• Welcome to OS2World OLD-STATIC-BACKUP Forum.
 

News:

This is an old OS2World backup forum for reference only. IT IS READ ONLY!!!

If you need help with OS/2 - eComStation visit http://www.os2world.com/forum

Main Menu

WDBASIC IS A BAD JOKE

Started by ddan, 2009.11.23, 20:06:03

Previous topic - Next topic

ddan

NOT ONLY DON'T BOTHER BUT IT'S A MANIFEST DANGER.

Just downloaded and ran it. Gives a prompt but NO INSTRUCTIONS included. "Help" tells me it can't find netscape for html. -- NO CLUE AS TO HOW TO EXIT. -- AND ALMOST UNPRECEDENTED, CAN'T CLOSE NOR EVEN KILL THE WINDOW WITH PSPM.

WHATEVER it is, FAILS BADLY. This isn't even a toy, NOW I'M ANNOYED.

MUST I RE-BOOT TO GET RID OF THIS CRAP?

If you need a few simple programs, just get Virtual Pascal.

(Yes, I'm back after more than a year. The moderators didn't un-register me, obviously still hard of understanding, and I feel inclined to perhaps rant about THE YET MORE EVIL MICROSOFT for the benefit of fanboy saijin.)

Pete

Hi ddan

It is ages since I last used a basic interpreter but I seemed to recall that Ctrl-C used to quit most of them.

Yes, works with WDBasic as well  :-)

Did you read the included readme.txt file? That has a url which may be of help to you.

Regards

Pete


rwklein

Quote from: ddan on 2009.11.23, 20:06:03
NOT ONLY DON'T BOTHER BUT IT'S A MANIFEST DANGER.

Just downloaded and ran it. Gives a prompt but NO INSTRUCTIONS included. "Help" tells me it can't find netscape for html. -- NO CLUE AS TO HOW TO EXIT. -- AND ALMOST UNPRECEDENTED, CAN'T CLOSE NOR EVEN KILL THE WINDOW WITH PSPM.

WHATEVER it is, FAILS BADLY. This isn't even a toy, NOW I'M ANNOYED.

MUST I RE-BOOT TO GET RID OF THIS CRAP?

If you need a few simple programs, just get Virtual Pascal.

(Yes, I'm back after more than a year. The moderators didn't un-register me, obviously still hard of understanding, and I feel inclined to perhaps rant about THE YET MORE EVIL MICROSOFT for the benefit of fanboy saijin.)

You know if you don't like the software don't use it. Report it to the developer in a constructive manner your problem and if its not fixed then thats that. Its freeware this program. Its all free of charge.

Just think twice before stating it in public in such a tone the software does not work. We have already lost enough developers. Just remember its all freeware you can download it. And if the developer does not want to fix it then c'est la vie. But lets keep things in a nice atmosphere.

Roderick Klein
Mensys

warpcafe

Hi ddan,

good to have you back. I think that there's also a misunderstanding about WDBasic.
Although it's made by Wolfgang Draxler who is the author of WDSibyl (which should prove some kind of expertise at least), WDBasic is not really intended to be "the new Basic" but rather born out of the need to do some "playing" and proof of concept.

There was indeed SOME discussion going on in the German forums following the announcement of WDBasic. Like "does the world need another Basic interpreter?" especially regarding the old-fashioned line number syntax. Phew, well,... someone might find it useulf. I certainly don't. Not even as a proof of concept.
It might be interesting from the authors viewpoint in matters of "can I write a language parser and make an interpreter of it". But that's all.

I think criticism is okay, especially given the point that the efforts put in WDBasic *could* have been put into something else... yet what? If noone feeds (good) ideas into the author, what would you expect? And a bit of public ranting is okay in my mind if one doesn't get too personal. And, like Roderick said, if something sucks, tell it to the people... but also stop using it or wait for (and be open for) "bugfixes" and support offerings.

Cheers,
Thomas
"It is not worth an intelligent man's time to be in the majority.
By definition, there are already enough people to do that"
- G.H. Hardy

ddan

I was a bit terse when YELLING.

Problem is that it was working perfectly, NOT HUNG, YET I COULDN'T GET RID OF IT.

It didn't respond to ctrl-c.

And I KNOW why the .html help didn't come up; I've moved and thereby disabled netscape.

And I made clear that I expected only a toy, I hoped with source, just for curiosity.

Was eventually forced to go to the web site, where I found the command "bye"; it went away normally saying "goodye" in response, just utterly pleased with itself.

