Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Open Source IDE GAMBAS Reaches 3.0

timothy posted more than 2 years ago | from the that's-ok-I've-reached-37.0 dept.

Open Source 137

Kevin Fishburne writes "After years of work, creator Benoît Minisini and friends are just in time for New Year's celebrations with the first stable release of GAMBAS 3. Per their web site, 'Gambas is a free development environment based on a Basic interpreter with object extensions, a bit like Visual Basic (but it is NOT a clone !).' GAMBAS is component-based, so check out the list for an idea of what you can do with it."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

BASIC (5, Insightful)

InterestingFella (2537066) | more than 2 years ago | (#38548626)

It's what I started my programming history with and I still have fond memories of it. Easy enough language that got me interested in programming and provided me instant fun. There never really was any other such comprehensive language with quick-to-see results. Drawing on screen was easy, syntax was easy and reading from input was easy. You got fun things done quickly. As much as some "I'm better than you" geeks like to take a stand about it, BASIC was important part of history.

Re:BASIC (1, Insightful)

gadzook33 (740455) | about 2 years ago | (#38548682)

Yes, BASIC was great (for the role it played). VB is an abomination that should be wiped from the face of the earth. I mean really people, learn something that starts with 'C'.

Re:BASIC (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#38548748)

COBOL?

Re:BASIC (3, Funny)

icebraining (1313345) | about 2 years ago | (#38548786)

ColdFusion.

Re:BASIC (1)

gadzook33 (740455) | about 2 years ago | (#38548820)

See, Caml would have at least been a worthy joke.

Re:BASIC (1)

arth1 (260657) | about 2 years ago | (#38548930)

Brilliant idea.
A couple of other popular choices include csh and CL (common lisp). And from my mainframe days, I'd say that CICS is almost a language of its own too.

Re:BASIC (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#38548942)

Common Lisp thank you.

Re:BASIC (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#38549076)

No, the true abomination is PowerShell.

Re:BASIC (5, Funny)

QuantumRiff (120817) | about 2 years ago | (#38549138)

But.. Powershell is like Perl had an affair with Bash, and didn't tell her husband, DOS.

So Dos helped raise and shape that little bastard, like it was its own :) Unaware of why it was so different..

Re:BASIC (1)

geminidomino (614729) | about 2 years ago | (#38550730)

You think having the real daddy's regex would have been such a giveaway. I guess sometimes you just really don't want to know!

Re:BASIC (1)

theshowmecanuck (703852) | more than 2 years ago | (#38553930)

Oh that's crap. And I learned C as my second language after VAX BASIC, and worked professionally as a C programmer on Unix for years. VB is a decent language/environment and has its place. Don't blame the tool because the worker holding it has no talent or other issues. Or to draw from one of my favourite sayings, it is the carpenter who cut the board three times and still found it too short. But it sure as hell wasn't the saw's fault. The worst you can really say about VB is that it allows bad programmers to create working programs in a similar way that poorly written SQL can appear to work until you realize the result set is missing data that you need (which was a similar complaint some C programmers had about Java when it first came out). But in the hands of a competent programmer there isn't really anything wrong with it. I don't use VB, but I have seen it used well. I have seen C used really freakin' badly too. So give up already.

Re:BASIC (2)

Yetihehe (971185) | about 2 years ago | (#38548798)

AMOS for Amiga was even better, it had some multimedia extensions (playing sound, sprites, bobs (blitter objects - like a sprite, but could be the size of a whole screen), mouse zones (for fast mouse position testing for buttons) and even special instruction which waited for vertical refresh. It was about as easy as basic.

Re:BASIC (1)

moderators_are_w*nke (571920) | about 2 years ago | (#38550088)

AMOS was where I learned coding, before moving on C

Re:BASIC (2)

arth1 (260657) | about 2 years ago | (#38548810)

But it's not BASIC. It's an IDE built around BASIC with extensions. To say it's BASIC is a bit like a canoe with an outrigger is to canoeing.

