PureBasic Forums - English

techjunkie wrote:

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!

To review; yes I bought an Atari ST and yes its because it was cheaper than the Amiga. Never thought I would be where I am today or I would have bought the Amiga instead but, it was a toy to me at the time so I got an Atari. I'm not proud

Randy Walker wrote: To review; yes I bought an Atari ST and yes its because it was cheaper than the Amiga. Never thought I would be where I am today or I would have bought the Amiga instead but, it was a toy to me at the time so I got an Atari. I'm not proud

OK.. Now go stand in the corner of the room...

techjunkie wrote:

Randy Walker wrote:Can you please do something to get rid of the extraneous gadgets?...

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:

LMAO That was funny! Ok though, the votes were in a while back and I already surrendered to the majority. Since several have returned to this comment, I will offer one very appropriate candicate if you would like to persue alternatives and still maintain a more descriptive term. Instead of AddItem or AddGadgetItem, how about AddControlItem? This may be considered appropriate since so much documentation already refers to controls and gadgets as "controls". As for this commentary, please note the above only suggest an alternative word for the term "gadget", and that I have abandoned all interest in implimenting any such change.

I'm begining to warm up to these gadgets and plan on having lost of them myself... one day... when I grow up

Hey! So I was a little exited on my VEERY first visit here after deciding to go with PureBasic. So I could ONLY FIND ONE THING that didn't seem quite right to me at first. (Bet you didn't look at it that way did ya?) I've found you have a cornucopia of resourses here like I'm not used to seeing. (no, I don't get out much).

And one last thing. Don't be jealous because your first post didn't draw the crowd and get as many relpies. This is the first forum group I've joined and I really didn't expect it, and surely didn't expect it would offend anyone. I figured maybe a few chuckles. Looks like lots of people are reading this so just in case, I better repeat myself with another apology. You are all very commited and I don't want to give any newcommer the wrong impression. I'm sorry if I offended anyone. I think PureBasic offers very professional functionality, a sensible code format and a rather impressive command set. Thats my final accessment and I'm sticken to it

Also want to say thanks again to everyone for so many contributions! And for your kind welcome... Thanks!!

Randy Walker wrote:persue alternatives and still maintain a more descriptive term. Instead of AddItem or AddGadgetItem, how about AddControlItem? This may be considered appropriate since so much documentation already refers to controls and gadgets as "controls". :idea: As for this commentary, please note the above only

That's still a very Windows-cetric view. Fair enough, most people here are Windows types, but does it really matter what they're called? Most intelligent people will take the time to evaluate the purchase of a language and will end up seeing that a gadget is a button, control or widget or whatever.

Once macros and PB v4 is released I fully intend to rename all the "Gadgets" in commands to "Doofers", "Thingumies" or "Whatsits". Far more useful and given the deteriorating state of my memory, far easier to remember ;)

LuCiFeR[SD] wrote:

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

Yes but if traffic is slow and you are quick, you can get squeeze an after-thought in before anyone else sends their post. You are correct though. It probably should not be used in most cases.

Since you brought it up again, is there a way for us to reset our counters? I don't want anyone to think I know what I'm doing here. This is little more than a part time hobby for me. I do have one small but serious project and other than that, my focus in this field is very narrow (Guess I showed you ). I am considerably more proficient at crashing Windows (just pick your favorite release ) than I am at programming so I don't like to think of myself as a programmer, and I think it would be a shame if my counter ever ended up leading someone to think that I am. (The crowd cheers )

> if traffic is slow and you are quick, you can get squeeze an after-thought in
> before anyone else sends their post. You are correct though. It probably
> should not be used in most cases.

On a similar subject, I think you have about 1 hour to edit a post before it
gets stamped with the Last edited by... message. Sometimes I post code and
have to fix a bug in it, and usually I'm quick enough to do so, but other times
the message gets there and others can see that I've corrected a problem.

hehe i like gadgets. But when the macro functionality comes, i think i will rename them to Mom

SetMomState(1: on 2: off)
SetMomSpeech(speech.s)

and FreeGadget to CleanUpMom(#mom)

and uh yeah: DisableMom()


cool cant wait for 4.0

tinman wrote:

Randy Walker wrote:persue alternatives and still maintain a more descriptive term. Instead of AddItem or AddGadgetItem, how about AddControlItem? This may be considered appropriate since so much documentation already refers to controls and gadgets as "controls". As for this commentary, please note the above only

That's still a very Windows-cetric view. Fair enough, most people here are Windows types, but does it really matter what they're called?