MY POINT is that a program that offers NO instructions, won't go away with ctrl-c or ANY ctrl-key, alt-key, escape, or function key; not by typing "exit", "close", "quit", 'x", "goodbye" (suggested from looking at code with tedit), window close click, OR PSPM (and I have the kill9 EMX driver running too), WELL, that's one OBNOXIOUS program. The only thing I didn't try was forcing the shell to re-generate because it loses running icons, and since the program was running just fine, doubt it'd work.

And I hope to save someone else the nuisance of discovering that the design is so feeble that idle experiment becomes annoying at best. And maybe hereby inform the designer that a primary goal, rather easily achieved, is some way to exit. Whew.

The designer has already been impolite to me by NOT putting on screen a line saying "type 'bye' to exit". I wasted ten minutes or so trying to kill it. Ignorance or flaunting of elementary program etiquette is simply unacceptable. I'd almost bet he had to deliberately disable ctrl-c. So don't be telling ME that I should politely email him - and wait - for how to get out of his lousy program that won't respond to ANY of the usual commands. Grrr.

Seriously, the first thing I do when writing a new program is provide a way to exit it, usually <escape>, BECAUSE I've had this experience with many programs, DOS to GUI, just NO obvious way to exit even when running fine. It's like the ghastly emacs on UNIX, presents you with a blank screen because you're supposed to have studied the doc's in advance of approaching the holy machine.

ddan

@rwklein
I'd already considered your points and still believe ranting is merited in the
particular case: I had an UNKILLABLE program that'd just been mentioned here,
and MIGHT be writing zeros starting at the MBR, for all I could tell. -- A
program out of my control, as though I was running Windows! Horrible!

You're right that an email prefaced with "I use your program but" would have
been... less satisfying. And was I to leave the program running for days while
waiting for response? (This system is a pain to re-boot). While others might
be led into the same trap? ("help" is useless if you don't guess to type it.
And I was further annoyed at being sent to a web site to get it: BAD IDEA.)

I'm sure WD is a quite miraculous localized accumulation of atomic particles,
mysteriously yet brilliantly animated by an ineffable if not unknowable ghost,
without regard to whether said ghost is intrinsic or extrinsic to those atomic
particles, nor to how such ghost came into existence.

And no, I wouldn't care for anyone to "notice" my obscure efforts that way.
But I've taken the obvious steps to avoid such response. And it's not that I
_wish_ to rant, nor lack for more ghastly examples (Windows, endlessly).

I'd LIKE to support WD, was interested, BUT that's "was" because a simple
lapse made the initial encounter so annoying that doubt I'll ever again
interest in anything marked "WD". -- NOT TRYING to be rude, but decidedly tips
me at the margin to turn my limited time elsewhere. -- Er, here, because...

This is a problem that I muse on at length because lousy "help" recurs OVER
AND OVER, despite "hypertext-ish" systems that really only add white space and
mouse clicks. There's no substitute for lots of good plain text.

Simply put: WHY do bright people with elaborate projects never explain basics
enough to make the program usable to those interested? Listings on Hobbes
frequently omit even what the program is supposed to do. -- Okay, not exactly
so here, but not even saying to type "help" falls below the minimum.

I've at least a couple times stated here that I'm grateful to the people who
write and port programs. But no matter how brilliant the programming is or how
well it works, "selling" it in terms of describing operation is necessary,
SURELY a prior requirement for determining purpose and user interface, and
consequent internals, besides who'd be interested. And programmers fail here.

I know how dull it is to write documentation, especially after the long grind
of development. Besides the dullness, there at least two causes for lack of
documentation: 1) programmers aren't good at communicating to mere humans, and
2) they're so familiar with their pet project that they incline to think all
is perfectly obvious, when, case in point, simply exiting can be baffling.

I've considered contributing my writing to this or that project but there's
generally an overwhelming obstacle: I don't know enough to adequately
document, because the programmers haven't supplied enough for even interested
parties to get started. -- And those that _I_ CAN get going, don't need help.

MOST programming projects are so arcane that no one except geeks would be
interested. For some reason, obscurities are most discussed on forums [sic,
for the pedantic], even discounting for the high percentage of sysadmins and
programmers who haunt such places, while I'm still looking for another text
editor that has the features this antique (Celebrity) does (and attempting a
better version of it with knowledge and ideas from upwards of 50 million
keystrokes). Real Programmers manifestly do much re-inventing of wheels, or
port the same old wheels, so we get literally hundreds of text editors (really
but am quite sure I'll never use, while the basics that everyone uses in some
form or other remain the same, as if optimized forever.

But not using ctrl-c to exit isn't an advance, it's BACKWARD. I'd bet WD had
to deliberately disable it. And if ctrl-c MUST be omitted (not so here), is a
ONE LINE MESSAGE too much to provide? And basic "help" via internet when it
should be bound into the .exe? -- I'm led to conclude that WD wants site hits.

