OK , don't flame me until you read my question fully.

First of all, why is basic never used to make anything very complex? I have never seen linked lists or priority queues. I have also not seen very much of anything in AI although semantic knowledge netwroks are easy to build and use and grammatical syntax changing is very simple (I have seen this in a very primitve form but...). Also, why haven't I seen a self-seeding random number generator or pointer routines? How about a BASIC pre-processor, written in BASIC? All of the things I have suggested could be done pretty simply with a little research...

Anyway, go out and try some of those things...

--------------------------------------------
I will bend your mind with my spoon...

:
: First of all, why is basic never used to make anything very complex?

Broad assumption. I sold a series of accounting software (AR, AP, GL, PR, IN) written in BASIC for years, starting in the early eighties. They were pretty complex, and pretty bulletproof.

: I have never seen linked lists or priority queues.

Well, the software I described had its own file management system, using a combination of ISAM and linked lists to get to the records.

: I have also not seen very much of anything in AI although semantic knowledge netwroks are easy to build and use and grammatical syntax changing is very simple (I have seen this in a very primitve form but...).

Early verions of "Eliza" were in BASIC, though cutting edge then, they don't match what can be done today.

: Also, why haven't I seen a self-seeding random number generator or pointer routines?

There wasn't much to "self-seed" from then - no internal clocks, etc., though I do recall one that "self-seeded" by reading memory locations until the user pressed the "Start" key, then used that location to seed the RNG. Closest thing I can recall to "self-seeding".

: How about a BASIC pre-processor, written in BASIC?

There were tons of these. There were programs written in BASIC that wrote other programs written in BASIC, as well as utilities to renumber, re-arrange, "pretty-up" and "pretty-print" BASIC source. There were even self-modifying programs (not a good thing to do, but...) written in BASIC.

: All of the things I have suggested could be done pretty simply with a little research...

And have been done!





Melissa

Well then where are they now mellisa? Where is the grammatic parsing and semantic net code?

--------------------------------------------
I will bend your mind with my spoon...

And I forgot to ask: do you even know what I mena by self-seeding random number generator?

--------------------------------------------
I will bend your mind with my spoon...

: And I forgot to ask: do you even know what I mena by self-seeding random number generator?

QB allows you to seed random numbers with the "RANDOMIZE" statement. For example:

RANDOMIZE 3

(where 3 is the seed value)

Of course, this seed would return the same "random" values each time you run the program, because the same seed value is used in the RNG algorithm. So QB can "self-seed" using the timer, as below:

RANDOMIZE TIMER

Using this method, QB automatically assigns a different seed value each time the program is run, so the random values are different each time. I have never heard the expression "self-seeding" RNG before, but I assume this is what you mean?

I meant you never have to use rnadomize and it will generate new numbers...

--------------------------------------------
I will bend your mind with my spoon...

This message was edited by the del at 2002-3-20 18:56:48

---

: I meant you never have to use rnadomize and it will generate new numbers...

What benefit would that provide?

Apart from reducing the size of your program by a single line... And giving you less flexibility over how random numbers are generated...

A little late with this post, but... just to let you know Melissa wasn't alone with this.

Multiplicitive congruence has been used in Basic, Fortran, and other languages, both to seed and generate random numbers. I've used it in the past with versions of Basic which had no random number generator... late 1970's.

I also have written applications for the pharmaceutical industry in which, having no access to ISAM or even Btrieve at the time, have written straight "interpetive" basic code to utilize linked lists... along with code to "manage" recursion in psudo-subroutine calls in order to create this linked list (a bill-of-materials explosion routine). That was back in 1982.

Alan

: :
: : First of all, why is basic never used to make anything very complex?
:
: Broad assumption. I sold a series of accounting software (AR, AP, GL, PR, IN) written in BASIC for years, starting in the early eighties. They were pretty complex, and pretty bulletproof.
:
: : I have never seen linked lists or priority queues.
:
: Well, the software I described had its own file management system, using a combination of ISAM and linked lists to get to the records.
:
: : I have also not seen very much of anything in AI although semantic knowledge netwroks are easy to build and use and grammatical syntax changing is very simple (I have seen this in a very primitve form but...).
:
: Early verions of "Eliza" were in BASIC, though cutting edge then, they don't match what can be done today.
:
: : Also, why haven't I seen a self-seeding random number generator or pointer routines?
:
: There wasn't much to "self-seed" from then - no internal clocks, etc., though I do recall one that "self-seeded" by reading memory locations until the user pressed the "Start" key, then used that location to seed the RNG. Closest thing I can recall to "self-seeding".
:
: : How about a BASIC pre-processor, written in BASIC?
:
: There were tons of these. There were programs written in BASIC that wrote other programs written in BASIC, as well as utilities to renumber, re-arrange, "pretty-up" and "pretty-print" BASIC source. There were even self-modifying programs (not a good thing to do, but...) written in BASIC.
:
: : All of the things I have suggested could be done pretty simply with a little research...
:
: And have been done!
:
:
:
:
:
: Melissa
:
:

