Re: Coming From QBasic
Lynn Kilroy wrote:
>
> My biggest curiousity is how do I get it to use subs in Included files?
> I type the include file line. It accepts that fine. Then I try to get
> it to do the screen mode thing, and that it doesn't seem to do so well.
> Also, if it's a one-line sub, perhaps I can just plug the line in to my
> code without the rest of the sub? One line subs only make sense to me
> if they are a sub that's called often and by many different routines,
> and I want it to look purdy instead of using the languages default
> command synstax. An example from QBasic is my Inkey routine. It's call
> is purdy simple:
(snip)
To move stuff between includes you need to declare it as global like so:
global integer index
global function do_stuff()
...
end function
it also has to be declared as such before you use it no matter which file it is
in.
However, there is no call-by-reference in Euphoria so certain things like the
inkey example will not work (I think my QB is rusty). Stuff like "Input ans$"
would be used in Euphoria as "ans = input()".
There's also a QBasic to Euphoria translator in the Archive.
http://www.rapideuphoria.com/cgi-bin/asearch.exu?dos=on&win=on&lnx=on&gen=on&keywords=qbasic
> Speaking of Screen Modes, one of my programs uses a Screen Mode about
> which I can find no information in Euphoria Documentation available to
> me. I use the QBASIC command
(snip)
Check the documnetation on graphics ans sound and the graphics.e include file. I
think the routines you want are graphics_mode() and/or video_config().
> Basically, what I'm looking for is something with the flexibility and
> ease of use of QBasic but for more modern programming environments.
> Euphoria looks like it might be able to fill the bill, but first, I have
> to understand the very basic differences between it and QB. I don't
> mean the technical stuff like variable groups and nests and stuff {all
> that's kind of neat, though, and part of my attraction to the language},
> but the basic syntax and use of the language, and perhaps help in
> handling graphics with the simplicity of QB, but without all the buggery
> errors.
Euphoria is certainly a good replacement (I use in place of all the stuff I used
QBasic for both professionally and privately). However, certain things aren't as
easy but in the long run are more powerful and flexible (I think). Also, Euphoria
is constantly improved and MUCH faster than QBasic (the Euphoria interpreter
beats some compiled QBasic programs).
> Another thing ... I have a QB Compiler. From what I saw in the
> documentations, there is no Euphoria Compiler. This is something of a
> drawback to me. I can purchase a Euphoria binder program, I can even
> purchase a Euphoria to C translater. But no Euphoria direct to
> Executable Compiler. I imagine this is not a problem with Linux, but
> with Windows, it becomes a problem that is really quite large. From
> what I can see, there are no free c compilers for Windows. This means
> that no matter the cost of the binder and translator, the overall cost
> of Euphoria for the programmer is still prohibitively expensive. Sure,
> QB is old, and yes, it's very limited. But at least I can distribute my
> QBasic Programs in such a format that people don't have to download a QB
> interpreter to use them, or, worse, purchase a $500.00 program in order
> to compile it and use it. Nor do I have to risk the uncredited theft my
> source code {which I make available under GPL, but still, the compiled
> version preserves my status as original author on the original code}.
There is a free version of the C translator that has a notice saying it's
unregistered that you could use. Also, there are free Windows C compilers. Open
Watcom (http://www.openwatcom.org) is one which I highly recommend.
The Euphoria Standard Library project :
http://esl.sourceforge.net/
The Euphoria Standard Library mailing list :
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/esl-discussion
|
Not Categorized, Please Help
|
|
