"The emperor's new clothes". We can take it as "The label given to any fictional item that viewers have been induced into believing as real.."
Hey, wait a minute. That definition comes from your link, Mickster, and it's wrong!
The meaning of "emperor's new clothes" is a lot deeper than that. Otherwise it would apply to any magic trick.
I don't think the idea is as simple as the "viewers have been induced into believing as real".
No, they knew full well what they were seeing. Problem was they were all brown nosing their insane king so as to keep their positions. Not one of them would dare say to the king or each other the reality of the situation.
Well, with all due respect to the OP, let's use him as an example. Not too long ago, he made the statement that VC is "more powerful" than VB. Again, with all respect, I doubt that he could qualify this but it is what he has been led to believe. No doubt that VC *is* more "powerful" than VB but does the OP have the need for the extra capabilities of C? I for one am still waiting to see the "mother of all terminals" (for the prop) that he was harping on about so much ("using Microsoft Foundation Classes"), etc. How about actually finishing something???
I talk to so many wannabe programmers who turn their nose up when I tell them that I use BASIC almost exclusively and, like the sheep that they are, tell me that I should be using C...I ask them why and I get the deer in headlights expression....they don't know why! They have been led to believe that *real* programmers only use C and that any other language is just a toy. Oh and BASIC is all line numbers and GOTO's.
Scheme looks like gibberish compared to Basic or Pascal.
One of the virtues of Basic is that it's easy to learn. That's why the BasicStamp was and is popular. It allowed non-pros (not folks like you Heater) to play with microcontrollers and not need the guidance of a guru to accomplish things. Given that Parallax sold over 3 million of those puppies I'd say it accomplished it's role pretty darn well.
I personally think a nice BasicStamp Basic for the Prop with a nice library of routines would have been a good thing. It would have made it the logical progression for BS2 users who need more resources, etc.
I really don't want to talk about VB vs VC much. In my world neither of them exist. People creating cross platform, universally useful software do not use a platform specific language like VB. Thy may or may not use C/C++, but that is is not VC now is it.
"more powerful" depends on what it is you want to do and depends a lot on the implementations. As far as I can tell both VB and VC have zero power. They just don't run anywhere I want my code to run, from embedded systems, to my PC's, to server side systems. Useless.
I would not worry about "mother of all terminals". Bruce has been beavering away on other things. Like most of us, hobby projects that really fire us up one day can easily be displaced by the next interesting thing.
I agree, "Real programmers", whoever they are, are usually adept at a bunch of languages and other software tools and use whatever works for whatever task.
Yes, BASIC is all line numbers and GOTO's. If it isn't it's not BASIC any more, it's a pretender to C or Pascal or similar high level languages. But without the benefits they offer.
Well, with all due respect to the OP, let's use him as an example. Not too long ago, he made the statement that VC is "more powerful" than VB. Again, with all respect, I doubt that he could qualify this but it is what he has been led to believe. No doubt that VC *is* more "powerful" than VB but does the OP have the need for the extra capabilities of C? I for one am still waiting to see the "mother of all terminals" (for the prop) that he was harping on about so much ("using Microsoft Foundation Classes"), etc. How about actually finishing something???
He took the first strike. Am I supposed to remain quiet? Or do I run the risk of having another thread locked by an instigator?
@Mickster, I believe Bruce's main point is that C is useful because there are many applications that have been written in C, and this code can be ported directly to the Prop in C. The latest example is the Teacup 3D printer code. Bruce started by trying to convert it to Spin, but that became a huge project subject to conversion errors. He is now attempting to port the C code, and he has had some success with this strategy.
I see nothing wrong with using other languages on the Prop. They all have their pros and cons. Personally, I think that the native language of the Prop should have been a variant of the Basic Stamp language. This would have made the transition from the BS1 and BS2 to the Prop much easier. Bean's PropBASIC is a fine language. I believe it's roots come from the SX/B language that he developed for the SX. Spin is fine, but I wish it would have conformed to some standard language rather than being a whole new language.
