Author |
Topic: Banned from the LB Community Forum (Read 7048 times) |
|
Richard Russell
Administrator
member is offline
 
Posts: 1348
|
 |
Re: Banned from the LB Community Forum
« Reply #12 on: Mar 14th, 2015, 10:51am » |
|
Stefan posted this on the LB forum:
Quote:| LBB is not a different implementation of LB, it is a translator. LBB uses the LB syntax and language to convert it into BBC BASIC for Windows. |
|
If you apply that argument, GCC is not an implementation of the C language, because it translates the C into assembler code. Similarly VB.NET is not an implementation of the Visual BASIC language because it translates the BASIC to CLR bytecode, and Jython is not an implementation of the Python language because it translates the Python to Java!
It's not relevant how a compiler works 'under the hood'; if it accepts Liberty BASIC source code as input and generates a runnable executable as output it is an implementation of the Liberty BASIC language.
Richard.
|
|
 Logged
|
|
|
|
lancegary
New Member
member is offline
Posts: 9
|
|
Re: Banned from the LB Community Forum
« Reply #13 on: Mar 14th, 2015, 9:48pm » |
|
on Mar 14th, 2015, 10:51am, Richard Russell wrote:Stefan posted this on the LB forum:
If you apply that argument, GCC is not an implementation of the C language, because it translates the C into assembler code. Similarly VB.NET is not an implementation of the Visual BASIC language because it translates the BASIC to CLR bytecode, and Jython is not an implementation of the Python language because it translates the Python to Java!
It's not relevant how a compiler works 'under the hood'; if it accepts Liberty BASIC source code as input and generates a runnable executable as output it is an implementation of the Liberty BASIC language.
Richard. |
|
Hmm. The original LB also has a odd relationship with Smalltalk. But Mr Russell, why do you worry so much what these people think or say? The very small mindedness of their actions, and their self serving rationalisations of their pettiness should speak for themselves. They are not impartial judges of your work, and you should not let their inability to handle your exposure of the inferiority of their product and the hollowness of their promises of improvement as expressed in their vindictive ostracism of all who dare utter the name LBB, take away your peace of mind. It is precisely because your work is so good that they are so angry. In Shakespeare's terms, they protest too much...
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Mystic
Junior Member
member is offline
Gender: 
Posts: 53
|
|
Re: Banned from the LB Community Forum
« Reply #14 on: Mar 17th, 2015, 7:20pm » |
|
Due to the "conversation" on the LB forums I found your wonderful version!
After installing it and briefly checking things out it would be a great tragedy for you not to continue support for LBB.
This community would truly loose a fantastic tool!
Please reconsider and ignore disgruntled folks. Bask in your success, and not the failure of others.
Thanks!!!
|
|
Logged
|
- Rick
|
|
|
Richey
New Member
member is offline
Posts: 14
|
|
Re: Banned from the LB Community Forum
« Reply #15 on: Mar 17th, 2015, 10:23pm » |
|
on Mar 17th, 2015, 7:20pm, Mystic wrote:Due to the "conversation" on the LB forums I found your wonderful version!
After installing it and briefly checking things out it would be a great tragedy for you not to continue support for LBB.
This community would truly loose a fantastic tool!
Please reconsider and ignore disgruntled folks. Bask in your success, and not the failure of others.
Thanks!!! |
|
The irony is that it is called 'Liberty BASIC' and yet there seems to be a concerted effort on the LB Community Forum to limit the free discussion of LBB and its benefits for LB users, which is detrimental to users interests.
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Richard Russell
Administrator
member is offline
Posts: 1348
|
|
Re: Banned from the LB Community Forum
« Reply #16 on: Mar 20th, 2015, 12:35am » |
|
Once again I find myself having to use this forum to respond to comments posted at the LB Community Forum, where I am banned.
Rod Bird wrote:
Quote:| There is an implied assumption that we have campaigned against Richard and that we have all actively hounded him out of the forum. In fact we have been actively trying to include him in the forum, wishing he would support LB, which he has done in the past and rather well. |
|
That is a straw man argument. Mystic didn't say that I had been "hounded out of the forum" he said the LB community were "blocking any attempt of this person trying to share their hard work" which is the case.
Quote:| Richard has self excluded himself from this forum more than once, simply because he does not get his own way. |
|
The truth is that, about a year ago, I requested that discussion of LBB on the forum be permitted. Alyce apparently consulted with the other senior staff members and the change of policy was agreed. However I was then informed that Carl had vetoed the proposal; on that basis I decided that I couldn't remain a member.
Quote:| This is a LB forum and needs to stay focused on that software. LBB is awesome and a great achievement but there are quite substantial differences and it needs its own forum. |
|
The "differences" Rod refers to are of course in nearly every case a functionality which LBB has that LB4 hasn't, or something which works properly in LBB but doesn't in LB4 because of a bug. The great majority of programs which run in LB 4.04 run perfectly in LBB with no modifications. Therefore I cannot see any valid argument for not allowing LBB to be mentioned at a forum intended to support users of the Liberty BASIC language.
