QBASIC Programming for Dummies 630
| QBASIC Programming for Dummies | |
| author | Douglas Hergert |
| pages | 399 |
| publisher | IDG Books Worldwide, Inc |
| rating | 5 out of 10 |
| reviewer | HeavyJay |
| ISBN | 1568840934 |
| summary | "The Fun and Easy Way to Learn QBasic Programming." |
I've read countless books and online tutorials on QBASIC, C++, PHP, and other various languages. I'm sure all you wise programmers can tell me the first sample program that comes to mind with any language, can't you? The classic 'Hello, world!' example. This easy app starts off would-be programmers with a level of confidence and understanding. To my surprise, Douglas Hergert decided not to use the ever-popular example program. So, you might be wondering, what did he use in it's place? A four-page-long currency converter.
This was Mistake #1.
The book started off making me feel stupider than I actually am. This oftentimes discourages readers from pursuing, and the book takes to the shelf, perhaps never to be picked up again. I've noticed that the best way to capture a reader's attention (and explain the most) is to start off with PRINT, INPUT, IF...THEN and GOTO. Then move on to loops, and get technical from there. It best prepares the reader for everything in store, rather than making them feel like idiots. The book didn't do this at all. It started off making in such a way that anyone without experience would be completely lost. IF...THEN doesn't even come in until the eleventh chapter, despite being one of the most important tools in the language!
So, what good can I say about the book? Not much, except that it came with some practical applications. This brings up another grievance I have with it, that being the lack of an accompanying disc. I feel every book on programming with long examples ought to come with a disc containing all example programs, so that the reader can tweak and observe them as he sees fit, without typing in five pages of code. The best way to learn is often by example, and discouraging lazy people doesn't help the learning process along.
Alas, the book does contain some humour, as it's other brothers and sisters from IDG often do. With chapter titles such as Text, Lies, and Videotape and How to Manage Arguments and Influence People, a book can't be completely bad.
Although I suggest beginners steer clear of this book, it can be useful to experienced programmers (supposing they don't think QBASIC a waste of time). It goes deeply into data structures, arrays, and databases. There are many helpful features, but it's definitely not a book to learn from.
You can purchase the QBASIC Programming for Dummies from bn.com. Slashdot welcomes readers' book reviews -- to see your own review here, read the book review guidelines, then visit the submission page.
Redundant??? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Redundant??? (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Redundant??? (Score:5, Insightful)
Didn't get me any women, but it (QBasic) as a good springboard into computers.
Re:Redundant??? (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Redundant??? (Score:2)
Re:Redundant??? (Score:3, Funny)
To which I said, "More like blasé"
--Joey
Re:Redundant??? (Score:5, Insightful)
What's wrong with PASCAL? I'd rather learn on PASCAL than VB anyday. PASCAL looks more like C++ and Java (and C#) than VB does. Learning VB from any other 'decent' language is a snap. But learning C++ or Java from VB is a pain in the ass.
Students should be learning with a command line. No GUI apps to start. Learn from the ground up. Otherwise you'll be able to do things, but not necessarily understand them.
And yes, I still believe in teaching assembly...
Re:Redundant??? (Score:4, Insightful)
The problem is not with GUI-based languages; it's with tools that hide their inner workings from you. VB is like that but so is VC and MFC.
Smalltalk, on the other hand, is also purely GUI-based but it's also completely transparent. The entire system--including the GUI (usually)--is written in Smalltalk and you can browse it and modify it just like any other part of the system.
(A good open-source Smalltalk system is Squeak [squeak.org] if you're interested.)
I get the impression from looking at M$-ware that they have divided the world into rulers and peons with their developers in the ruling class and the customers as the peons. When this extends into their development tools it's either "this is too hard for you to understand" (in the case of VB and the like) or "you don't need to know this--just read the API documentation" for VC. Whether or not a GUI is involved is relevant only in that MS seems to be trying to get rid of the CLI.
If I were teaching a programming course, I would avoid MS tools (and those that try to emulate them) like the plague.
Re:Redundant??? (Score:3, Informative)
Ahh the arrogance of the ignorant.
Pascal beats your silly VB toy in every way imaginable. Go get Delphi [borland.com] , buy a good book on it, and learn something.
