Qbasicnews.com
February 22, 2020, 06:19:30 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Back to Qbasicnews.com | QB Online Help | FAQ | Chat | All Basic Code | QB Knowledge Base
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register  
Pages: 1 [2] 3
  Print  
Author Topic: string and numeric variable questions  (Read 7161 times)
whitetiger0990
__/--\__
*****
Posts: 2964



WWW
« Reply #15 on: March 23, 2004, 10:31:42 PM »

yup. that code works but i think it's better using 2 lines of code to do the same thing rather than 4

Code:
MID$(raceentry.finishorder, p) = LTRIM$(STR$(carnumber))
PRINT USING "###"; VAL(MID$(raceentry.finshorder, p, 3))

it just combines the three lines


and what you said about structured spagetti.... i think that too (Yummm spagetti)
Logged


[size=10]Back by popular demand!
I will byte and nibble you bit by bit until nothing remains but crumbs.[/size]
jgr
Forum Regular
**
Posts: 131


« Reply #16 on: March 24, 2004, 12:25:53 AM »

Yes, you are right.  I'm still trying to get used to all these different commands.
Logged
Moneo
Na_th_an
*****
Posts: 1971


« Reply #17 on: March 26, 2004, 01:36:38 AM »

I did some work myself using Business BAsic for several machines including the BAsic IV and the NCR Tower. What I liked in particular was the I/O, lots more sophisticated than what QB has. The rest of the language is fair.
*****
Logged
1000101
Ancient Guru
****
Posts: 519



WWW
« Reply #18 on: March 26, 2004, 04:19:26 AM »

Nobody has caught on to what I said yet about FORMAT$

If you use FORMAT$(num) then you don't need to use LTRIM$ since there is no leading space.  Why make two function calls when you can make one.  Especially when QB is so slooooow about function calls.
Logged

Life is like a box of chocolates', hrm, WTF, no it isn't, more like, 'life is like a steaming pile of horse crap.'
jgr
Forum Regular
**
Posts: 131


« Reply #19 on: March 26, 2004, 11:06:00 AM »

Quote from: "Moneo"
I did some work myself using Business BAsic for several machines including the BAsic IV and the NCR Tower. What I liked in particular was the I/O, lots more sophisticated than what QB has. The rest of the language is fair.
*****




I miss the direct files...this random stuff sucks
Logged
jgr
Forum Regular
**
Posts: 131


« Reply #20 on: March 26, 2004, 11:07:57 AM »

Quote from: "1000101"
Nobody has caught on to what I said yet about FORMAT$

If you use FORMAT$(num) then you don't need to use LTRIM$ since there is no leading space.  Why make two function calls when you can make one.  Especially when QB is so slooooow about function calls.


Tried it but get subscript out of range error
Logged
1000101
Ancient Guru
****
Posts: 519



WWW
« Reply #21 on: March 26, 2004, 02:28:55 PM »

hrm, maybe QB doesn't have Format$?

Yup, just checked, wasn't introduced until PDS (QB7).

Sorry about that, but then, who still uses QB45 when the VBDOS compiler is a better one?  ;P
Logged

Life is like a box of chocolates', hrm, WTF, no it isn't, more like, 'life is like a steaming pile of horse crap.'
Moneo
Na_th_an
*****
Posts: 1971


« Reply #22 on: April 03, 2004, 11:53:46 PM »

Quote from: "jgr"

I miss the direct files...this random stuff sucks

I totally agree.
*****
Logged
Moneo
Na_th_an
*****
Posts: 1971


« Reply #23 on: April 03, 2004, 11:59:26 PM »

Quote from: "1000101"
hrm, maybe QB doesn't have Format$?
Yup, just checked, wasn't introduced until PDS (QB7).
Sorry about that, but then, who still uses QB45 when the VBDOS compiler is a better one?  ;P

I don't consider PDS(QB7) as part of the QB or QuickBASIC family. It has entirely too many different features. Including PDS feature in a conversation is like mentioning C++ or C# features in a C programming discussion.
*****
Logged
TheBigBasicQ
*/-\*
*****
Posts: 4550