Ultimately, it comes down to whatever the programmer is most comfortable with. There is no reason to spend time learning a new language if you can accomplish your goals with the current tools you have. However, I feel it is hard to speak against a language unless you have learned at least some part of it, and tried it yourself. That's why I spent a few months immersing myself in the Forth language. I wanted to understand what the proponents of the language were talking about. I learned that some of their points were valid, but other points were highly exaggerated.
He took the first strike. Am I supposed to remain quiet? Or do I run the risk of having another thread locked by an instigator?
I would politely point out to Mickster that you didn't mention VC, VB in your original post. In fact I just looked at it and didn't see any reference to basic. Given the context of that OP you thought it was clear that you were referring to increased productivity using C vs spin and that at no time did you mention that C was superior to spin or make any disparaging statement about spin and then let it drop.
Turns out though it is very easy. Places like MIT used it for ages to introduce programming to newbie undergrads. For someone who has never seen a program before "(+ 1 2 3)" is as easy to pick up as "1 + 2 + 3". It's amazing to watch some of the lectures you find on YouTube now a days. They have covered the whole language in a few lectures and are immediately in to CS concepts like traversing binary trees and so on. Scheme makes this so much easier than BASIC or pretty much any other HLL.
I totally agree with the BASIC Stamp concept. Easy for beginners and casual programmers. Heck, easy for anyone. I'm just not convinced BASIC is the way to go any more when we have so many other easy to use options. (no not Scheme)
As I said before, Parallax could have done themselves a big favour by ensuring the Prop could run those BASIC Stamp programs out of the box or with a little modification.
Don't worry about it Bruce. Just ignore it. It's only a debate and we can argue your case as well. We like a mass debate as you know:)
@Mickster
Those benefits being?
Recent discussion has been about VB. Well, "those benefits" of other languages I was referring to include the fact that they do actually run on the machines I have to use. As opposed to not. That's a pretty major benefit
Now, I'm very sure you can do wonderful things in VB. For sure I have seen guys doing exactly that. This is a good thing. It just does not work in the wider world.
In my opinion, pertaining to newbies, youngsters, or simply the reluctant programmer, learning C is really not that much different than learning any other programming language. Once you learn the syntax, you are on your way.
However PERL is a special case and I don't suppose older HTML would apply.
Now, I'm very sure you can do wonderful things in VB. For sure I have seen guys doing exactly that. This is a good thing. It just does not work in the wider world.
I personally have never used VB. Back in the day, my secret weapon was QuickBASIC 4.5 (well the PDS 7.1, actually) + MASM.
Today I use Basic4Android for my machine controller HMIs and PropBasic for the Propeller
QuickBASIC, VB, it's all the same to me. Spend a long time writing an application in that, then, perhaps years later, try and run it somewhere else. Oops does not work. Start again. I have been bitten by and seen companies bitten by this phenomena may times over the years.
Enter the charms of C and such like languages. Programs I wrote ten or twenty years ago are still in use. Usually running on very different machines and with different operating systems than the original roll out. Others have taken them over and extended them.
In my opinion, pertaining to newbies, youngsters, or simply the reluctant programmer, learning C is really not that much different than learning any other programming language. Once you learn the syntax, you are on your way.
However PERL is a special case and I don't suppose older HTML would apply.
I agree that perl is greatest language ever created!! I've personally never used another language like it!!
I agree that perl is greatest language ever created!! I've personally never used another language like it!!
It is a very powerful language, but it is very difficult to get a good grasp on it, and finding those server errors can often be quite frustrating, especiallly if it is a very large script.
One typo can lead to hours of hair pulling EDIT: If you are using Notepad
QuickBASIC, VB, it's all the same to me. Spend a long time writing an application in that, then, perhaps years later, try and run it somewhere else. Oops does not work. Start again. I have been bitten by and seen companies bitten by this phenomena may times over the years.
Enter the charms of C and such like languages. Programs I wrote ten or twenty years ago are still in use. Usually running on very different machines and with different operating systems than the original roll out. Others have taken them over and extended them.
And yet you don't hesitate to extoll the virtues of a very non-portable Spin language? My original statement in this thread was about hoping for a refined PropBasic.
