Pete's QBASIC Site

Zamaster wrote:FreeBASIC is evil and cheap cause' you have to work harder to use QB. This makes QB more of a joy to program instead of sleezing your way out and taking the easy road

Take your "eye r so l33t c0z eye am teh 0LDSK00L!!!!!!!!!!!1111111" crap elsewhere, eh?

QB is a pain in the ass to program in, it's not fun...if it were fun, more people would still be using it instead of FB. FB is fun to program in because it allows you to truly express your creative talents in a restriction-less environment...whereas in QB, you're always fighting with one hurdle or another...low memory, zero compatibility, or the IDE eating your sourcecode which you just spent 20 hours writing...

Nekrophidius wrote:or the IDE eating your sourcecode which you just spent 20 hours writing...

yeah, I hate that soooo much... don't remind me!

Nathan1993 wrote:

Nekrophidius wrote:or the IDE eating your sourcecode which you just spent 20 hours writing...

yeah, I hate that soooo much... don't remind me!

It destroyed my Roguelike for QBTK's compo, and it destroyed the original version of Two Lords. I wasn't far into Two Lords so I started over, but my Roguelike (called I2) had taken many hours to write and was irreplaceable...I had to give up the project.

Warum ist jeder Sprechen deutsch?

PQBC wrote:Warum ist jeder Sprechen deutsch?

Speak English or die!

Si vous voulez, je parlez on francais, pas de probleme...
Of Nederlands,
Oder deutsch,
Jetski Polski (to little actually),
Jag talar litte svenska (not much),
I'll keep ya from the others I know...

grtz
Seb

So then whos the better programmer... the one who uses QB the "pain in the ass" or FB?

Neither. The better programmer is the one who actually programs rather than whining on a messageboard like this one.

The better programmer is the one that creates the better program. It is that simple. You do not make your own lib for your program, and say it makes your program better.

Hey Nek, I aint the one typing loads and crying over his dear "freeBASIC". Not neccesarily is the one who creates the better program the better programmer. Lets say Nek used his beloved FreeBASIC and made some 3D thing with OpenGL, then I came along and made the same thing in pure QB except with a lower resolution/colors. In this case the pure QB guy is the better programmer cause' he/she learned all of 3D math and concepts themselves instead of getting some library/other person's work to do it. Even though the FreeBASIC one would look better.

Zamaster wrote:Hey Nek, I aint the one typing loads and crying over his dear "freeBASIC". Not neccesarily is the one who creates the better program the better programmer. Lets say Nek used his beloved FreeBASIC and made some 3D thing with OpenGL, then I came along and made the same thing in pure QB except with a lower resolution/colors. In this case the pure QB guy is the better programmer cause' he/she learned all of 3D math and concepts themselves instead of getting some library/other person's work to do it. Even though the FreeBASIC one would look better.

You're the same kind of typical elitist scumbag that I spoke out about during the QBRPG craze of the mid to late 90s. In addition, just because you can do 3D in something such as OpenGL doesn't mean you can be ignorant of 3D maths. You still have to know at least the basics of shit like vectors and faces, more intermediate stuff such as drawing 3D lines in a 2D space, more advanced stuff such as level of detail algos, etc etc etc. the list goes on for miles. Just because you have a library that performs the actual calculations doesn't mean you're a worse programmer...you have to already know 3D to use OpenGL, it's that simple, and it's redundant to reinvent the wheel when an existing wheel has already been made and is very well-made to boot.

As I said before, elitist...the better programmer is the one who actually programs, rather than sitting on a forum whining.

I agree with Nek... but when people pay for your program, they don't wanna hear "this isn't the best bcause im duh 1336 s0 1 w3n7 01d sch001." i want to hear "this is the cheapest, smallest, most feature-full multi-platform (insert program's function here) ever made."

Oh and you wanna call yourself a great programmer...let's see you implement hardware OpenGL in QB. If you can do that, then you can truly say you're a better programmer.

QB rules.... you FB hoodlums....

it goes without saying if you learn the
foundation first(qbasic/basic) the rest
is cheese...

qbasic is like a classic car... beautiful simplicity
its a gas guzzler sure...but oh its nice when
done well...

fb is like a modern car...all the fancy bells and
whistles wont do you any good when you total
you car by running into a tri-cycle...

ha...took me all day to write that one...