Puzzler, this stuff isn't written in Basic anymore as it's all been done before and nowadays there are far easier languages to work with to do these types of programs.

When Basic was written, in the 70's, it was one of the best all purpose languages around. The fact that 30 years later that it's still in use by many of us proves how good a language it is. Microsoft thinks so to, otherwise it wouldn't still be putting it on its CDs. Think of all the other languages that have come and gone since Basic was written, Fortran being just one, even COBAL is being phased out of schools and colleges as the learning language of choice. Prolog's specialty was AI, it dropped out of sight for a while but was revived a year or so ago.

Melissa is right, at one time there were hundreds, maybe thousands of professional, commercial programs written in Basic and its variations, GWBasic, QBasic, Asic, QuickBasic, BasicA, Basic2, Basic2 Plus etc. etc. as well as the all the tools, libraries and utilities that are now commonly written for VB, C, C++, Delphi etc.

QBasic programs can be as complex as anyone cared, or can care, to write. It's got all the tools necessary to get to the underlying software and memory. A company I used to work for spent a fortune getting the programmers copies of the MS Development software but even then I sometimes found it easier to write code in QBasic. As MS moves away from DOS based OS's then the problems with writing programs where you draw on the resources of the OS will only get worse for Basic - you need only look at what some of the earlier mouse programs do to a PC running some of the later Windows OS's to understand that.

Personally, I'd hate to write some of the programs and routines you mentioned in your original post in QBasic, as I said, it's easier and faster in other languages. That's progress, otherwise we'd all still be using Assembler, or worse still Machine Code. As a program to learn programming techniques, it's great. I'ts free and there are millions of lines of code to examine. Besides that, I and many others, still like using it. You need only look around the net to see how many people are using it, what they are using it for, and from the emails I get to my site, are still interested in learning it.

Ray

But everything you people have talked about were done 20-30 years ago. Why don't I see any of now? No one can say a semantic net isn't useful but I have never seen one implemented in BASIC. I am just wondering why you people aren't doing that sort of thing.

--------------------------------------------
I will bend your mind with my spoon...

:Well then where are they now mellisa?

I think I have the source code and disks (8" floppies) packed in the closet next to the polyester leisure suits...

:Where is the grammatic parsing and semantic net code?

I vaguely remember some grammatic programs. I don't know what "semantic net code" is. Could you please explain?

: But everything you people have talked about were done 20-30 years ago. Why don't I see any of now?

Good point. You know, maybe we should swing by the Ford dealer and pick up a new orange Pinto hatchback? What? You can't get those anymore?

Times change. Code changes. Why would I do all that file handling work in BASIC today, when I can use SQL for my new projects? (which I do...)

: No one can say a semantic net isn't useful but I have never seen one implemented in BASIC. I am just wondering why you people aren't doing that sort of thing.

Don't know what it is, so it's not yet useful to me. Please enlighten?

:And I forgot to ask: do you even know what I mena by self-seeding random number generator?

I thought I did. Could you please clear that up for me too?


Don't get me wrong. I have great fondness for BASIC. I was making a living writing things in BASIC for many years. I dug through the BASIC code, disassembled it to learn new tricks, mixed machine code and BASIC, did crazy stuff like embedding machine code in a string and executing it from within BASIC - I had a ball!

But, all good things must come to an end! I still use BASIC when I want to do something quickly, since years of using it has made me pretty fast at it.

People joke when I toss together a BASIC program, run it to do what I need, and never save it. Why bother? Just write it again if I need it!

Todays languages and tools distance us from the machine's internals, and I don't think that's good for understanding. But, things are far more complicated today then when BASIC's popularity was at its peak.

Do you rub sticks together to start a fire, or use a lighter!




Melissa

OK. I didn't mean to be rude when I posted at first so...

Anyway a semantic net is a form of knowledge representation in which you have node and links between the nodes. The links describe the relationship between the nodes. This is especially good for a is to b as c is to d.