Quote:| To think that they can work together is naive since LB is based on Smalltalk and LBB, on BBC BASIC, so neither author understands each others system or constraints. |
|
I think Carl should be allowed to speak for himself. From a technical standpoint it would, in principle, be entirely possible for a 'hybrid' product to be developed. For example I could incorporate some of LBB's technology in a DLL, which could be called from SmallTalk in exactly the way the existing LB4 calls its custom DLLs. This approach could substantially solve the problem Carl has with LB5, in that his tools vendor has discontinued support for native GUI widgets; LBB (or more precisely the LBLIB library) could provide that support.
Quote:| I postulate this scenario, I build an exact replica of a Ferrari that can run at ten times the speed of a real Ferrari. I then roll it in to a Ferrari showroom and say "hey I want to promote this car here and I want to give it away, not just this one but as many as I can give away" |
|
I would say that's a poor analogy. The LB Community Forum isn't like a showroom for Liberty BASIC; its primary purpose isn't to attract custom for Carl. Rather it is (or should be) providing support for existing users of the language, whether that be Carl's implementation or mine. How many people have given up on Liberty BASIC entirely because Carl's version is so slow and bug-ridden? How many might still be using it today if they had discovered LBB earlier?
Richard.
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Mystic
Junior Member
member is offline
Gender:
Posts: 53
|
|
Re: Banned from the LB Community Forum
« Reply #17 on: Mar 20th, 2015, 12:44am » |
|
on Mar 20th, 2015, 12:35am, Richard Russell wrote: How many people have given up on Liberty BASIC entirely because Carl's version is so slow and bug-ridden? How many might still be using it today if they had discovered LBB earlier?
|
|
Definitely agree with this one! I'm running into the same mess with a CMS I use.
It's frustrating that things with great potential are stifled due to poor vision.
Don't get me started on the Amiga! LOL
|
|
Logged
|
- Rick
|
|
|
Mystic
Junior Member
member is offline
Gender:
Posts: 53
|
|
Re: Banned from the LB Community Forum
« Reply #18 on: Mar 20th, 2015, 12:56am » |
|
From LB Forums
Alyce wrote on the LB forums
Quote:LBB may be mentioned here, but not promoted. We believe that is an amicable solution and we have tried to work this out with Richard for four years.
Richard is an amazingly talented programmer, and I wish him well.
If LBB is mentioned, we will point folks to Richard's forum for discussion.
|
|
At least that means LBB can be discussed in front of others and still attract potential users.
I'm sure they will watch carefully and draw a fine line between "mention" and anything else.
|
| « Last Edit: Mar 20th, 2015, 12:58am by Mystic » |
Logged
|
- Rick
|
|
|
Richard Russell
Administrator
member is offline
Posts: 1348
|
|
Re: Banned from the LB Community Forum
« Reply #19 on: Mar 20th, 2015, 5:39pm » |
|
on Mar 20th, 2015, 12:56am, Mystic wrote:| I'm sure they will watch carefully and draw a fine line between "mention" and anything else. |
|
Somebody on the LB forum has followed up an old message from Stefan stating "You can't create controls in a loop". Of course you can create controls in a loop in LBB and this would make the task of the enquirer much easier.
So, would responding with this information about LBB be "promoting" it or just "mentioning" it? Would somebody who can still post to the LB forum like to put this to the test?
Here's some code for LBB which will create a grid of between 1 and 8 rows of textboxes as requested by enquirer RNBW:
Code: number.of.rows = 8
for row = 1 to number.of.rows
for col = 0 to 4
textbox #w.tb, 10+col*55, row*20, 55, 20
maphandle #w.tb, "#w.tb";row;col
next col
next row
open "Textbox grid" for window as #w
#w.tb42 "Some text"
wait
Richard.
|
|
|
|
AAW
New Member
member is offline
Posts: 22
|
|
Re: Banned from the LB Community Forum
« Reply #20 on: Mar 20th, 2015, 6:06pm » |
|
on Mar 20th, 2015, 5:39pm, Richard Russell wrote:So, would responding with this information about LBB be "promoting" it or just "mentioning" it? Would somebody who can still post to the LB forum like to put this to the test?
Here's some code for LBB which will create a grid of between 1 and 8 rows of textboxes as requested by enquirer RNBW:
Richard. |
|
I have logged in to answer your question.
This is not about the difference between "mentioning" and "promoting." Your code works in LBB, but not in LB. We prefer not to confuse readers, so code that does not work in regular LB will be discouraged. Mentioning that LBB offers a different solution, with a link to this forum would be fine.
Edited to correct typo.
|
| « Last Edit: Mar 20th, 2015, 6:07pm by AAW » |
Logged
|
|
|
|
Mystic
Junior Member
member is offline
Gender:
Posts: 53
|
|
Re: Banned from the LB Community Forum
« Reply #21 on: Mar 20th, 2015, 6:30pm » |
|
on Mar 20th, 2015, 6:06pm, AAW wrote:| Mentioning that LBB offers a different solution, with a link to this forum would be fine. |
|
Sounds good to me. 