It is what it says it is. HTML = Hyper Text Markup Language
You cannot express algorithms in it. It is not Turing complete. It is not a programming language.
LOL
I knew what the acronym meant, but I know you meant it is a Markup Language. When writing HTML, I always referred to it as HTML programming, but I was technically incorrect.
I just realized that instead of this thread being entitled "C You Later" is could be called "Bash You Later" if we promoted bash instead of C. It seems like a more appropriate title for a language war thread.
And yet you don't hesitate to extoll the virtues of a very non-portable Spin language?
Good point. Does sound inconsistent.
I'm not sure I extol the virtues of Spin much, purely as a language design ignoring it's implementation and environment. There are many things about it I don't like. White space block indenting, the weird operators, to name a few. It is at least simple to grasp for beginners to programming or casual Prop programmers.
I have said on occasion that the entire package, from the Prop architecture, to the instruction set and PASM, to the Spin byte codes, to the interpreter, to Spin itself and to the IDEs is a truly brilliant integrated whole.
What is not clear to me is how any BASIC for the Propeller offers anything more than is already there out of the box in Spin.
As far as I know we have a bunch of BASICs for the Prop, I have never looked into them, so presumably if that is what people want they can have it.
I still refer to the original point.... At this point in time and probably for as long as we all live, there will never be a more productive way of programming the Propeller chip than programming it in C. The available source code proves my point.
What is not clear to me is how any BASIC for the Propeller offers anything more than is already there out of the box in Spin.
PropBasic is essentially high level PASM and in fact supports inline PASM code. I wrote a quadrature decoder and thought I would be able to hand optimise the generated PASM...I couldn't have written it better in straight PASM!
I still refer to the original point.... At this point in time and probably for as long as we all live, there will never be a more productive way of programming the Propeller chip than programming it in C. The available source code proves my point.
That statement may be correct if you are porting existing C code. However, I don't think it applies in all cases. Sometimes it is more productive to convert it to Spin or some other language. And if there is no existing C code it may be better to use some other language.
I still refer to the original point.... At this point in time and probably for as long as we all live, there will never be a more productive way of programming the Propeller chip than programming it in C. The available source code proves my point.
Hey IDBruce,
In Tachyon I have a Telnet terminal, FTP Access, HTML with ajax(forth style) access and a serial console. My application runs a PTU32 touchscreen and interfaces with multiple sensors. The state machine handles the output to control the devices. All this is done with 2 COGS and 30K of code using FORTH and Tachyon.
So I still have 6 COGS and 2K code space ( a world in FORTH/Tachyon), of course I have access to the 2GB SD card for forth snippets etc. I can log into the system via the console or Telnet and dynamically monitor the system or change it on the fly, it's completely shelf hosted.
Me too! Its the only way I am going to be productive with the prop
@ Mickster
DOS and a wonderful programming language called QuickBASIC enabled....
...me to convert a cement batching plant system based on a BBC Micro (going obsolete and becoming unreliable), to a PC based system on a 4 inch square SOC board with flash memory for disc drive, monitoring and controlling six aggregate hoppers and two cement hoppers, strain gauges, relays and user interface with cement proof keypad etc. - no goto's or line numbers.
The BBC Basic and the Qbasic were very similar and then very different. BBC had line numbers and crude editor, but what a revelation with Qbasic - a text editor and NO line numbers - bliss. This is now replaced by FreeBasic and FreeDos- Hi res graphics and oodles of memory, and modern IDE.
@ Mickster
I really, really, really believe that a refined PropBASIC would be a huge success for the Prop. I for one would pay $$$ for such a thing.
Comments
The meaning of "emperor's new clothes" is a lot deeper than that. Otherwise it would apply to any magic trick.
I don't think the idea is as simple as the "viewers have been induced into believing as real".