WWW
« Reply #24 on: April 04, 2004, 07:11:44 AM »

Hey! QB7.1 was just an improvement over the previous versions of QB and they did add a lot of new features. So dont say that its not a part of QB family =P.
Logged
na_th_an
*/-\*
*****
Posts: 8244



WWW
« Reply #25 on: April 04, 2004, 10:30:10 AM »

It is not. The last QB version was QB 4.5

What you call (wrongly) "QB 7.1" is MS Basic Professional Development System 7.1 which included the Basic Compiler 7, following the BASCOM product line. It is a different product line.
Logged

SCUMM (the band) on Myspace!
ComputerEmuzone Games Studio
underBASIC, homegrown musicians
[img]http://www.ojodepez-fanzine.net/almacen/yoghourtslover.png[/i
TheBigBasicQ
*/-\*
*****
Posts: 4550



WWW
« Reply #26 on: April 04, 2004, 10:35:45 AM »

Whatever. All I know that I can make my QB programs using it and compile it into an .exe =P. So for me it belongs to the QB family  :wink:
Logged
Moneo
Na_th_an
*****
Posts: 1971


« Reply #27 on: April 04, 2004, 10:29:58 PM »

Sorry, BIgBasicQ, but that's my opinion. My QuickBASIC came with 3 half-inch thick manuals and a few disketttes. When PDS came out, a software distributor here lent me the complete set of PDS which came in a very huge box full of manuals and I can't remember how many diskettes. I installed this behemoth language and tested it for about a week. Needless to say I didn't like it, so I returned the whole lot to the distributor and deleted it from my harddisk.

I didn't like PDS because:
* It's not portable. I can carry QuickBASIC 4.5 with the BC, linker, a library, etc. on a diskette, wherever I need to go.
* It made changes, not just enhancements to the Basic language.
* The much raved about ISAM, stinks. I used the real Indexed Sequential Access Method on IBM mainframes, so I know how it's supposed to work.
* I especially didn't like the IDE environment or whatever it was called. I don't need all that stuff which makes me feel like I'm in a prison --- reminds me of XTree which wants you to live inside their environment and do only those things which it envisions for you. I'm perfectly happy working from the command line where I have all the utilities I need, and if I don't, I write them.
* The bottom line: PDS does not enhance my programming capabilites at all.

But then again, that's my opinion --- you're entitled to yours.
*****
Logged
1000101
Ancient Guru
****
Posts: 519



WWW
« Reply #28 on: April 04, 2004, 10:50:19 PM »

Quote from: "Moneo"
I don't consider PDS(QB7) as part of the QB or QuickBASIC family. It has entirely too many different features. Including PDS feature in a conversation is like mentioning C++ or C# features in a C programming discussion.
*****


Whether you 'consider' it to be or not, it is.

Also, comparing PDS and QB to C++ and C is stupid.

It's more like comparing MSC 4.0 to MSC 6.0, yes, there are lots of improvements and chages, but aside from a couple things the programmer has to worry about, they are mostly internal.
Logged

Life is like a box of chocolates', hrm, WTF, no it isn't, more like, 'life is like a steaming pile of horse crap.'
TheBigBasicQ
*/-\*
*****
Posts: 4550



WWW
« Reply #29 on: April 05, 2004, 07:11:42 AM »

Thats exactly what I've been trying to tell everyone. BASIC is a language while 4.5 and PDS(7.1) provide different compilers/libraries. So they are different versions of the *same* software.

BTW nath i dunno why you keep saying QB 7.1 is not a part of the Qbasic line of products but this is what I see at the bottom of the IDE:

Quote from: "Qb 7.1"
Microsoft (R) QuickBASIC Extended v7.1 (C) Copyright Microsoft Corp, 1982-1990


Quote from: "Qb 4.5"
Microsoft (R) QuickBASIC 4.50 (C) Copyright Microsoft Corporation, 1985-1988
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!