I guess I can go over and make the reference... Might want to stick this code in a different forum though to avoid confusion even further.
I can do it later if I don't see Richard relocate it or start a new thread.
|
| « Last Edit: Mar 20th, 2015, 6:31pm by Mystic » |
Logged
|
- Rick
|
|
|
RNBW
Full Member
member is offline
Gender:
Posts: 106
|
|
Variable Number Of Rows Of Texboxes
« Reply #23 on: Mar 22nd, 2015, 10:59am » |
|
on Mar 20th, 2015, 5:39pm, Richard Russell wrote:Somebody on the LB forum has followed up an old message from Stefan stating "You can't create controls in a loop". Of course you can create controls in a loop in LBB and this would make the task of the enquirer much easier.
So, would responding with this information about LBB be "promoting" it or just "mentioning" it? Would somebody who can still post to the LB forum like to put this to the test?
Here's some code for LBB which will create a grid of between 1 and 8 rows of textboxes as requested by enquirer RNBW:
Code: number.of.rows = 8
for row = 1 to number.of.rows
for col = 0 to 4
textbox #w.tb, 10+col*55, row*20, 55, 20
maphandle #w.tb, "#w.tb";row;col
next col
next row
open "Textbox grid" for window as #w
#w.tb42 "Some text"
wait
Richard. |
|
------------------------------------------
Richard
You are the only one of the respondents who understood my problem in that the number of rows could be any figure between 1 and 8. Your solution does produce a grid which can be varied as I require. I'm now investigating how I can best incorporate it into my program.
Whilst I am posting this might I add my support and say how disappointed I am that you have decided to stop supporting LBB. I use both BBC Basic for Windows and LB/LBB. They both have their strengths and weaknesses, but LBB provides a wonderful link between the two.
Also being retired, I know how much programming keeps my mind active. Can I suggest that if you have currently made your mind up. Leave it for a while and then reconsider and if you still feel the same in 6 months time then fair enough. I'm sure you have a lot on your plate with BBC Basic for Windows, which you have recently updated. I think all we devotees can only thank you for what you have done so far.
Thank you
Ray :( :D
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Richard Russell
Administrator
member is offline
Posts: 1348
|
|
Re: Variable Number Of Rows Of Texboxes
« Reply #24 on: Mar 22nd, 2015, 6:16pm » |
|
on Mar 22nd, 2015, 10:59am, RNBW wrote:| Your solution does produce a grid which can be varied as I require. I'm now investigating how I can best incorporate it into my program. |
|
I see from your most recent post at the LB forum that you've decided the LBB solution isn't ideal. That's fair enough, but it would be helpful to me to know what is lacking and how LBB could be improved to better meet your requirements.
Richard.
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
RNBW
Full Member
member is offline
Gender:
Posts: 106
|
|
Re: Variable Number Of Rows Of Texboxes
« Reply #25 on: Mar 22nd, 2015, 9:24pm » |
|
on Mar 22nd, 2015, 6:16pm, Richard Russell wrote:I see from your most recent post at the LB forum that you've decided the LBB solution isn't ideal. That's fair enough, but it would be helpful to me to know what is lacking and how LBB could be improved to better meet your requirements.
Richard.
|
|
Hi Richard
It's not that it's not ideal. In my case not all the textboxes in a row are the same width. One accepts a description and is much wider than the others, so I've got some work to do to modify your code.
The reason why I've gone back to the LB Conforum is that I'd like to see if "pure" LB also has a solution.
Rod has responded with some earlier code that you provided, which he believes will help. I've not had chance to look at it yet. I'm currently watching tennis on the telly.
Ray
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Richard Russell
Administrator
member is offline
Posts: 1348
|
|
Re: Variable Number Of Rows Of Texboxes
« Reply #26 on: Mar 23rd, 2015, 09:49am » |
|
on Mar 22nd, 2015, 9:24pm, RNBW wrote:| I've got some work to do to modify your code. |
|
It is a very simple modification. If you had described your requirement in more detail I would have written code which more accurately fulfilled it.
Quote:| The reason why I've gone back to the LB Conforum is that I'd like to see if "pure" LB also has a solution. |
|
I think we're losing sight of some fundamentals here. Rod has shown code in which there is only one genuine textbox, which is moved around according to which 'cell' is being used for entry (the rest is just graphics) and Stefan has shown code in which all the textboxes are generated initially but some are 'hidden' so there appear to be fewer.
But neither of those alter the fact that in LB4 if you want to have (say) 50 text boxes in a window you must have 50 TEXTBOX statements. If you don't mind having such a large number of statements to create the textboxes then certainly there are solutions in LB4 for varying the number that can be seen (either by hiding or moving the 'unwanted' ones, or by resizing the window).
But if you want to create a large number of controls without having an equivalently large number of statements to create them, only LBB provides a solution.
Richard.
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