Re:BASIC (1)

Mitchell314 (1576581) | about 2 years ago | (#38549470)

But a lot of old BASIC dialects were similar, they were variants of the same language packaged in a development environment. If a language can load arbitrary C libraries, then that opens up a *ton* of doors.

Re:BASIC (1)

martin-boundary (547041) | more than 2 years ago | (#38552690)

That's a meaningless objection. Which BASIC are you thinking of as canonical?

The original language (and first historical version) is Dartmouth BASIC [wikipedia.org] , which went through several version changes, adding new features over time. In its final version, the original BASIC was renamed True BASIC [wikipedia.org] . The dialects available on micros didn't necessarily implement all the features of Dartmouth BASIC, for example matrix operations were missing from GW-BASIC or Commodore BASIC, IIRC.

Re:BASIC (0)

hedwards (940851) | about 2 years ago | (#38549006)

I suppose you also fondly remember running with scissors and poking eyes out with sticks.

Re:BASIC (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#38550522)

I've had a look at Gambas3 just now. You know what... it worked first time and was dead-fucking easy to get a gui running.

People knock Visual Basic for Applications (built into Excel/Word)... but so many quick and dirty applications get built with it because:

1. The component style of programming is extremely powerful - particularly when you can call upon very flexible and high level Office components. Especially when you have a good IDE - which VBA does.

2. It's shockingly easy to get your first application running (don't knock it... businesses run on the phrase "get it done now" - the first thing that works gets used).

3. You can give someone, for example, one MDB file and they click on it... and it runs (same with a spreadsheet). Easy to develop, easy to distribute.

Slag it off all you like. Microsoft does understand how to get people to use it. It's something that Free software developers never seem to learn. Maybe Gambas has?

Re:BASIC (0)

HiThere (15173) | about 2 years ago | (#38550758)

The component style of programming does have LOTS of advantages. It's the BASIC part that I can't stand. If they replaced it with Python, Ruby, ... even LISP or FORTH, then I'd seriously consider it. C might be acceptable, but I sort of doubt it. It would depend on the fit, and I don't think that C woruld fit. But Pascal might work. (N.B.: I don't consider Lazarus to be a good fit, and it would need to handle Unicode strings. So the easiest language to adapt would probably be Python3.)

Please note that I didn't mention Java. I have not seen an acceptable implementation of this kind of thing for Java, and there have been many of them. Perhaps the language needs to be basically an interpreter based language. (This doesn't mean that it can't be compiled, this means the language design is aimed at an interpreted implementation. So of the languages I mentioned I consider Python the most promising, and Ruby the second most. [Ruby is deficient in the handling of Unicode. It CAN do it, but it's not as designed for it as Python {even Python2, but especially Python3}.])

BASIC, however, is not a good base language.

Re:BASIC (1)

jbolden (176878) | about 2 years ago | (#38551322)

BASICS are good to write because

1) Syntax is well defined and thus lexiconical interpretation is easy.
2) There is an extremely low number of keywords
3) It is well understood.

LISPs are by far the easiest interpreters to write.

Python and Ruby are orders of magnitude more difficult to write interpreters for. Multiple man years instead of man days.

Re:BASIC (1)

icebraining (1313345) | more than 2 years ago | (#38553772)

But why would they write their own interpreter instead of writing their IDE around libpython?

Excellent resource for beginners (2)

oakgrove (845019) | about 2 years ago | (#38548676)

Gambas is a great basic-esque ide for beginners and on any debian derivative is just an apt-get away. Of course use your respective repo tools elsewhere.

Re:Excellent resource for beginners (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#38548852)

it has the most disgusting website ever. Who thought that intentionally blurry text is cool? It just makes it hard to read.

Re:Excellent resource for beginners (1)

tomhudson (43916) | about 2 years ago | (#38549160)

it has the most disgusting website ever. Who thought that intentionally blurry text is cool? It just makes it hard to read.

CTL+A is your friend. Or just remove the text-shadow:0 0 6px black; using firebug. Because it really IS that ugly!