By a self-seeding random number generator, I meant one that doesn't need a randomize function. I would basically seed itself somewhere in its algorithm.

--------------------------------------------
I will bend your mind with my spoon...

Hi,
The question you really seem to be asking is:
Why have BASIC at all?

It's fun, easy to use and cheap. I like many programmers first learned to program in BASIC (WANG's 2200 BASIC) many years ago. Of all the languages I've come in contact with, BASIC is the easiest to get started in. A potential programmer can in one line print his name or the old standard "Hello World".
QBASIC was, until recently, free with the operating system. Kids, when they tired of playing minesweeper or some other game, started to program in QBASIC. Now many of those same kids are REAL programmers in C/C++ or JAVA.
There in lies the greatest mischief that Bill Gates and MS have wrought on the technical future of this country. Many kids, without a free and easy introduction to programming provided to them by QBASIC, will never be bitten by the programming bug. Many will take their talents and become lawyers, accounts or whatever.
I wonder if Bill Gates knows how many of his programmers started in QBASIC or some other BASIC.

Just my thoughts.



Pappy
You learn something everyday.

That wasn't what I meant... You should make assumptions... To assume is to make an @ss of you and me.

Why though have none of these things been done? That is all I asked. I think you read too deep here...

--------------------------------------------
I will bend your mind with my spoon...

Don't be so fast to ASS-u-me Pappy1942 is wrong. Pappy1942 brings up a very important point: Each language or even development platform tends to attract its own community.
Not to say that all kinds of people don't program in BASIC, but the majority, these days, tend to start in BASIC because of how little overhead it has. Ususally they either move on after a while or quit altogether. You're asking why you don't see these advanced techniques in BASIC? Key word: --> Advanced. <---. There's BASIC programmers of all levels out there, but more advanced programmers tend not to use BASIC.

Watch carefully the language I used: words such as TEND, and USUSALLY. I'm not stating ultimate, undisputable truths about BASIC programmers, I'm only outlining general trends i've observed.


: That wasn't what I meant... You should make assumptions... To assume is to make an @ss of you and me.
:
: Why though have none of these things been done? That is all I asked. I think you read too deep here...
:
: --------------------------------------------
: I will bend your mind with my spoon...
:
:

I know you weren't trying to badmouth BASIC, but if you think about it, you only see it as primitive because you know other languages exist. When BASIC ruled the road back then, it was the only choice home users had, save assembly, and who wanted to learn assembly when you could type print?

If you didn't know any better, you'd think basic killed for speed and features.

---------------------------------------------
I've got a plan, but I'm going to need a dead monkey, some empty liquor bottles, and a vacuum cleaner.

This message was edited by the melissa_may1 at 2002-2-27 16:49:39

---

OK, I found it! Here's a link with a bunch of BASIC resources.

http://www.rahul.net/rhn/basic/

Towards the bottom, there are a couple of links to compilers written in BASIC! Here are a few examples:

MoonRock - a Basic to x86asm compiler written in QBasic

qbtiny - a tiny language compiler + tutorial written in QBasic.

MicroBasic - a tiny Basic compiler written in QBasic/FutureBasic

Small Basic Interpreter - written in MicroSoft VB4 (a Basic written in Basic). SBI source code is included with the June 97 issue of Dr. Dobbs Journal.


Melissa

This message was edited by the PrzemekG_ at 2002-3-11 7:22:49

---

Look for products for QB PB and VBDOS:
http://www.teratech.com/products.cfm
The price of basic compilers:
http://www.emsps.com/oldtools/msbas.htm

basic sucks because if u are not blind, cripled, or crazy u can use it. my six year old sister even knows how to make games in basic. it is exatcly what the name states BASIC. THAT IS WHY IT SUCKS!

Dou you know what I think ? I think you sucks, the idea of basic is EASY TO LEARN & USE and that's why basic is GREAT and your six years old sister knows it ( but still I don't thinks she know as much as most of people on this board). Also you must know that there are many basic compilers (Dark Basic is for writing very fast 3D games using DirectX, also MoonRock is as fast as C).
If it wasn't gwbasic (near 1990) I wouldn't be here. Now I know QBasic, VBasic, MoonRock, Euforia, some of Pascal, C and Assembler.

P.S. If you don't like QB the take your a.. from here and go somewhare else.

: basic sucks because if u are not blind, cripled, or crazy u can use
: it. my six year old sister even knows how to make games in basic. it
: is exatcly what the name states BASIC. THAT IS WHY IT SUCKS!