Re:Redundant??? (Score:3, Interesting)
I learned Pascal and QBASIC at the same time. I tought myself QBASIC because it was what I had at home, and I learned Pascal in high school (that was back in 1998). Needless to say, the language that helped me learn all of the important stuff was Pascal. Pascal is very a very structured procedural language. QBASIC makes it too easy to write spaghetti code, and VB just, well, sucks. I believe that it would benefit all beginning programmers to learn on a language like Pascal, so moving to a real producti
Re:Redundant??? (Score:2)
Not me. I started with Applesoft [applefritter.com] (and played with the Integer Basic a little), then 6502 assembly (Applesoft was slow), then USCD Pascal (while I dabbled with Gra-forth.) Then I replaced the Apple ][ with an Amstrad PC, and got Turbo Pascal and dabbled with Prolog.
Sometime later I got an account on the Suns at school, where I discovered some languages that I still use today ...
Re:Redundant??? (Score:2)
Note that I didn't replace the Apple ][ so that I could program in new languages (but it worked out well.) I did it solely so I could play this [uo.com], which was the first Ultima not available on the Apple II. Curse you, Lord British. 48k not enough for you?
And I should have added this to the original post, but yes I do know that Applesoft and Qbasic are fairly similar, both being BASIC.
Re:Redundant??? (Score:2)
If you like Ultima check this [u5lazarus.com] out.
A group of grad students in Purdue's CG dept are contributing to a remake of Ultima V. They asked some undergrads (one of them being me) to help them out with various aspects of recreation, like textures or worldmap modeling.
Re:Redundant??? (Score:2)
Started with Logo, and then HyperTalk. Then I leard Commodore Basic and GW-Basic. By the time QuickBasic (QBasic is just QuickBasic with no compiler) came around, I was already using Borland C.
Re:Redundant??? (Score:2, Funny)
Q.) What'd the farmer say when he couldn't find his tractor?
A.) He said: "Where's my tractor?"
Man, I hope whoever modded the previous post gets around to mine. I should be at +5 in no time!
Page 1 (Score:3, Insightful)
Seriously, I learned QBASIC, and it had me so brain damaged for so long that it took me forever to grasp PERL, and I've still never quite gotten Java, even though I took a college course on the subject.
Stay faaaaaar away from anything with the word 'BASIC' in it. You've been warned.
Re:Page 1 (Score:2)
This same idea came up in the "what to start kids on for programming" article, and a lot of asked, what's all this about? How does it damage you? Yeah, you're thinking like a scripter rather than in subroutines or objects, but so? It's still an introduction to breaking up a process step by step....
Frankly,
Avoiding BASIC... (Score:4, Funny)
Where were you when I was 10 years old in my hobby shop buying my first Dungeons and Dragons set?
Re:Page 1 (Score:3, Funny)
If you want to learn to program, I would suggest starting with something a little more structured like Python or Ruby. Both of those languages are near to my heart.
Re:Redundant??? (Score:2, Funny)
Apparently not, didn't you read the review? You need to be a dummy with a PhD!
Engineers paradise more like. (Score:3, Funny)
One line.........
10 OPEN "COM1:" as #1
explains it all. For RS232 work, QBASIC is gold standard for me.... For exerything else.. Forth baby!!!!
Re:Redundant??? (Score:4, Insightful)
NOW, the POINT of this book review would be more or less to the people (or perhaps parents) looking for books to recommend to their friends/children looking for a foot in the door.
Chapter Summary (Score:5, Funny)
Chapter 2: That game where the monkeys throw bananas at each other.
Chapter 3: That game..
QBASIC ?? (Score:2, Interesting)
if it's in a corporate world, flee while it's time
else, why not use python as a first language ? or, Java ?
I mean, you could learn something simple, like, LISP ?
Re:QBASIC ?? (Score:4, Insightful)
Programming is a rather abstract concept. Best to start with something where you don't have to trip over stupid things like case sensitivity or declaring variables.
Nothing wrong with starting with Basic.
Re:QBASIC ?? (Score:2)
Who realy is the Dummy? (Score:2, Funny)
Actualy I have read several of those books, the one on linux was a decent read for a noobie.
Re:Who realy is the Dummy? (Score:5, Funny)
The person who misspelled "really"
Twice!
QBasic (Score:2, Interesting)
I never understood why they did away with line numbers in QBasic. Seemed like a very big part of GWBasic.
Re:QBasic (Score:2)
Re:QBasic (Score:2)
For what it's worth, I learned on QBasic and think it was a really good starting point.
Re:QBasic (Score:2)
RENUM 100,10
Re:QBasic (Score:2)
Re:QBasic (Score:3, Informative)
From there, the only lines that actually still needed their numbers were the lines that were called by name in a GOSUB or GOTO line, and there was no reason to limit the "line number" t
Re:QBasic (Score:2)
And yes, I do use Visual Basic when I need a quick GUI/database app.
go ahead and laugh (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:go ahead and laugh (Score:2, Funny)
More like a "leaving your cave for dummies" book.
