From: Morris Dovey on
daestrom wrote:
| Guess I don't understand you non-debugger types. With an IDE,
| stepping through code in a debugger is a blessing. Can find all
| sorts of silly mistakes in seconds. Beats the heck out of the old
| days of adding a bunch of 'DEBUGPRINT' statements to track down
| *what* and *where*. (yeah, I know, you guys don't make silly
| mistakes, right? right... :-)

Right. _I_ only make /smart/ mistakes. ;-)

Regrettably, most debuggers don't provide much help with real-time
systems. When I really needed a debugger, I usually stashed skeletal
info in a memory buffer for post-mortem analysis.

| I agree about the reusability. You do have to really think in
| 'generic' terms. Break it right down to what truly *is* the core
| essentials of the object/routine; what am I taking for granted here?

Analytical skills, perhaps.

Morris Dovey
DeSoto Solar
DeSoto, Iowa USA

From: rst0wxyz on

Morris Dovey wrote:
> rst0wxyz(a) wrote:
> | Morris Dovey wrote:
> || Hard to argue with a preference <g> - Mine is for APL (which no one
> |
> | I have never seen APL used anywhere except in IBM, so you must be
> | working for IBM.
> From '69 to '75 - and that /was/ where I started using it. The IBM5081
> portable computer was a favorite in many company's R&D labs; and it
> ran both APL and CALL360-BASIC.
> Somewhere around '80 a free APL went into circulation; and there's a
> (free) PC version that'll run under Windows. If you're interested, I
> suspect that Google can provide a number of download sites.

I prefer working with assembly language.

> A word of warning: It's addictive. <vbg>
> --
> Morris Dovey
> DeSoto Solar
> DeSoto, Iowa USA

From: Joe Fischer on
On Fri, 29 Dec 2006 09:47:49 +1100, "Rod Speed"
<> wrote:

>Joe Fischer <joe(a)> wrote
>> A person that makes spaghetti in line number BASIC
>> can make more in some C compilers if they allow GOTO to
>> jump to another function.
>Yes, C is even worse than line number basic, if only
>because its much less readable by those who havent
>come across it before. Anyone can read basic.

Which I think is why the short programs posted
here might be BASIC.

>> I think line number BASIC is preferred to present short problems
>> in a public forum, at least the B in BASIC stands for "Begin........".
>More fool you.

I do claim to be the world's biggest fool. :-)

>It makes a lot more sense to use Visual Basic instead.

So take one of Pam's programs and present it
in VB, written in a style that will allow a beginner to
read it. Hopefully many DIYers are involved in
alternate energy projects and they may not have
ever written a program.

I thought VB was a commercial product, although
there are couple of maybe earlier compilers that came
with windows.

But your premise depends on ___Everybody___
running windows, there are a lot of text mode only
computers around.

>> If anybody wants to run it in visual basic, it should not be difficult.
>It makes a lot more sense to use Visual Basic instead.

You pay for it, I'll use it, I have paid MS too much
already, and have dreams of another operating system.
Line number code is easier for everybody to read,
a cute programmer might be inclined to write obscure
action code just to demean the beginner, rather than
try to present information that is useful.

>> The concept of reusable code or modules fails
>> to consider the variety of possible programs and
>> the many ways algorithms can be juxtaposed.
>Nope, thats what module design is about.

Nonsense, what module design and an
include library does is give the programmer
with the best memory and the most experience
the ability to write more program with less code,
PROVIDING the current project CAN use any
existing code.

There isn't anything special about library
modules, the same thing can be done in BASIC,
even line number BASIC.

>> There may be egoists who will not believe this,
>> but I have written a lot of code, and never (possibly
>> on one occasion) been able to use the same module
>> a second time without modification.
>Because you didnt design it properly.

Of course I didn't, I didn't plan it at all, I had
an idea for a program, started writing it, and had
fun thinking up more ideas.

A person on salary can afford to plan ahead,
I can't get anybody to pay me, I am too much of a fool.

>> And I have never used a debugger,
>More fool you.

Never needed one, I don't write bugs. :-)

>> but then I never had the agony of working in a team. :-)
>That aint the only time when a debugger makes sense.

That and a programmer that makes mistakes.

>> So line number BASIC is my preference for
>> programs that will fit on one or two screens,
>More fool you. Visual Basic is a significant improvement on that.

I should have mentioned, I usually work
in DOS, the fool that I am.

>> and I have used GWBASIC for 20 years
>More fool you.

That was all there was for 10 of those years. :-)

>> (and still use it as a calculator). :-)
>In spades. You should be using a spreadsheet for that.

I bought a used Victor 9000 in 1985 that had a
$200,000 spreadsheet on it, I couldn't figure it
out, and I needed room on the 5 meg hard drive,
so I erased it.

>Thanks for that completely superfluous proof
>that you're just another bone headed dinosaur.

You're welcome. Do you tell all the linux
and Unix users to use Visual Basic too?

The BASIC programs posted here can
probably be read and understood by younger
students than if it was in Visual Basic (or any
of the other flavors of BASIC that ms has
sold or given away with DOS or windoze.

Joe Fischer

From: Solar Flare on
There is no spreadsheet. You are the one suggesting the spreadsheet.
Post any spreadsheet code here so we can paste it into our spreadsheet

"Rod Speed" <> wrote in message
> Solar Flare <solaerfart(a)hootmail.invalidated> wrote
>> Can you post some spreadsheet math and see if anybody can use it?
>> Cut and paste it into their spread sheet?
> You post a link to the spreadsheet.
>> I wasn't promoting C at all in case you didn't catch that.
> That was obvious.
>> C is a horrible language.
> Thats overstating it, but its certainly not appropriate for the
> sort of stuff that Nick posts, just because most cant read it.
>> Visual Basic has gotos in it
> Yes, but only a fool uses nothing else.
>> and an EXITIF is a goto with a fancy name and a condition.
> Wrong, it isnt as general as a goto and its a lot more obvious
> when reading the code what happens when it gets triggered.
>> Rod Speed <> wrote
>>> He'd be a lot better off using Visual Basic, and should be using a
>>> spreadsheet anyway.

From: Solar Flare on
Post one.

In the last round about spreadsheets you avoided the issue by posting
apparent confusion.

Demonstrate how spreadsheet code can be ported to somebody else. Post
one here.

"Rod Speed" <> wrote in message
> Steve O'Hara-Smith <steveo(a)> wrote
>> Rod Speed <> wrote
>>> Corse he should be using a spreadsheet, not a progamming language.
>> Nah a programming language is portable - spreadsheet code is not.
> Excel is as portable as you need, the free spreadsheets support it
> fine.