Re:Excellent resource for beginners (1)

InterestingFella (2537066) | about 2 years ago | (#38549670)

Great example of how "greatly" open source devs get UI and design, tho

Re:Excellent resource for beginners (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#38549782)

Yeah because as we know, all proprietary ui's are spectacular. We also know you are a jackass, cmdrpony.

Re:Excellent resource for beginners (1)

tomhudson (43916) | about 2 years ago | (#38549790)

I wouldn't limit it to open source devs - Microsoft has produced its' share of turkeys. So has Apple (hockey puck mouse, anyone? How about the "toaster"?)

Devs can produce ok UIs provided that they follow the decades-old rule that form should follow function. But how many times have you been presented with a "finished" design that is non-functional by some "design team"?

Re:Excellent resource for beginners (1)

geminidomino (614729) | about 2 years ago | (#38550754)

Firefox 4
Firefox 5
Firefox 6 ...

Re:Excellent resource for beginners (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#38551908)

All of which are functional and fine to use, with UI improvements rather than worsening.

Re:Excellent resource for beginners (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#38551160)

Right, because the design of the Gambas website is the result of the unanimous agreement of all open source developers in the world.

Re:Excellent resource for beginners (1)

arth1 (260657) | about 2 years ago | (#38549286)

It's not blurry text. It's text-shadow.
Depending on your font, font size and display DPI, that might make it hard to read, yes. The lower DPI and smaller font you have, the worse it's going to look.

The error here is the typical web design 101 blunder of combining scalable and fixed size elements.
I am disappointed that HTML and CSS after all this time still lets you do that, cause the result becomes "looks good for me, looks shit for you" pages.
Where's HTML/CSS with strong typing? It shouldn't be possible to affix a shadow in px to a font in pt - IMO, the browser should then discard the text-shadow.

Re:Excellent resource for beginners (1)

tomhudson (43916) | about 2 years ago | (#38550104)

It's nothing to do with scaling. I have my dpi set at 120 (instead of the standard 96) AND I have my browser set to zoom in an additional 40%, and it's STILL blurry. I have enough problems reading text w/o that sort of silliness.

Re:Excellent resource for beginners (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#38549350)

Whats WORSE, is they use flash !!!
For a darn IDE image??
In heavens name WHY ??
Web page designed by 13 y/o ??

GET RID of the FLASH !!!

Re:Excellent resource for beginners (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38553278)

Holy shit, I thought you were exaggerating. There needs to be a Bulwer-Lytton style contest where sites like that can compete to see who can cause the most lost lunches.

That is just... astonishing.

need a good C++ IDE, though (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#38548694)

Nothing against BASIC, it's what I learned on in the 70's, but most really serious projects are done with C or C++ based languages. Kernels, device drivers, video games, serious applications, all C++. We miss a really good open source C++ IDE. There are some so-so ones. I've tried several, like KDevelop, but they always fall short of (I hate to say it) MS Visual Studio. For as much as I dislike microsoft, MSVC is the gold standard of IDEs for C++.

Ever heard of ECLIPSE ???? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#38548774)

Visual Studio may be great for debugging, but is not that great as an actual programming editor. Too many dumb azz steps to get simple jobs done.

Re:Ever heard of ECLIPSE ???? (2, Informative)

InterestingFella (2537066) | about 2 years ago | (#38548874)

Like what? Visual Studio is by far the best IDE there is. It is almost outstandingly powerful and still lightweight with the newest versions. It's nice to work with. Apart from VisualAssist, which is great addon, there's not much there to improve over others. In fact, the assist features of VS is on par with others, VA just takes it step further. Anyone who would use Eclipse over VS just doesn't know what he is doing.

Re:Ever heard of ECLIPSE ???? (1)

dokebi (624663) | about 2 years ago | (#38548968)

Anyone who would use Eclipse over VS just doesn't know what he is doing.

Or maybe I use linux for development? You know, like a proper geek?

Re:Ever heard of ECLIPSE ???? (2)

tomhudson (43916) | about 2 years ago | (#38550122)

Anyone who would use Eclipse over VS just doesn't know what he is doing.

Or maybe I use linux for development? You know, like a proper geek?

What? You use eclipse when you have the awesomeness of vim available to you? (okay, I admit it - I switched to jEdit recently, but still, for a lot of code, eclipse is massive overkill).

Re:Ever heard of ECLIPSE ???? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#38549060)

Of all the professional programmers I have met, it is always the less talented ones that use the likes of Visual Studio.

Re:Ever heard of ECLIPSE ???? (0)

HisMother (413313) | about 2 years ago | (#38549078)

Not to go too far off topic, but my few experiences with VS have been abysmal: the editor sucks (the selection behavior alone is enough to make me want to throw the keyboard through the monitor), search is hellishly clumsy, there's no completion of any kind, it rarely sees symbol definitions it should, etc. It's so bad, that I suspect it has to be my fault: it's unintuitive for me, and I don't know how to use it. Can you recommend a reference for an accomplished programmer who just doesn't understand Windows tools?

Re:Ever heard of ECLIPSE ???? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#38549172)

Thanks. I thought I was the only one.

Add the strange tripping-over-itself VS does when building the project and there's a mistake in the code and so it will report a compile error (which is good) and from this point on I can't compile again until I closed and restarted visual studio because some kind of database is locked (at least it says so). No idea how people can get any useful work done in it without despairing.

The resource editor keeps adding #define s to resource.h and never removes them again - so you end up having hundreds of IDs trying to refer to something that doesn't exist.

The strange compiler quirks like non-working template speciaizations, "someone initialized the runtime in the wrong way" errors and abysmal memory management (ever tried allocating memory in a DLL and then freeing it in the main program?)

Never had any problem in Eclipse. Not one in all those years.

Re:Ever heard of ECLIPSE ???? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#38550464)

Welcome to nuSlashdot. Where speaking the truth about Microsoft is a guaranteed -1. Sad. In the name of Malda, $DEITY save us!

Re:Ever heard of ECLIPSE ???? (1)

HisMother (413313) | about 2 years ago | (#38550660)

Seriously. Well, bye Slashdot, it used to be fun.

Re:Ever heard of ECLIPSE ???? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#38549110)

I use botg vs2010 and Eclipse daily. I prefer Eclipse. Please tell us lost souls what else we are doing wrong. I'm waiting with baited breath for your pontification on emacs and vi. Also, eat shit you arrogant prick. Many developers that would code infinite circles aeound you know what they are doing, use eclipse and would laugh in your face over your fanboy partisanship. A shit dev blames tge tools.

Re:Ever heard of ECLIPSE ???? (2)

Mitchell314 (1576581) | about 2 years ago | (#38549598)

Many developers that would code infinite circles aeound you know what they are doing.

Actually, in code, infinite loops tend to be a bad thing . . .

Re:Ever heard of ECLIPSE ???? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#38549968)

visual studio is lightweight

Sputter...cough...lightweight?? What? Please stop with the fanboy bs, soppsa. Who the hell is modding this joke up?

Re:Ever heard of ECLIPSE ???? (2)

datavirtue (1104259) | about 2 years ago | (#38550922)

Does that include those who can't bring themselves to install VS? How is it lightwieght by the way? Last time I installed it took two hours.

Re:Ever heard of ECLIPSE ???? (1)

sproketboy (608031) | about 2 years ago | (#38551968)

Wrong. IntelliJ IDEA is.

Re:Ever heard of ECLIPSE ???? (5, Insightful)

laffer1 (701823) | about 2 years ago | (#38549112)

I don't understand why people think Eclipse is so awesome. I use it at work currently and when I get time, I'm going to switch away from it.

1. Eclipse is too modular. It can't do anything on it's own and the hundreds of plugins aren't tested with each other. This causes bugs, incompatibilities and UI integration problems.
2. Eclipse has gotten better, but it still suffers from the refresh problem. It doesn't poll for changes in source files frequently enough and if you dare add a file outside the IDE, you have to manually refresh the view to see it.
3. Eclipse wasn't written with swing and requires SWT which means that you can only run it on platforms that SWT has been ported on.
4. Eclipse is not intuitive. Things like wizards don't behave properly. When writing Java code, one would assume that Apache Axis 2 projects would be supported with the latest web project type. They're not. You can't switch without recreating your whole project. You also can't generate a client only from an axis 2 project.
5. Eclipse is ugly. It still looks like an IBM product. Intellij, Netbeans, hell even visual studio are more appealing.
6. Every "killer" feature I've seen an Eclipse developer mention is also available in Netbeans. The few things I can't do in Netbeans are third party add-ons that haven't been tested well and don't integrate. It turns into multiple eclipse installs.. one for Java, one for C++, one for PHP, etc. This is wrong. Netbeans got this right.
7. Source formatting in eclipse is terrible. It breaks things up into little tiny lines and wraps things way too much. Java is verbose.. i need more than 80 characters unfortunately to be legible. It's also a hassle to configure this compared to other IDEs I've seen. It's so bad, some people have made plugins just to do that.
8. Eclipse warnings are useless. People get so used to having yellow lines on the side, they don't take any warnings seriously. It causes one to do bad things.

I realize that this is going to start a flamewar, but before anyone tries to say I'm wrong please try some recent versions of other IDEs. Most complaints I hear about Netbeans, Visual Studio, etc. are for very old versions. If eclipse is the gold standard, our standards are too low.

Re:Ever heard of ECLIPSE ???? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#38549888)

The "hell even visual studio" remark is unwarranted. I'm no Microsoft fanboy, but let's be honest: Visual Studio is far and away better than any of the IDEs discussed.

That being said, in the Java world, I still prefer Eclipse. I don't think it's awesome, if anything it's deeply flawed. But for my needs, it's still the best thing out there. I do really like what IntelliJ is doing, it's so much lighter weight. But it just doesn't have the plugin ecosystem that eclipse has.

Those useless warnings that you complain about are the warnings that the Java compiler spits out, it has nothing to do with Eclipse. I can't speak for everyone, but I strive to write warning-free code. Eclipse makes this easier.

So in summary: yeah, eclipse sucks, but for many people it's still the best option available. Personal preference plays a big role here also.

Re:Ever heard of ECLIPSE ???? (2)

tomhudson (43916) | about 2 years ago | (#38550176)

If eclipse is the gold standard, our standards are too low.

"Gold" is our 3rd-lowest level. Sort of like "Professional" - it's really for amateurs. You want AT LEAST Platinum. Or Onxy. Or even the craptastic Diamond level. That will give you the absolute minimum. And for our Enterprise-y customers, there's Prozilla, to Manhattan, and all the way up to Rushmore.

What do they mean? Who knows - it SOUNDS like it should cost more, and that's all that counts!

Re:Ever heard of ECLIPSE ???? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#38550278)

1. Eclipse is too modular.

Since when has that been a complaint you'd find on Slashdot?

Eclipse isn't a "product". It's more akin to Seamonkey than Firefox.

Re:Ever heard of ECLIPSE ???? (1)

KermodeBear (738243) | about 2 years ago | (#38550492)

I, unfortunately, have had the same issues with Eclipse. I find it to be incredibly slow, bulky, and difficult to use for even standard tasks.

I do a lot of PHP work. I used to use the old, pre-Eclipse version of Zend Studio which was pretty good. When they moved to the Eclipse platform, it ended being a terrible product. I thought that, perhaps, the Zend people just didn't do a great job building on top of Eclipse and I decided to go to Eclipse directly. What a mistake - even the "easy installers" with all of the pre-installed, pre-configured PHP-specific plugins were a nightmare and rarely worked.

These days, I currently use a simple editor with syntax highlighting. The big, bulky IDEs are just too much, are a pain in the rear to work with, and force you to work within a very specific paradigm. It is their way or the highway. And, many of them don't support simple things like SFTP.

Every year or so I poke around and see if anything new has come along, and I might try a new product or two, but I always end up going back to "simple syntax highlighting text editor".

Re:need a good C++ IDE, though (1)

liquidweaver (1988660) | about 2 years ago | (#38549228)

QT Designer is quite good.

Re:need a good C++ IDE, though (2)

Hodapp (1175021) | about 2 years ago | (#38549472)

I have found Qt Creator much easier to work with than Visual Studio. It requires some more explicit management in its project files (as they are just QMake projects), but I've found that I prefer this to the endless point-and-click mazes that VS subjects me to.

It's handy enough on its own for C/C++ projects, independent of whether you are using Qt or not, but it's extremely helpful for developing applications that use Qt as it integrates very well with Qt Designer.

Re:need a good C++ IDE, though (3, Insightful)

Jorl17 (1716772) | about 2 years ago | (#38550418)

I fully agree. Visual Studio is amazing, even for someone as "anti-Microsoft" as myself to admit it. Qt Creator is the closest thing I get to pure satisfaction when I code C++ without Visual Studio. It indents it right, it has great themes, great shortcuts, great everything!

Python too (1)

nurb432 (527695) | about 2 years ago | (#38549310)

Would like to have a true "GUI IDE" Rad tool for python too. ( something like what wavemaker is to java, or ironspeed is to .net tho the latter isnt free ) While it may sound lazy, drag and drop interface creation and good remote debugging speeds development time, even for professionals.

Re:Python too (1)

BorelHendrake (1496471) | about 2 years ago | (#38550628)


You might want to give Eric a try. Eric is an IDE for python which can call Qt designer. This allows you to create the gui using Qt and with PyQt write your actual program in Python.

Re:Python too (1)

nurb432 (527695) | about 2 years ago | (#38551032)

Ya i have and its the best we have so far, but the GUI builder 'extension' is a bit kludgey and still has an 'external' feel ( since it is :) )

I have seen a few other smaller projects but none seem ready for prime time. I just hope one is out there and i missing it.

Useless (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#38548804)

So, it is BASIC - a language people here look down on and claim "nobody uses" and it is for Linux - which, while popular here, basically nobody uses (very low percent of the installed base of computers). So, maybe three people will use this language? It is only the confluence of BASIC users and Linux users - which has to be very small.

Thumbs up for Gambas (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#38548850)

I'm a big fan of Gambas.Though I haven't used it in a few years it is a great way to quickly put together graphical applications. It has pretty good help files, simple (BASIC) syntax and is a great way for beginners to learn and for more experienced programmers to throw together simple apps in a hurry. I'm very happy to see this project is continuing to be developed.

First use on CSI? (1)

tomhudson (43916) | about 2 years ago | (#38549038)

I'm a big fan of Gambas.Though I haven't used it in a few years it is a great way to quickly put together graphical applications.

Quick - someone tell the writers of CSI so they can now ""whip up a GOOEY in Gambas so they can track the killers' IP address [youtube.com] " ... or something equally zombified.

Spaghetti code with gotos AND inheritance! (0)

John Hasler (414242) | about 2 years ago | (#38548972)

Wow! The possiblilties are endless! Do we get overloading as well?

Re:Spaghetti code with gotos AND inheritance! (1)

Mitchell314 (1576581) | about 2 years ago | (#38549656)

C and C++ have GOTO as well, should we shun them for that too?

Re:Spaghetti code with gotos AND inheritance! (2, Insightful)

tomhudson (43916) | about 2 years ago | (#38550218)

Look at all the case: statements in a switch - they're all GOTOs (the case: is a label). So are your virtual method tables. The break; statement also does a goto to the next instruction after the enclosing set of statements (switch, for, whatever).

So don't knock goto - the software you're using depends on it.

Re:Spaghetti code with gotos AND inheritance! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38553648)

Not to mention that assembly language/machine code is rife with jump statements in multitudinous varieties.

Re:Spaghetti code with gotos AND inheritance! (1)

moderators_are_w*nke (571920) | about 2 years ago | (#38550106)

Just because you can it doesn't mean you should

Re:Spaghetti code with gotos AND inheritance! (1)

gambix (2543106) | more than 2 years ago | (#38552904)

Take a look to the Gambas IDE witch is written in Gambas... count the goto uses :-)

NOT what I wanted (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#38549052)

I want a BASIC ENVIRONMENT just like
the old days. This is where I can type
"run" and "save" on the same command line
as "10 let A = B + C".

