On Jan 7, 5:46 am, Charmed Snark <sn...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> The Translucent Amoebae expounded
innews:ce3a28f8-9b51-439b-b00d-a994ac38e913@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
>
> > On Jan 4, 10:27 am, Charmed Snark <sn...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> >> The Translucent Amoebae expounded in news:0d8a898d-ec7c-4a96-a42a-
> >> 9e4fc59f4...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> >> > On Jan 3, 10:53 am, Charmed Snark <sn...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> >> >> This is a new Open Sourced BASIC interpreter,
> >> >> using the Berkeley DB, focused on:
>
> >> >> 1. Simple to program (for non-programmers)
> >> >> 2. Powerful database statements
> >> >> 3. UNIX shell friendly
> >> ...
> >> > The moment that i read: "Unix Shell Friendly", i knew that it was
> >> > NOT going to be AT ALL Friendly.
>
> >> So you'd prefer it to be UNIX UN-friendly? ;-)
>
> > My point was; If they have to mention it, it's going to be trouble.
>
> Not necessarily. The fact that a manufacturer of automobiles only
> warrantees the driver train for x amount of miles, doesn't imply that it
> will fail at mile x+1, or x + a few. Or the fact that they mention it,
> doesn't mean the drive train is a problem (which is the point you're
> making).
>
> If you ever worked with MICOS BASIC (from which this interpreter was
> inspired), then you know that it was not only non-unix friendly, but if
> it (or an emulator) were ever made available for Windows/DOS, it would
> also be unfriendly there. So this is a distingui****ng point from MICOS
> BASIC and bears mentioning.
>
> Yes, I mentioned UNIX, but it could equally apply to the DOS prompt,
> which is in itself a form of a shell though inferior in functionality.
> One place where the "UNIX" applies is in the PRINT statements. This
> BASIC interpreter can print to standard output or standard error by
> suitable use of a file unit number within the program (these are not the
> only possibilities, but let's keep this simple). Some BASICs are unable
> to allow that kind of linkage between file units in the program and file
> units within the shell.
>
> Of course, the use of this feature is optional: if you find it
> complicated, you do not have to make use of it. Just do a "normal"
> print.
>
> Warren.
>
> --
> Posted via a free Usenet account fromhttp://www.teranews.com
You're 'Explanation' to make it sound simple, had quite the opposite
effect.
At one time, not so very long ago, i believed, Because i WANTED TO
BELIEVE--
That Unix/Linux were The Next Big Thing, that they were going to
revolutionize the computer universe, and then i was exposed to Unix
and Linux, and now i no longer believe that.
What i now believe; Is that Unix/Linux are Hacker Tools, that may only
be used by Geeks & Geekettes in dank basements or drafty attics.
It may be that you genuinely, in your heart of hearts, believe, or
believe that you KNOW that this BASIC Dealie you're pu****ng is a
Stand alone program, but i am also sure that if i were to download it,
or even pay for it, i would never get it running.
i would need to know ( based on real world experiences ) all kinds of
things that are not included in your do***entation, and further, if i
tried to make inquiries about the problems that i was having, you
would have no idea what i was talking about... Anymore than trying to
talk to a fish about water.
( if you don't get that last joke, then i've proved my point. )
|