To JonathanS:
Here are 3 tutorials that TheBOB wrote. At least one of them is a graphics tutorial that I have heard good things about.
http://www.network54.com/Realm/QBZips/TheBobTutor.zip
http://www.network54.com/Realm/QBZips/Qbg1.zip
http://www.network54.com/Realm/QBZips/Qbg2.zip
Btw, TheBOB is a highly skilled graphics programmer at The QBASIC Forum. http://www.network54.com/Forum/13959

The moral of thi story? Goto goes a linenr/label and doesn't return. Gosub goes to a linenr/label and has to return.

Yes, and <b>DO NOT</b> forget to RETURN! So long as GOSUB ... RETURN is used properly, it is a nice and useful tool that I am fond of.

GOTO is similar to jmp and GOSUB is similar to jsr.

GOTO is similar to JMP or JMP NEAR. GOSUB is similar to CALL. RETURN is similar to RET. I don't know if QBASIC subroutines are near or far, but my guess would be near. routines called with CALL ABSOLUTE are alway far.

Zamaster wrote:

FreeBASIC is evil and cheap cause' you have to work harder to use QB. This makes QB more of a joy to program instead of sleezing your way out and taking the easy road

Take your "eye r so l33t c0z eye am teh 0LDSK00L!!!!!!!!!!!1111111" crap elsewhere, eh?

QB is a pain in the ass to program in, it's not fun...if it were fun, more people would still be using it instead of FB. FB is fun to program in because it allows you to truly express your creative talents in a restriction-less environment...whereas in QB, you're always fighting with one hurdle or another...low memory, zero compatibility, or the IDE eating your sourcecode which you just spent 20 hours writing...

:-O :-( This is shocking and disappointing... especially on a QBASIC forum. :-(
"restriction-less environment" What about null-terminated strings? QBASIC's pascal strings and fixed legnth strings are no doubt easier.
"zero compatibility" Only if you are using the WRONG operating system... Win NT/2000/XP = Wrong. DOS/Win 3.1x/9x = Right.
"IDE eating your sourcecode which you just spent 20 hours writing..." Save your files often... Make backups at major points. Don't do anything crazy.
This is a QBASIC forum. We are 16 bit MS-DOS programmers and we like it. 1337? `/34|-|, \/\/3 4r3, 4|\|d pr0|_|d 0f i7!
"QB is a pain in the ass to program in, it's not fun...if it were fun, more people would still be using it instead of FB." QBASIC is fun, it is very easy. It is the easiest language I have ever used. I can write quick code fast in it, without worry. I would guess that the QBASIC programmers in the world still outnumber the FB ones.
MS-DOS is just so wonderfully elegant. :-D. It is wonderful!

You're the same kind of typical elitist scumbag that I spoke out about during the QBRPG craze of the mid to late 90s.

\/\/3 4r3 t|-|3 1337. Long may MS-DOS rule!

smallest

You want small? Write it in pure x86 assembly...

QB rules....

Yes, it absolutely does! :-D Long live QBASIC! FreeBASIC may have its place, and I may force myself to use it one day, but my love will be for QBASIC, and 16 bit MS-DOS. :-)
Regards,
Michael

Really, QB is classic. FreeBASIC wouldnt have been there were it not for QB. Oh yeah and Nek, you need to chill out and avoid having a heart attack over something posted online by someone you dont even know. Smooth move ace!

Stupid people.

Stop bashing your opinion on others.

FB is better than QB, in terms of:
FREEDOM
COMPATIBILITY
SOUND
GRAPHICS
SPEED
SIZE
MODERNISATION

QB is better than FB, in terms of:
LIMITS
BOUNDARIES
INCOMPATIBILITY
AGE
SIZE


If you PREFER QB, however, thats fine. Just stop spamming about it, nobody else is interessted. Most of the FB people come from QB, we know what QB is like. Which is also why most of the FB people really disslike QB.

Now, could people stfu and get back to coding? Or have you forgotten how to code?


And if you don't agree with what I said in this post, you're wrong.

Great post, z!re. I agree. I am booth. I program in FB when I need to do stuff, but when I wanna have fun or tinker with DOS I use QB. I don't think all who program in FB are noobs, or all that program in QB are noobs. People just need to pick one, or love booth. There is no reason to spam about itm though.

I think not! QB is cooler no matter what anyone says, IMSO! Hands down, no more discussion.

Zamaster wrote:I think not! QB is cooler no matter what anyone says, IMSO! Hands down, no more discussion.

Get over yourself already before I beat you with a frying pan.