The company I work for writes for RedHat and SCO systems mostly, and I don't recall ever seeing the term "control" in any of the code I've seen there. I am not at all familiar with Lindows (or whatever) but it is my understanding that Lindows, Xwindows(?), etc. were all derived from Windows GUI concepts. If that is true (again I don't know) it would make sense to adhere closer to the originators terminology. When I first browsed the list of commands, I got down to all those gadgets and thought HuH! I was indeed looking for something more MS oriented. This may be inappropriate thinking but, I was after all looking at the list from inside the PureBasic "FOR WINDOWS" help.

As has beed stated on this topic more than once, it doesn't matter to the existing users so why be concerned about appearence? The impression I have is this product line and the standards therein stems from the Amiga days. Appearence affects sales and I'm sure the creator(s) knew this from the start so its not really our place to comment on it anyway. That being the case, I've already said more than enough myself (the crowd cheers ) so... this be my last post on this topic.

Welcome Randy. Purebasic is Grrrrrrreat! So have fun!

A few links to get you started:

PureBasic Code Archive
http://www.purearea.net/pb/english/index.htm
Lots and lots of examples collated by Andre

PureBasic Resource Site
http://www.pureproject.net/
Lots and lots of sample apps, games, dlls, libraries, snippets, etc.. compiled by Paul

The Newbie FAQ
viewtopic.php?t=4876
You may get the RTFM gif posted if you ask a question from here.

The Survival Guide
http://www.xs4all.nl/~bluez/datatalk/purebasic.htm
The rather handy introduction to PureBasic by Blueznl

all derived from Windows GUI concepts. If that is true (again I don't know) it would make sense to adhere closer to the originators terminology.

The originator of it all was Smalltalk, and the terminology in Smalltalk was widget:
http://smalltalk.cincom.com/community/i ... sary#77051

As a mentioned above, almost all of the cross-platform GUI frameworks use the expression Widget.

The term Gadget is much closer to Widget.

Window's was a relative late comer to the GUI. The Amiga had a full mulitasking GUI in 1985, a full decade before Windows 95. In 1985 Windows was looking rather poor at version 1. The Atari ST used GEM, which also used the term Widget.

If purebasic were to standardise, then I think Widget would be the true crossplatform standard expression adopted from the Smalltalk originator's at PARC.

Control is purely a Microsoft expression.

Finally, check the definitions:

Widget

In computing, widgets are components of graphical user interfaces that the user interacts with. See widget (computing).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Widget]Wikipedia

The Merian-Webster dictionary makes no reference to GUI's but the description is appropriate to the GUI use:

an unnamed article considered for purposes of hypothetical example

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Widget]Wikipedia

Control
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Control]Wikipedia makes no mention of GUIs in its definition of Control.

None of the Meriam Webster definitions of control reflect it's current usage in Windows.

Gadget
None of the sources give the definition of Gadget in terms of GUI. However, in every case it is listed as an alternative for Widget.

I believe wxWindows changed it's name to wxWidgets recently... MS probably yelled at them
AOL uses wxWidgets for their communicator, and I don't hear them complaining
BTW, they are a rather large company

a bit offtopic, but PolyVector how are things going with your skinner?

thefool wrote:but what platform has .net? windows. and probaly only windows.

www.go-mono.com

the.weavster wrote:

thefool wrote:but what platform has .net? windows. and probaly only windows.

www.go-mono.com

Oh! bloat for all the platforms...

@thefool

FreeStyle is comming along nicely! The editor is more-or-less complete. The only thing keeping us from release is:

• Document writing.
• Creating example skins.
• Beta testing.

I do contractor work (on *shudders* mobile homes )... And I'm working on a huge (and smelly) project ATM... Anybody know of a good Network Admin/Techie position???
There hasn't been a lot of time for SkunkSoft lately... I can, however, asure you that things are still moving along... slowly... The engine would probably have been released by now if I didn't currently reside in hell

Anyways, the next major step will be beta testing... If you're interested, sign up on our forums and ask Skunkie if you can test FreeStyle...
http://www.skunksoft.com/forums/