Re:go ahead and laugh (Score:2)
I was really impressed with companies selling software written in Pascal (including DB engines ), but QBASIC is on another league completly.
Re:go ahead and laugh (Score:2)
I wouldn't say QBasic is a toy either, but it's certainly not as useful as it was in the days most folks with a PC ran DOS console apps. Pascal, on the other hand, has kept up with the times as far as libraries and the like. You can write full-own GUI apps that use the OS's native GUI library.
Yes, I know you noted that Pascal was in another league, but in a way to imply that
Yeah, But Companies Don't Need To Care (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:go ahead and laugh (Score:5, Funny)
Re:go ahead and laugh (Score:2)
Having worked for a POS company in the not-too-distant past (who develped in Business Basic on UNIX and -- gasp! -- SuperDOS), I can't believe the prices companies will pay for the stuff. It's simply insane.
Re:go ahead and laugh (Score:5, Insightful)
Am I the only person who sees nothing wrong with this?
As long as the application does what the client wants, is bug free, works well, easy to use and saves them money - who cares what it is written in?
What is next (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:What is next (Score:2)
Re:What is next (Score:2)
QBASIC is the first language. (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:QBASIC is the first language. (Score:2, Informative)
Maybe if the schools were better you could count them.
It might be better to pick up a language that is more commonly used though. For instance C would be a decent language. Once you learn the simple IO libraries you can do some fun stuff. You can then learn about all the basics of programming like flow control, functions and such.
Re:QBASIC is the first language. (Score:2)
-Sean
Q-what? (Score:5, Funny)
I would feel pretty stupid actually reading a QBASIC book in 2003. Modern programming languages are easier to learn than QBASIC.
In short:
10 PRINT "QBASIC SUCKS"
20 GOTO 10
Re:Q-what? (Score:5, Funny)
They are? By what reconning? These days they turn this:
print(a + b)
Into this:
am = new math.ArithmeticManager()
opA = new math.Operand((float) a)
opB = new math.Operand((float) b)
am.addOperand(opA)
am.addOperand(opB)
am.operator = new math.operators.Addition()
am.executeMathOperation()
system.io.output.print(am.mathOperationResult())
Re:Q-what? (Score:2)
printf(a+b);
Re:Q-what? (Score:2)
print(1+2)
is a complete, totally legal program.
Re:Q-what? (Score:5, Funny)
You need to brush up your skill (Score:2)
10 ? "QBASIC SUCKS" : goto 10
As for programming languages, which one do you have in mind? C++, Java or Pascal are definitely much harder to get started than Basic.
Re:Q-what? (Score:2)
Hey, I wouldn't write a "QBASIC SUCKS" program in QBASIC, now would I? Of course it's GWBasic ;-)
Here ya go... (Score:5, Informative)
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/1
there ya go.
Running MS-DOS: QBasic by MS Press.
I'm *NOT* a fan of Microsoft, but this IS a well-written book that covers the QBasic language well.
I used this many years ago when I wanted to modify the source code to VirtualBBS 6.12 (Remember that mess?)
Coming up next on Slashdot Book Reviews... (Score:5, Funny)
"Changing Vacuum Tubes in your ENIAC for Dummies"
"4004 Assembly Made Easy"
Re:Coming up next on Slashdot Book Reviews... (Score:2)
>>"Changing Vacuum Tubes in your ENIAC for Dummies"
>>"4004 Assembly Made Easy"
What is this? A post to the prototype of usenet that got lost in the seventies, but that now have magically found its way through an electronic wormhole to /. ?
Duh? (Score:2)
1) QBASIC? That's so 1992...
2) You bought a DUMMIES book for QBASIC. It's like buying a Dummies book for cooking Kraft Macaroni.
Re:Duh? (Score:2)
2) You bought a DUMMIES book for QBASIC. It's like buying a Dummies book for cooking Kraft Macaroni.
1.) So? He's trying to understand what programming is, he's not trying to run out and get a job as a software engineer.
2.) Can't say that comment was particularly insightful. QBasic is programming, like it or not. It may not be as efficient or structured as the competitors of its day, but it's still something that requires study to learn.
So I guess what I'm really saying
Re:Duh? (Score:2)
Who says you never learn anything useful in college?