You can't be serious? That's like saying DOS must be better than Windows because DOS is harder to use. If harder is better, why doesn't everyone just program in machine code?

The aim of any good developer is to make their software as user-friendly as possible. The fact that BASIC is so high-level and so easy to pick up is its advantage over other languages, not a disadvantage. Because it's so easy to write, applications can be written in half the time and with far fewer bugs.

When you say BASIC is "basic", I wonder what particular strand of BASIC you are referring to. For example Microsoft's latest version, VB.Net, is a very powerful object-oriented language with strong Internet and database management functionality, just to name a few.

Do you have an inferiority complex with your six year old sister or something?

all basic sucks because it is too easy. it takes little or no skill whatsoever. the new windows type vb.net is so easy! i don't know y u say it is diffucult! i like java because it stimulates the brain which basic doesn't. the graphics are better. do u want any other reasons why java sucks? e-mail me at kc489@hotmail.com then if u think u know nething.

How can you say that BASIC doesn't stimulate the brain? I hate to break the news to you, but a language itself does very little. Each command plays a tiny role, and your skill lies in how you put those together. In fact, the ease of BASIC stimulates your brain to worry less about syntax + specifics and focus more on your final product

Just because you program in one language or another, you don't automatically become smarter or more skilled.

: all basic sucks because it is too easy. it takes little or no skill whatsoever. the new windows type vb.net is so easy! i don't know y u say it is diffucult! i like java because it stimulates the brain which basic doesn't. the graphics are better. do u want any other reasons why java sucks? e-mail me at kc489@hotmail.com then if u think u know nething.
:

: all basic sucks because it is too easy. it takes little or no skill
: whatsoever. the new windows type vb.net is so easy! i don't know y u
: say it is diffucult! i like java because it stimulates the brain
: which basic doesn't. the graphics are better. do u want any other
: reasons why java sucks? e-mail me at kc489@hotmail.com then if u
: think u know nething.

You have said "i like java because it stimulates the brain" and then you said "do u want any other reasons why java sucks?". Maybe next time you should check that your reply actually makes sense before you send it to the message board.

I never said VB.Net is difficult. It is powerful and user-friendly. Like in any language, the difficulty depends on the complexity of the application you are trying to create.

And by the way, Java is not that hard either - that's one of the reasons it's so popular.

--------------------------------------------
I will bend your mind with my spoon...

: basic sucks because if u are not blind, cripled, or crazy u can use it. my six year old sister even knows how to make games in basic. it is exatcly what the name states BASIC. THAT IS WHY IT SUCKS!
:
I rarely answer posts like this, but I can't resist.

Please answer the following:

1) If BASIC "sucks", why are you in a BASIC forum?

2) Is your six-year-old sister blind, crippled, or crazy?

3) Apparently you've mastered the JAVA language, but what about English?




Melissa

: :
: I rarely answer posts like this, but I can't resist.
:
: Please answer the following:
:
: 1) If BASIC "sucks", why are you in a BASIC forum?
:
: 2) Is your six-year-old sister blind, crippled, or crazy?
:
: 3) Apparently you've mastered the JAVA language, but what about English?
:
: the answer to ur ?'s is

a) i wanted to see answer my teachers question about peoples opinion on basic
b) no my sister isn't blind crippled or crazy but i think u must be crazy for mentioning it
c) the java language is mastered but i don't have the hang of english yet since i am russian you loser

if u think u can even come close to the brain capapcity of mine mellisa then try.
:
:
: Melissa
:
:

: a) i wanted to see answer my teachers question about peoples opinion on basic
: b) no my sister isn't blind crippled or crazy but i think u must be crazy for mentioning it
: c) the java language is mastered but i don't have the hang of english yet since i am russian you loser
:
: if u think u can even come close to the brain capapcity of mine mellisa then try.

The loser here is you, you think you are better than us becose you know some of java, or becose russians higher consumation of vodka? I don't think so. (I am polish and I don't like russians becose of person like you).

Maby your problem is that your six years sister is better in basic than you in java, or as you said your sister knows how to make a game in basic and you aren't able to make any in java ?

Go to the java forum and don't bug us with you comlexes.

I do think the he is being rather arrogant considering his position, but I also think it isn't right to make fun of him or diss him for not knowing english (totally). So you guys need ot back off or blow off...


--------------------------------------------
I will bend your mind with my spoon...

