fig, what would this change in a discussion? It likely creates an additional question.

If PureBasic would be named to "TargetX" for example and you would tell others about the "TargetX" language, what would the answer?
"What the hell is TargetX"?
And what would be the explanation? The same as now.
"Hey, it's a super cool Basic-like programming language".

So, I think you cant convert someone if this one is skeptical about basic only by giving the product another name.

And I can fully agree with the points raised by Mohawk70.

[Fig]

1. Are too ignorant to realize a name has nothing to do with the value of the product ( as in the old saying "You should never judge a book by its cover" )
2. Oblivious of the fact that you should use the tool most suited for the job at hand.
3. Have a lot to learn
4. No matter how much you learn, # 3 still applies.

I agree with you. So pb will never be considered like a good language because young programmers are too ignorant. What a relief !
This sentence, "You should never judge a book by its cover" has its purpose because EVERYBODY naturaly does it by default.

So, wouldn't it be way easyer to change the cover of our book than trying to change everyone else paradigm ?

[Fig]

Fig, what would this change in a discussion? It likely creates an additional question.

If PureBasic would be named to "TargetX" for example and you would tell others about the "TargetX" language, what would the answer?
"What the hell is TargetX"?
And what would be the explanation? The same as now.
"Hey, it's a super cool Basic-like programming language".

So, I think you cant convert someone if this one is skeptical about basic only by giving the product another name.

And I can fully agree with the points raised by Mohawk70.

As far as I understand Pb it's not a basic programming language, it looks more like an Asm/C macro language.
Would you explain Python being a Basic -like programming language ? Why ?

I can tell by labelling Pb "TargetX" it would raise an interest. Qualifying Pb of a Basic like language, it sadly makes it look old and outdated.

[Mohawk70]

I agree with you. So pb will never be considered like a good language because young programmers are too ignorant. What a relief !
This sentence, "You should never judge a book by its cover" has its purpose because EVERYBODY naturaly does it by default.

Speak for yourself. I judge books by reading them ( and whether or not the topic is of interest to me ) , music by listening to it , paintings by how they look , a vehicle by how it performs.

[Kurzer]

Fig, why is it not possible to explain C or C++ or C# with a functional reference to another language "X"?

Because, these languages (C, C++, C# and so on) define their own standard. These languages are themselves a reference. You can say in other languages as an explanation,"It is similar to C", but you can't explain for C "C is similar to...".

PureBasic is not a reference language. PureBasic uses paradigms and language elements from existing languages. And when you look at the keywords and commands of PureBasic, it is mostly similar to Basic. And Basic as a general definition is a reference language.

I'm not (still) a C expert, but I also worked with some basic dialects in the 80s. From my personal point of view, PureBasic's commands are based on the previous basic dialects, even if Fred has added other elements. Why else did he call it PureBasic and not PureMacroC?

Two examples (because I know it in both variants):

Code: Select all

PureBasic:
For i = 0 To 100
...
Next t

C:
for (i=0; i++; i<=100) {
...
}

PureBasic:
Define Tex$
Text$ = "Hello World"

C:
char name[] = "Hello World";

PureBasic:
Goto, Gosub -> pure basic derivation.

I think these parts speak very strongly for a language with roots in Basic.

[Fig]

I agree with you. So pb will never be considered like a good language because young programmers are too ignorant. What a relief !
This sentence, "You should never judge a book by its cover" has its purpose because EVERYBODY naturaly does it by default.

Speak for yourself. I judge books by reading them ( and whether or not the topic is of interest to me ) , music by listening to it , paintings by how they look , a vehicle by how it performs.

Well, you are way more clever than 99% of us. But your first answer to this thread looks like a "by cover" judgement to me. Hopefully, I may be wrong.

[Mohawk70]

The first half of my first response was answering the question "Does Purebasic should change its name ?"

The second part of my response would not change regardless of who made the statement.
I'll say it again, but reworded so you may understand my meaning better, "The name doesn't make the product".
Just as a College / University degree doesn't make you smart.

[Fig]

PureBasic:
Goto, Gosub -> pure basic derivation.
[/code]
I think these parts speak very strongly for a language with roots in Basic.

The real question is, what are the difference between a Basic-like and other languages ?
We could anwer the keywords, easy to read and easy to learn, high level ...
But really this description suits to lot of non basic-like language. (Pascal, Python etc...)

Pb is not really highlevel and doesn't use spaghetti code either (even if goto and gosub still exist. Pb is mainly procedural).
You can call it a Basic but nothing really force us to do so.
If i had to define Pb I would say a C syntax friendly language.

[Kurzer]

If i had to define Pb I would say a C syntax friendly language.

Okay then do it so in discussions and add the statement that the developer refers to the word "basic" to the simplicity which you can create programs with it. It's just not "WashyComplicated".

Someone without prejudice might be interested in it and take a look at the program.

If PureBasic had a different name, you might also get someone to look at it who has prejudices. But he probably wouldn't want to buy it. If someone thinks that Basic means Spagetthicode, then he has missed the development of Basic dialects.

So it doesn't make any difference.

[Dude]

This discussion always comes up. Here we go again.

PureBasic is Basic, with some extra advanced stuff thrown in. If you don't want to use a Basic-based language, then you shouldn't have come here in the first place.

Reminds me of this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=niumQLDL_k0