Page 2 of 3

Posted: Sun Aug 24, 2003 2:39 am
by Rebel
Hard to say. May take you a week, may take a month or more. It all depends upon how easy comprehension and coding comes to you --

Posted: Sun Aug 24, 2003 2:45 am
by the ARK
I guess I'll find out soon enough. Thanks for your help! :D

Posted: Sun Aug 24, 2003 2:34 pm
by Rebel
Becoming an expert, such as Andres, or proficient such as Remdul, takes more time than a few months, but get started and see how you do.

Who knows, perhaps you'll be a natural. It'd also be helpful to u if you consulted with others more knowledgable than I, which btw, isn't very knowledgable!

:shock:

Posted: Sun Aug 24, 2003 6:52 pm
by the ARK
Well, I've been looking on the internet, and I'll get the book today, but it doesn't seem too hard. What with the variables being true and false and that stuff, but I'll see soon enough. Thanks again.

Posted: Sun Aug 24, 2003 7:58 pm
by Troodon
I started programming computers fifteen years ago and now I have a bioinformatics company. Here is my advice: do NOT start with C/C++/C# if you don't intend to do operating system programming, or use some exotic libraries that are only available as C source; try Pascal instead (http://www.freepascal.org; lots of tutorials, documentation, and code are freely available on the Web). Also, avoid Java.

There are three types of software: console, windows (graphics) , and service (daemon). If you just want to hack into something without developing a window-based Graphic User Interface, which is harder to develop than a console program, then stick with console mode programming (e.g., TPAadd). But if you choose to develop a GUI on Windows then try Delphi (a commercial version of Pascal; you can download or order a free time-limited demo then... well, there are ways to keep the copy functional).

Posted: Sun Aug 24, 2003 8:04 pm
by the ARK
It probably needs to work in Windows, because of the layout I had in mind. Why not C++?

Posted: Sun Aug 24, 2003 11:40 pm
by Troodon
Why not C++?
Because it's one of the most difficult software development languages. It's hard to explain if you have no programming experience. A friend of mine, who is a systems engineer, used to put it this way: C is like a this gymnast while Pascal is like a strong bodybuilder -- there are things they can both do and things one of them may be better at than the other one. But C++, the object-oriented version of C (Free Pascal also has an OOP mode), is notoriously complicated. Now, there are people who use it for a living but you also have to think in terms of how much you wish to invest yourself into learning and using C++. However, simply take all of the above as "IMO". ;)

Posted: Sun Aug 24, 2003 11:46 pm
by the ARK
I've been looking on an online tutorial for C++ and it seems very simple. I'm understanding pretty much everything it says the first time through. Unless C++ gets drastically more difficult, I'm probably sticking with it.

Posted: Mon Aug 25, 2003 2:31 am
by Andres
I wouldn't recommend anyone start in C/C++ either. C is full of quirks which can make finding problems in code very hard. Also, writing a user interface in C++ can be a pain, it's easier in something like Delphi or Visual Basic.

Posted: Mon Aug 25, 2003 3:24 am
by the ARK
Yes, but those cost money. :?

Posted: Mon Aug 25, 2003 3:53 am
by machf
There is a free VisualBASIC clone... I think its name started with "E". Oh, yes, now I remember, I believe it's "Envelop BASIC".

I'd recommend starting with old QuickBASIC (so that you'll actually learn something), then proceed to some other language. For example, RapidQ, which is free, available both for Windows and Linux, and can compile QuickBASIC programs with only some minor changes and also allows you to do GUI-oriented programs. Also, someone ported the OpenGL libraries for it, though unfortunately didn't provide any instructions or examples on how to use them (and since practically all existing OpenGL examples seem to have been written in C++, that's what has prevented me from learning to use OpenGL so far)...

Posted: Mon Aug 25, 2003 4:05 am
by the ARK
Works for me; whatever gets the job done, lol

Posted: Tue Aug 26, 2003 4:40 pm
by machf
I remember MS C++ and Visual C++ from about 10 years ago, and a program in compiled QuickBASIC would run faster than the same program (well, written using the same structure, I mean) compiled with C++. And that thing wouldn't even compile several of its own examples! I still have the notes I took from the manual somewhere...

Posted: Wed Aug 27, 2003 12:02 am
by the ARK
Lol,
I got a QBASIC Book and read it today, along with most of the documentation for RapidQ, so I'll be able to get working with that soon.

Posted: Fri Oct 31, 2003 2:29 pm
by Asjad
lol :lol: i wanna learn program languages as well........