: I do think the he is being rather arrogant considering his position, but I also think it isn't right to make fun of him or diss him for not knowing english (totally). So you guys need ot back off or blow off...
:
You are absolutely correct. I am sorry I responded in that way.


Melissa

Sorry. That was little harsh...

--------------------------------------------
I will bend your mind with my spoon...

: I do think the he is being rather arrogant considering his position, but I also think it isn't right to make fun of him or diss him for not knowing english (totally). So you guys need ot back off or blow off...
:
:
: --------------------------------------------
: I will bend your mind with my spoon...
:
:
thanks for tryin to help mr. spoon-bender but i think that i could handle dis.
holla

:
:
:
With a little inginuity, BASIC will give any other language a 'run for the money'. After all you can add almost any function you want.
ET

There are realy many thing I don't like in basic (exactly in qbasic becose there are many better compiler than qbasic) like signed integers no inline assembler, no function like malloc and no direct access to the memory, a lot of error checking when you don't need/want it.
But there are things I love in it, when I need a simple program made very fast I always use basic, where else I could write a program on one line to display a result of an math expression. I don't know why I love basic, when I have a problem to solve I always do it in basic, it is much faster.

My thoughts:
I don't think "primitive" is quite the right word to begin with. Like the designers of any piece of software, the designers of BASIC had to begin by asking, "Who will use this software, and what sort of problem will the typical user be trying to solve? A programming language can be thought of as being "close to the machine" or "close to the problem to be solved". Since the typical
BASIC user was expected to be one without extensive knowlege of low-level arcana, and the typical task was expected relatively trivial in size and scope, BASIC was designed to relieve the "programmer" of much concern about memory allocation, addresses, etc., leaving him free to focus on his problem (in fact, to protect him and the system from his bumbling efforts).

BASIC (especially QBasic, etc.,) are actually quite sophisticated at handling this, and in this sense, it is hardly fair to use the term "primitive".

All this hand-holding comes at considerable cost in overhead, however, and this cost becomes more and more limiting as the user's skill level and the scope of his projects increase.

This message was edited by the etlusk at 2002-4-24 20:12:5

---

: My thoughts:
: I don't think "primitive" is quite the right word to begin with. Like the designers of any piece of software, the designers of BASIC had to begin by asking, "Who will use this software, and what sort of problem will the typical user be trying to solve? A programming language can be thought of as being "close to the machine" or "close to the problem to be solved". Since the typical
: BASIC user was expected to be one without extensive knowlege of low-level arcana, and the typical task was expected relatively trivial in size and scope, BASIC was designed to relieve the "programmer" of much concern about memory allocation, addresses, etc., leaving him free to focus on his problem (in fact, to protect him and the system from his bumbling efforts).
:
: BASIC (especially QBasic, etc.,) are actually quite sophisticated at handling this, and in this sense, it is hardly fair to use the term "primitive".
:
: All this hand-holding comes at considerable cost in overhead, however, and this cost becomes more and more limiting as the user's skill level and the scope of his projects increase.
:
My hat is off to you SIR!
Well spoken.
My first 'encounter' was Z80 asm, if not for ZX81 'basic' I would have given up. Damn! And now-a-days, it's still in my blood.
ET

: This message was edited by the etlusk at 2002-4-24 20:12:5

---

: : My thoughts:
: : I don't think "primitive" is quite the right word to begin with. Like the designers of any piece of software, the designers of BASIC had to begin by asking, "Who will use this software, and what sort of problem will the typical user be trying to solve? A programming language can be thought of as being "close to the machine" or "close to the problem to be solved". Since the typical
: : BASIC user was expected to be one without extensive knowlege of low-level arcana, and the typical task was expected relatively trivial in size and scope, BASIC was designed to relieve the "programmer" of much concern about memory allocation, addresses, etc., leaving him free to focus on his problem (in fact, to protect him and the system from his bumbling efforts).
: :
: : BASIC (especially QBasic, etc.,) are actually quite sophisticated at handling this, and in this sense, it is hardly fair to use the term "primitive".
: :
: : All this hand-holding comes at considerable cost in overhead, however, and this cost becomes more and more limiting as the user's skill level and the scope of his projects increase.
: :
: My hat is off to you SIR!
: Well spoken.
: My first 'encounter' was Z80 asm, if not for ZX81 'basic' I would have given up. Damn! And now-a-days, it's still in my blood.
: ET

For me it was TRS-80 BASIC. I never would have been interested if it wasn't for those cute little Radio-Shack computers.