On 07/27/09 11:07, clipka wrote:
>> QuickBasic was it's highest development.
>
> Just out of curiosity: Did they ever introduce such things as structs (records
> in Pascal)? That was the thing that bothered me most about BASIC ever since I
> first wanted to store a list of data tuples. Using a separate array for each
> "dimension" of the tuple just didn't feel right.

	I've forgotten, actually.

>> I was able to display an image and VBnet seemed to promise good image
>> handling capabilities if one could only figure them out.
>
> If graphics (or any other non-textual user interaction, for that matter) is what
> you want to do, it comes as no surprise to me that you don't like modern
> computer languages. The major problem, however, is not an inherent feature of

	I can sympathize with David. As a kid, graphics was one of the fun 
things about BASIC/QuickBasic. For someone new to programming, there are 
a lot of things you can do using language concepts with graphics, and 
it's a lot more interesting than writing a silly calculator program.

	I think that's what kept me and many away from "serious" languages like 
C/C++ for a long time. No book I picked up covered what I thought should 
be straightforward: How do I color a pixel on the screen. Doing graphics 
seemed to be a lot more complicated.

	I didn't have Internet access, nor did I know anyone who knew much 
programming, so no one pointed me to better ways to do graphics in C, 
nor was I aware of other languages where it may be easier.


-- 
ASCII and ye shall receive.

Post a reply to this message