Back to general: This is one of those "until things improve, they won't get
better" problems. But has to start with programmers; I can't possibly evaluate
a program until I'm able to use it, and if installation is complex or the
learning curve is steep, then they'd better describe its value in simple
terms, and without assuming a great deal of prior knowledge for me.

THAT runs smack into the inability of programmers to communicate basics with
any degree of terseness. It's so common that I think it's inextricably bound
up with the ability to program well. Not really a flaw, but characteristic.

***** Interlude: It'd be a wonderful world if: *****

The only potential solution I see is more feedback, assuming that users will
trouble themselves to supply it, and programmers will at least read it. Those
are both problems in themselves, of course. Feedback doesn't mean just saying
"it's great" (though it'd be welcome), or a "wish list" (RARELY welcome:
writing code is a grind even for seemingly minor features), but a thoughtful
review of operation, or at least a description of ANY trouble encountered.

***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** *****

But practical fact is that no one will bother unless the program is definitely
of use, which rules that out for toys. Few have leisure and inclination to
even complain. I admit that I don't. But this thread may make an adequate
preface to such complaint, at least for "why can't you just simply TELL ME how
to operate it?"  (The less verbose might copy and paste or link here, heh.)

Then there's the fact that it's a rare programmer who will re-think a design
based on mere user experience. I bet that WD doesn't add a how to exit
message, nor bind in help text just in case the internet isn't available.

SO, I've re-stated my first post at greater length, and it boils down to that
a quick relief of irritation was pleasing, and possibly prevented someone else
from getting stuck with the program. -- OR, forced to visit WD's site, and I'm
QUITE suspicious of that these days, even if "merely" pumping site hits. I
don't rule out that he entirely innocently thinks that a good way to provide
up-to-date help, but if so, he's just plain WRONG. -- JUST WRITE PLAIN TEXT.

ddan

You having a personal vendetta does not justify jumping on my posts without having read it or having of anything of substance for comment. At least save up your one-liners until you have TWO. Geez.

RobertM

STOP
Back to topic without the snide remarks back and forth please.


|
|
Kirk's 5 Year Mission Continues at:
Star Trek New Voyages
|
|


ddan

@RobertM

NOPE. -- Good. Already to where I dare you to un-register me.

I require you to decide: who started the topic, who jumped in with a mere one-liner, and who wrote the first direct personal insult (see the OS/2 v Windows thread).

I want a warning to saijin to NOT drop one line bombs on my posts. The record is clear, he's done it over and over, as if compulsively. I've complained of it previously.

There's NO equivalency between my eighty or so thoughtful lines and his one line bomb. The latter has the effect of pushing my name off the top post, and I don't care for that unless there's substance behind it.


RobertM

ddan: My warning was to both of you (which is why I did not single out either of you). I (at the time of posting my last post in this thread) had no intentions on taking any action.

My post is to simply state, that from that post forwards, I expect both parties (and all other forum users for that matter) to continue any such debates in a civil matter. I could care less how heated the debates get as long as they do not get personal, do not include name calling, do not include personal attacks.

It is really that simple. I am not assigning blame. I am not threatening anything or anyone. I am stating that from this point forward, no participant of this forum (both of you included) is to participate in such behaviour. Really simple request I would think. Simply, it ends now.


|
|
Kirk's 5 Year Mission Continues at:
Star Trek New Voyages
|
|


Saijin_Naib

Not to get snarky, but I do believe you opened by calling me a fanboy.
Quote from: ddan on 2009.11.23, 20:06:03
(Yes, I'm back after more than a year. The moderators didn't un-register me, obviously still hard of understanding, and I feel inclined to perhaps rant about THE YET MORE EVIL MICROSOFT for the benefit of fanboy saijin.)

So your line here:

Quote from: ddan on 2009.11.25, 22:05:08
I require you to decide: who started the topic, who jumped in with a mere one-liner, and who wrote the first direct personal insult (see the OS/2 v Windows thread).

is a bit off base.

Secondly, I didn't meant to detract from the thread. I only wanted to posit that perhaps you should not be so negative in how you are dealing with the program Draxler made. I then responded a second time to your longer post by saying simply that you being frustrated by Draxler's program does not justify you being so pejorative about it all.

If this final post is in bad form, I will remove it if asked by yourself or Robert.

RobertM

You two could always discuss it personally, via chat or even PM's here. Let's just otherwise move on (on the forum side) so we dont clutter it with back-and-forth.