No, they knew full well what they were seeing. Problem was they were all brown nosing their insane king so as to keep their positions. Not one of them would dare say to the king or each other the reality of the situation.
wikipedia has a much better explanation [/url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Emperor's_New_Clothes[/url]
Well, with all due respect to the OP, let's use him as an example. Not too long ago, he made the statement that VC is "more powerful" than VB. Again, with all respect, I doubt that he could qualify this but it is what he has been led to believe. No doubt that VC *is* more "powerful" than VB but does the OP have the need for the extra capabilities of C? I for one am still waiting to see the "mother of all terminals" (for the prop) that he was harping on about so much ("using Microsoft Foundation Classes"), etc. How about actually finishing something???
I talk to so many wannabe programmers who turn their nose up when I tell them that I use BASIC almost exclusively and, like the sheep that they are, tell me that I should be using C...I ask them why and I get the deer in headlights expression....they don't know why! They have been led to believe that *real* programmers only use C and that any other language is just a toy. Oh and BASIC is all line numbers and GOTO's.
The heck with the ego, I prefer to be paid!
One of the virtues of Basic is that it's easy to learn. That's why the BasicStamp was and is popular. It allowed non-pros (not folks like you Heater) to play with microcontrollers and not need the guidance of a guru to accomplish things. Given that Parallax sold over 3 million of those puppies I'd say it accomplished it's role pretty darn well.
I personally think a nice BasicStamp Basic for the Prop with a nice library of routines would have been a good thing. It would have made it the logical progression for BS2 users who need more resources, etc.
I really don't want to talk about VB vs VC much. In my world neither of them exist. People creating cross platform, universally useful software do not use a platform specific language like VB. Thy may or may not use C/C++, but that is is not VC now is it.
"more powerful" depends on what it is you want to do and depends a lot on the implementations. As far as I can tell both VB and VC have zero power. They just don't run anywhere I want my code to run, from embedded systems, to my PC's, to server side systems. Useless.
I would not worry about "mother of all terminals". Bruce has been beavering away on other things. Like most of us, hobby projects that really fire us up one day can easily be displaced by the next interesting thing.
I agree, "Real programmers", whoever they are, are usually adept at a bunch of languages and other software tools and use whatever works for whatever task.
Yes, BASIC is all line numbers and GOTO's. If it isn't it's not BASIC any more, it's a pretender to C or Pascal or similar high level languages. But without the benefits they offer.
I do love a good language war
He took the first strike. Am I supposed to remain quiet? Or do I run the risk of having another thread locked by an instigator?
I see nothing wrong with using other languages on the Prop. They all have their pros and cons. Personally, I think that the native language of the Prop should have been a variant of the Basic Stamp language. This would have made the transition from the BS1 and BS2 to the Prop much easier. Bean's PropBASIC is a fine language. I believe it's roots come from the SX/B language that he developed for the SX. Spin is fine, but I wish it would have conformed to some standard language rather than being a whole new language.
Ultimately, it comes down to whatever the programmer is most comfortable with. There is no reason to spend time learning a new language if you can accomplish your goals with the current tools you have. However, I feel it is hard to speak against a language unless you have learned at least some part of it, and tried it yourself. That's why I spent a few months immersing myself in the Forth language. I wanted to understand what the proponents of the language were talking about. I learned that some of their points were valid, but other points were highly exaggerated.
I would politely point out to Mickster that you didn't mention VC, VB in your original post. In fact I just looked at it and didn't see any reference to basic. Given the context of that OP you thought it was clear that you were referring to increased productivity using C vs spin and that at no time did you mention that C was superior to spin or make any disparaging statement about spin and then let it drop.
Those benefits being?
I agree, Scheme does look like gibberish.
Turns out though it is very easy. Places like MIT used it for ages to introduce programming to newbie undergrads. For someone who has never seen a program before "(+ 1 2 3)" is as easy to pick up as "1 + 2 + 3". It's amazing to watch some of the lectures you find on YouTube now a days. They have covered the whole language in a few lectures and are immediately in to CS concepts like traversing binary trees and so on. Scheme makes this so much easier than BASIC or pretty much any other HLL.
I totally agree with the BASIC Stamp concept. Easy for beginners and casual programmers. Heck, easy for anyone. I'm just not convinced BASIC is the way to go any more when we have so many other easy to use options. (no not Scheme)
As I said before, Parallax could have done themselves a big favour by ensuring the Prop could run those BASIC Stamp programs out of the box or with a little modification.