I do not want objects or events.

Why ? Because I can do VERY VERY FAST
quick and dirty little programs and solve problems
quickly - IF the BASIC was put into my linux terminal,
iphone, smartphone, tablet, etc.. It was proven
to work well and occupy under a paltry 32KB
(both ROM and RAM) 30 years ago.

I realize an ENVIRONMENT means you need line numbers.
So what? It makes BASIC editing MUCH faster without
saving and retrieving darn files in a separate editor.

And because teenagers can have an easy
Calculator Language to learn to solve everyday
problems.

Re:NOT what I wanted (1)

nurb432 (527695) | about 2 years ago | (#38549322)

So you use something like freebasic and let others who want those features use Gambas

Re:NOT what I wanted (1)

Mitchell314 (1576581) | about 2 years ago | (#38549696)

Please, the only major feature Gambas has that FB doesn't have is inheritance (which is in development (and has been for quite some time now, starting to wonder if it'll ever come)).

/StartObscureLanguageFlameWar :P
Of course, if really want a good flamewar, bring up QB 64.

Re:NOT what I wanted (1)

innocent_white_lamb (151825) | about 2 years ago | (#38551318)

Bywater Basic
Bas
blassic

Any of those should be what you're looking for (and they all work quite well).

Re:NOT what I wanted (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#38551696)

Try SpecBAS...

https://sites.google.com/site/pauldunn/https://sites.google.com/site/pauldunn/

Re:NOT what I wanted (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#38551770)

Sorry, the URL has changed...
It's now www.specbas.co.uk :D

Re:NOT what I wanted (1)

ZXDunny (1376265) | about 2 years ago | (#38551772)

Or indeed, http://www.specbas.co.uk/ [specbas.co.uk] Disclaimer: I'm the author of that interpreter. It's based on the old 8bit BASIC style, where you get a "command line" where you enter your code and execute statements. It's line-based, and has sprites and graphics and stuff like mod music and such. It's a little pet project which a small number of people enjoy messing around in. It's not a serious programming language.

Windows? (1, Insightful)

Osgeld (1900440) | about 2 years ago | (#38549134)

Its the main reason I have never bothered with this, it looks like everything I would want except windows support ... which though I run linux on the desktop most of the world does not

Its really not in my interest to sit down and learn a whole new system if I have to toss it out of the window the second I'm on a MS OS

Re:Windows? (1)

gambix (2543106) | more than 2 years ago | (#38552668)

Well, a little help would be welcome. Work for a windows version is in progress, but the lack of means in terms of knowledge and time are that it is unfortunately not a priority. It is on this would be a hell of a competitor in the world of windows.

Re:Windows? (1)

Osgeld (1900440) | more than 2 years ago | (#38553438)

trust me, I am Ctarded, you dont want my help

Cute characters (3, Funny)

evil_aaronm (671521) | about 2 years ago | (#38549196)

Is it required that open source projects have cute characters? Mozilla's fox and other characters, Linux's Tux, BSD's devil, Freemind's butterfly, etc.

I understand "guerrilla marketing" but to whom are we marketing: prepubescent teenie boppers?

Re:Cute characters (1)

Robert Zenz (1680268) | about 2 years ago | (#38549400)

Yeah, because a window and an half-eaten apple is way better.

Re:Cute characters (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#38551430)

I hate that fucking linux penguin.

Re:Cute characters (1)

Jah-Wren Ryel (80510) | about 2 years ago | (#38549408)

I understand "guerrilla marketing" but to whom are we marketing: prepubescent teenie boppers?

Anime and manga fans.

Re:Cute characters (1)

marcosdumay (620877) | about 2 years ago | (#38549582)

I understand "guerrilla marketing" but to whom are we marketing: prepubescent teenie boppers?

Everybody likes a cute character. With maybe the exception of male prebubescents and adolescents.

Re:Cute characters (1)

Hatta (162192) | about 2 years ago | (#38549622)

It's BASIC, yes it's aimed at teenagers.

Re:Cute characters (1)

Mitchell314 (1576581) | about 2 years ago | (#38549722)

I think it's as much tradition as it is advertising. Heh, Dragonfly BSD has not one, but two pages dedicated to dragonflies. :D

Re:Cute characters (1)

gambix (2543106) | about 2 years ago | (#38549954)

Yes and i really like the relation to Toys... we want a simple and complete language for doing simply things ... that's all :-)... that's why a so cute shrimp. Happy new year

Re:Cute characters (1)

icebraining (1313345) | more than 2 years ago | (#38553808)

Don't forget Plan9's Glenda, which pretty much out-cutes all of those.

Actual use (2)

nurb432 (527695) | about 2 years ago | (#38549344)

Not to slight the work he is doing, but has anyone used gambas in any 'real' projects? I have seen lots of toy/pet projects but noting major.

Re:Actual use (1)

Osgeld (1900440) | about 2 years ago | (#38550224)

it wont work on MS systems, otherwise it could be a good VB alternative, otherwise like I stated in a previous post why bother learning it if your never going to be able to use it on other systems

I already know a half dozen useless programming systems, not wasting my time on yet another

Re:Actual use (2)

Kevin Fishburne (1296859) | about 2 years ago | (#38550596)

I'm writing an MMO with it: http://www.youtube.com/user/VasCorpBetMani [youtube.com] The users mailing list would probably be the best place to ask what the serious folks are doing with it.

Re:Actual use (1)

gambix (2543106) | more than 2 years ago | (#38552640)

some big applications in Gambas : http://gambasdoc.org/help/app/guygle?v3 [gambasdoc.org] http://gambasdoc.org/help/app/laurus?v3 [gambasdoc.org] http://gambasdoc.org/help/app/domotiga?v3 [gambasdoc.org] http://gambasdoc.org/help/app/kedicad?v3 [gambasdoc.org] http://gambasdoc.org/help/app/txapucnc?v3 [gambasdoc.org] There is many others professionnal applications... but i've not urls for them There is http://gambasforge.org/ [gambasforge.org] and http://gambas.doc.org/ [doc.org] both writted in gambas.

Re:Actual use (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38553840)

There's a data modeling tool for Postgres which is written in Gambas:

http://sourceforge.net/projects/pgdesigner/

nice web site (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#38549732)

i thought my eyes were going for a minute... then i realized the website intentionally has text that looks blurry...

made my year (1)

A Pressbutton (252219) | about 2 years ago | (#38550652)

someone called fishburne posting about gambas what are the chances of that? could be a variable from the poission distribution

English source code? (1)

Nimey (114278) | about 2 years ago | (#38550834)

It looks like most of the example applications were written by native Spanish speakers, have comments in Spanish, etc. Any good example source in English?

The New 2012 Model T ? (2)

assertation (1255714) | about 2 years ago | (#38551338)

Isn't this like Ford releasing a Model T for 2012?
Who cares about Basic in 2012?

No disrespect to anyone, I'm serious. Honest thought, not meant to offend.

Re:The New 2012 Model T ? (1)

gambix (2543106) | more than 2 years ago | (#38552980)

Well ... What i can answer to a so stupid thing ... Ford T is died since many years ... but Ford is alway here ! ... Ford T have Wheel ... and modern Cars too So Gambas Have some little things of basic ... but all the modern tools existing too ! It's in the name ! Gambas Almost Mean BASic ! Yes we are in 2012, and Gambas have been written to make modern apps, not to remake nostalgic one.

NIGGA (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#38551420)

the reaper in a

What sort of language do we actually need? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38553362)

Looking forward, I don't see much use for a language used to write desktop apps for only Linux, or maybe even Mac, or MS.

I think there will be even more web, server, and mobile development.

What might be great is something to replace javascript. Not that javascript is horrible, but it could be better. Also, something to create apps for multiple mobile platforms, like phonegap, but better.

It would really be great if we could the same, or similar language for desktop, server, web, and mobile; and any platform.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?