Thanks,
Rob


|
|
Kirk's 5 Year Mission Continues at:
Star Trek New Voyages
|
|


Pete

Hi ddan

I think most of your problems with WDBasic stem from the "standard" user action of not reading the (limited) documentation before playing with the app.

Yes, I do agree that the docs on the website should have been included with the package to make life easier for the user - but if you did not read the readme.txt to start with would you have looked at any other docs included?

Regards

Pete

ddan

Sorry, Pete. Don't care.

THIS IS A REPOST OF WHAT MODERATOR REMOVED.

NOPE. Sorry, RobertM.

NOT AFTER saijin "sanitized" the record by removing his posts from here!
Unfortunately, go_ogle hadn't cached it, and of course bing is worthless.

So here we go again, diverted from all else to arguing whether a troll with
one line of mere contradiction has equal standing with 80 lines of substance.

I thought my lengthy post was a bit thought-provoking on why documentation is
so uniformly lacking, and rather like the idea of a "programming etiquette"
that establishes a few conventions, put in an amusing pseudo-pontification,
BUT all that's now going to be overlooked due to this simple trolling tactic.

I'm not trying to get my way here, unless that means free to comment on
Windows. Because that's definitely what draws out saijin. Just look at since I
resumed posting.

---------------- NO, YOU CAN'T BECAUSE HE REMOVED 3 POSTS. ----------------

EVERY TIME I bait a trap with "Windows", he bites. Don't have to mention him
at all, only Windows. Look at my last long post on WDBasic (that has two quite
deliberate little jibes at Windows): he dropped a one liner within 8 minutes,
and responded quickly to my complaint about that.

That's NOT coincidence. That's NOT argument. That's simply trolling.

His one-liners have the practical effect of erasing my name as the last
poster, denying me my brief interval of attention, and since his are mere
empty contradiction, I conclude his intent is to suppress and offend me.

I'm more vividly aware of the direct linkage between my Windows remarks and
his sniping than you can be, but now that I've suggested what to look for, you
should see it clearly too. Kind of obvious. Possible causes and implications
would be speculation, but I won't let you deny the facts in the record.

saijin's pattern is clear and prolonged. Bash OS/2, defend XP. Brag of
expertise, but when pressed for details, dodge, accuse, then go silent.
http://www.os2world.com/component/option,com_smf/Itemid,63/topic,1235.0/

**** All I need is that trivially jumping onto my posts STOP. To prevent that,
I propose a simple mechanical rule: unless he has a 100 words or more, saijin
doesn't reply to ANY of my posts within less than 8 hours. *****

I ain't takin' NO degree of blame. My actions are entirely defensive, as
informed from last year. Consider his first remarks to me after that absence:

>> I've missed you too.

>> Not really.

A lie and a trick. I think it HIGHLY indicative of his true nature. -- Now
totally confirmed by his CONCEALING it. I'm not falling for "make nice".

Yes, let's not have any more drama. I'm here to support OS/2 and bash Windows.
saijin is AGAIN actively attempting to prevent me from doing either of those.

By the way, I'm not even reading other messages. All I have to say is right
out in the open, and won't be removed by me.

NNYITGuy

On Topic - Off Topic

The OS/2 - eCS platform needs every talented bit of gray matter that we can muster.  We have resources that are be absolutely amazing to keep eCS a viable platform for many of us consultants / commercial users / enthusiasts.  But when I see this kind of SMACK going on and the wasted O2 that has been consumed on the gray matter that has put together this SMACK; I wish I could put my own HAMMER down on this.  But then I set back and see what is shown here by all of this and can see that the wasted O2 from the distorted gray matter really shows for itself what the distortion is all about.  So by letting this air to the forum really shows that the OFFENDERS are really DETRACTORS of FORWARD POSITIVE MOVEMENT.  We, the forum members, will probably get our fill of this NONSENSE and turn up our SQUELCH to tune this GARBAGE RANT OUT.  But then again with this kind of BULL, it is really good to see that so many of the rest of our community really functions well and WE should really be PROUD of what WE have ACCOMPLISHED.  So this SMACK is a measure that these OFFENDERS do need to be present to show that WE, in reflecting what we really have, have a GREAT COMMUNITY and SO MUCH TO BE PROUD OF AS A COLLECTIVE OF KNOWLEDGE AND EXPERTISE for propelling our Ecs technologies FORWARD!

I do not talk often.  I am too busy working on my own initiative to propel our eCS platform forward.  This might be a little hint of what the RANT fringe should do too.  ENOUGH SAID.

Thank You and My Best to All of Us,
Todd Simpson (aka NNYITGuy)
Todd J Simpson (IT Consultant)
Business Automation Technologies
(Professional Products and Services.  Business to Business...)