@Mickster Recent discussion has been about VB. Well, "those benefits" of other languages I was referring to include the fact that they do actually run on the machines I have to use. As opposed to not. That's a pretty major benefit
Now, I'm very sure you can do wonderful things in VB. For sure I have seen guys doing exactly that. This is a good thing. It just does not work in the wider world.
However PERL is a special case
I personally have never used VB. Back in the day, my secret weapon was QuickBASIC 4.5 (well the PDS 7.1, actually) + MASM.
Today I use Basic4Android for my machine controller HMIs and PropBasic for the Propeller
QuickBASIC, VB, it's all the same to me. Spend a long time writing an application in that, then, perhaps years later, try and run it somewhere else. Oops does not work. Start again. I have been bitten by and seen companies bitten by this phenomena may times over the years.
Enter the charms of C and such like languages. Programs I wrote ten or twenty years ago are still in use. Usually running on very different machines and with different operating systems than the original roll out. Others have taken them over and extended them.
I agree that perl is greatest language ever created!! I've personally never used another language like it!!
It is a very powerful language, but it is very difficult to get a good grasp on it, and finding those server errors can often be quite frustrating, especiallly if it is a very large script.
One typo can lead to hours of hair pulling
What is it?
And yet you don't hesitate to extoll the virtues of a very non-portable Spin language? My original statement in this thread was about hoping for a refined PropBasic.
You cannot express algorithms in it. It is not Turing complete. It is not a programming language.
LOL
I knew what the acronym meant, but I know you meant it is a Markup Language. When writing HTML, I always referred to it as HTML programming, but I was technically incorrect.
I'm not sure I extol the virtues of Spin much, purely as a language design ignoring it's implementation and environment. There are many things about it I don't like. White space block indenting, the weird operators, to name a few. It is at least simple to grasp for beginners to programming or casual Prop programmers.
I have said on occasion that the entire package, from the Prop architecture, to the instruction set and PASM, to the Spin byte codes, to the interpreter, to Spin itself and to the IDEs is a truly brilliant integrated whole.
What is not clear to me is how any BASIC for the Propeller offers anything more than is already there out of the box in Spin.
As far as I know we have a bunch of BASICs for the Prop, I have never looked into them, so presumably if that is what people want they can have it.
PropBasic is essentially high level PASM and in fact supports inline PASM code. I wrote a quadrature decoder and thought I would be able to hand optimise the generated PASM...I couldn't have written it better in straight PASM!
Hey IDBruce,
In Tachyon I have a Telnet terminal, FTP Access, HTML with ajax(forth style) access and a serial console. My application runs a PTU32 touchscreen and interfaces with multiple sensors. The state machine handles the output to control the devices. All this is done with 2 COGS and 30K of code using FORTH and Tachyon.
So I still have 6 COGS and 2K code space ( a world in FORTH/Tachyon), of course I have access to the 2GB SD card for forth snippets etc. I can log into the system via the console or Telnet and dynamically monitor the system or change it on the fly, it's completely shelf hosted.
I take issue with your "proof".
I always thought of it as a markup language.
I wanna see PropBASIC developed!
Me too! Its the only way I am going to be productive with the prop
@ Mickster
DOS and a wonderful programming language called QuickBASIC enabled....
...me to convert a cement batching plant system based on a BBC Micro (going obsolete and becoming unreliable), to a PC based system on a 4 inch square SOC board with flash memory for disc drive, monitoring and controlling six aggregate hoppers and two cement hoppers, strain gauges, relays and user interface with cement proof keypad etc. - no goto's or line numbers.
The BBC Basic and the Qbasic were very similar and then very different. BBC had line numbers and crude editor, but what a revelation with Qbasic - a text editor and NO line numbers - bliss. This is now replaced by FreeBasic and FreeDos- Hi res graphics and oodles of memory, and modern IDE.
@ Mickster
I really, really, really believe that a refined PropBASIC would be a huge success for the Prop. I for one would pay $$$ for such a thing.
Dollars! I'd pay Pounds....
Dave