Re:Duh? (Score:4, Informative)
Tip: don't cook the macaroni in beer, but use the beer in the cheese and dairy mixture. Just heat it up in a saucepan (you can do this in the hot saucepan you just cooked the pasta in) and you have an excellent beer-cheese sauce. Reduce the amount of other liquid, of course, or your creation will be runny.
Stronger beers work better. Pretend pilseners like Bud will not be so good.
Remember: don't play with cheese sauce powder near an open flame. Unless you know what you are doing. And like setting things on fire. And second-degree burns. But only then.
QBASIC?!?! (Score:2)
QuickBASIC was an interesting product in its day, except for the fact that the simplest programs were bloated by about 400% due to the overhead of all the standard libraries in the runtimes. Or you could create a "Standalone EXE" which contained the minimum necessary procedures. (If only V
Re:QBASIC?!?! (Score:2)
Just to clarify, you aren't claiming that C is OO, are you - you mean "structured and OO language, respectively" right? That's okay then... Yeah, I'll go with that, although C++ is pretty damn good as an OO language, especially for someone who knows C.
Why would people move from good, useful languages that they have the hang of, to use VB? I'm not trying to MS-Bash here, but what use is VB if you are a
OK, it was bad at some stuff.. (Score:2)
... but if it teaches you how to modify the banana into a "Redemer" type weapon and render the Gorilla in 3D, I'll buy it.
Wow! (Score:3, Funny)
QBASIC for Dummies (Score:2)
Re:QBASIC for Dummies (Score:2)
Don't buy Dummies books for languages. Period. If you can, try to find the O'Reilly Windows 95 in a Nutshell (yes, Windows *95*) book somewhere; it looks from the index like it has about 20 pages on QBASIC.
Not really, I think that dummies book for languages are quite good when the languages are not computer languages, for example, their 'German for Dummies' is quite good...
Coming soon (Score:2)
Re:Coming soon (Score:3, Funny)
DIETEL's "JAVA how to program" is like this (Score:2)
Why am I mentioning this? The QBASIC "Currency Converter" program reminds me of Dietel's example program for RMI. MY GOD! It was like 10 pages of pain! ANd it was only mildly useful- it was about WEATHER report updates! who cares? Some of my
Still Taught Out There!! (Score:2)
Re:Still Taught Out There!! (Score:2)
What was your point?
If you are in CS, they assume that you should be taught the basics with a language that will put you on the path to deeper meaning. BASIC is a good business language (don't argue, this has been clearly proven in at least the past 12 years), but is a dead-end for getting deeper into systems (drivers, OS coding, etc.)
yes (Score:2)
Ok, to make a serious point, is there a QBASIC interpretor for linux? I have some code that I don't want to bother re-writing in C, and I want to first get it working on linux then re-write it as I have time.
Why is this here? (Score:2)
*crickets chirping*
RIGHT?
It is not bad to learn QBasic... (Score:5, Insightful)
WAY back when when I got my first computer, DOS was this wierd arcane alter-world from Windows 3.1, I found QBasic. It CAME with my computer. I didn't have the internet, so free, downloadadable compilers were not an option. For me, QBasic was my only link to the programming world.
I never had a book, btw, so all I had to learn BASIC was a vague memory of LET and PRINT commands, and the help file. The help file was awesome. It is, to date, the only good docs I have ever seen from MS. After 6 years, I could do stuff in BASIC that my friends who started out in Pascal and C++ could not dream of doing. Why? Because their learning curve made it impossible.
Before I found QBasic, I wanted to be a writer or a chef or something silly like that. QBasic introduced me into the programming world in which I can now call myself a professional.
So, I'm going to do something right now that, as a Linux user, I thought I would never do...
Thanks, Microsoft.
Re:It is not bad to learn QBasic... (Score:2)
That *was* a great help file.
And on DOS computers, QBasic/QuickBasic was the one of the best cheap (both in terms of expense and time
Re:It is not bad to learn QBasic... (Score:3, Interesting)
The fact that this is possible makes QBASIC the obvious choice for self-taught beginning programmers. But in any other environment, Java is by far a better starting place for newbies.
So do I... (Score:3, Interesting)
But BASIC is really awkward if you want to write structured, maintainable large programs. The largest Qbasic program I have ever written during the one or two years was about 5kB in source code.
Then I learned Pascal at school, and got hold of a copy of Turbo Pascal 5.5. In a month I switch to Pascal exclusively. Anyway, the programs look cleaner (well, clean for a kid's code, still much ug
A Better Choice (Score:2, