Page 4 of 8
Posted: Tue Jul 27, 2004 11:17 am
by blueznl
people, plz. don't flame eachother, if you wanna flame somebody, flame me (go here:
viewtopic.php?t=11865 )
i'm married
i'm unemployed
i got two kids
i got a mortgage i cannot afford
some strong disagreements with my wife
what's a little flame to me then?
gimme your best shot, pal...
i can take it
Posted: Tue Jul 27, 2004 11:19 am
by PB
> everyone else has already moved on.
Point!? Narph!!!
All right, okay, let's forget it. You've shown you have a sense of humour and
there's nothing to be gained by me going on about it. As you can tell, I am
very passionate about PureBasic.
Friends? Cool!
Posted: Tue Jul 27, 2004 1:41 pm
by TeddyLM
... yeah let's get the peace pipe and smoke together !!
Personaly I don't care about what other people think about Purebasic. I'm not using PB because i THINK it's the best prog.... i use it because i know it !
Keep on programming and let's show the WOOOOORLD how powerfull Purebasic is !!!!!!!!!
Posted: Tue Jul 27, 2004 2:08 pm
by fweil
I am quite confident about smoking both cigars and cigarettes (take care about the moderator with such words).
About coding, I don't know.
Posted: Tue Jul 27, 2004 3:06 pm
by PolyVector
everyone else has already moved on
I was responding to your remarks that I found insulting... But as I said, welcome abord. :roll:
I'm done with this thread, off to work!
Posted: Wed Jul 28, 2004 7:10 pm
by the.weavster
Shannara wrote:
2. Create a wrapper library (hehehe) that basically renames the Gadget commands to remove the gadget part, and pristo your set. The only bad part is that it adds a bit of K's to your program..
Shannara's right
I found 'SetGadgetText(#txtForename,GetDatabaseString(0))' too verbose so I wrote it into a procedure like this:
Code: Select all
ProcedureDLL DB2GT(DatabaseColumn.l,GadgetID.l)
Text$ = GetDatabaseString(DatabaseColumn)
SetGadgetText(GadgetID,Text$)
EndProcedure
then used tailbite to add it to my personal library
I've done this for quite a few wordy combinations I use regularly.
Maybe it adds a few K, so what...
Posted: Wed Jul 28, 2004 8:45 pm
by techjunkie
Randy Walker wrote:the Yuppies Atari game machine.
Upps! I didn't read that... I didn't read that...
Damn!! That line really hurts...
But it isn't true... Randy - I'll suggest you study some Amiga / Atari history!
But then, in early 1984, just as annual sales were climbing above $1 billion, Tramiel clashed with a Commodore stockholder mightier than he, Irving Gould -- and when the smoke had cleared, Tramiel was out. The nature of their quarrel was never publicly disclosed. Today, however, Tramiel says he wanted to "grow" the company, and Gould didn't.
Commodore was really Tramiel's last hurrah. True, he surfaced again quickly in the computer industry, agreeing later in 1984 to take over -- for a pittance -- Warner Communications' floundering Atari operation. But in a business changing convulsively as IBM brought out its PC and the clones marched in, Atari was a loser and ultimately a venture into which Tramiel was unwilling to sink big money. Eventually he folded Atari into a Silicon Valley disk-drive manufacturer, JTS, in which he has a major interest but plays no operational role.
So you see - nothing can be more wrong than the... "the Yuppies Atari game machine" statement!!
Sorry about the "off topic", but my soul was upset... :roll:
(I still read the "Amiga Hardware Reference Manual" every night! It's art, it's beautiful...
)
Re: Gadget?!!... GADGET!!!???? Did I just enroll in pre-sch
Posted: Wed Jul 28, 2004 9:00 pm
by techjunkie
Randy Walker wrote:Can you please do something to get rid of the extraneous gadgets? I could live with the main kaywords like "Gadget", but there is no discernable reason to require "SetGadgetText" when simply "SetText" would suffice. That being only one of many many examples. CreateGadgetList, AddGadgetItem, GetGadgetItemText, etc., etc., etc.
By the way... It seems really stupid and unlogical to remove "Gadget" and only use "AddItem", "SetText" and so on... Add item to what? Set text - on what?
Well, if the methods where listed for a object... For example,
Code: Select all
New ButtonGadget MyButtGadget
MyButtGadget.SetText("Atari sucks!")
But with the way PB works today I think it is ok... We have to live with it...
That's my point of view... :roll:
Posted: Wed Jul 28, 2004 10:50 pm
by Doobrey
techjunkie wrote:
I still read the "Amiga Hardware Reference Manual" every night! It's art, it's beautiful...
I bet you wear Boing Ball underpants too...
Posted: Wed Jul 28, 2004 10:59 pm
by blueznl
well, if he doesn't, i will! where can i buy them?!?
on top of that, some of the designers of the *real* atari's (the 8 bitters
) continued working on the amiga...
hey, it was a nice idea, good concept, okay start, but commodore managed to kill it, oh well, so did atari with the st
(no flaming in here please, you know where to flame me
)
(actually, i owned a few amigas, and worked with the atari st range at my work at that time, liked them both for different reasons, in hindsight it's easy to point the finger and tell the world why those systems did not survive, but at that time...)
Posted: Thu Jul 29, 2004 1:02 am
by techjunkie
Doobrey wrote:I bet you wear Boing Ball underpants too...
Sure - and it "boing" a lot...
http://amiga.emugaming.com/boingball.html
Well, the same goes for me - three A500s, one A600, one A1200 and one A3000. No A1000...
But we still have E-Bay!!
But to be frank... I DID start an Atari Club in my hometown... So... :roll:
Posted: Thu Jul 29, 2004 7:44 pm
by the.weavster
kake26 wrote:.NET is a joke you need a whole framework installed on a computer to run a .NET app.
As I understand it the .NET base classes are going to replace Win32 API which means whatever Windows programming language you use you are going to need "a whole framework installed" if you want the OS to do anything for you. The objects in the framework provide an interface by which you address the subsystem.
The significance is Microsoft could create a .NET framework for any platform they considered to be a viable market irrespective of OS or even processor. The interface to your application would remain the same, the control of the subsystem would be handled by the framework.
Any .NET program you have written, in whatever language, will then work on any platform that had a .NET framework.
That's no joke, that's cool...
Posted: Thu Jul 29, 2004 10:09 pm
by thefool
but what platform has .net? windows. and probaly only windows.
Posted: Thu Jul 29, 2004 10:22 pm
by Codemonger
Wholly has anyone checked the topic title "Gadget?!!... GADGET!!!???? Did I just enroll in pre-school?" we are way off base
I just have to jump in though ... My thoughts on .NET are:
It's cool, it's clean and overdue ... I just don't like the JIT compiler ... It bothers me soo much. The idea that basically a scripting language will run the next generation OS is really crappy. But I'm using PB so who cares.
Posted: Thu Jul 29, 2004 11:24 pm
by LuCiFeR[SD]
oh for gods sake
. Talk about somebody trying to pick a pubic hair out of his teeth with a claw hammer
Welcome to the forum Mr. Randy Walker
very interesting read about your thoughts on gadgets... I must admit, I personally find the gadget commands a huge pain in the arse at times, but the worst thing for me is the documentation of the commands. I would have thrown the towel in with PB a while back if it hadn't been for the great ppl here on this very forum.
I don't agree that removing the name gadget would make a difference to how professional the language looks though. but, at the end of the day, PB is really being marketed as a "hobbiest" language. I don't know how much the gadget commands could be simplified (even if Fred wanted to do that) , If it ain't broke, don't fix it
2. I just realized my posts have an edit option, which is the reason for this addendum It wont exagerate the counter.
There is one problem with the edit option... it makes newcomers to the topic loose track of whats being said, especially if edit gets abused to death
Right, Time for bed... Work at 6am
TTFN.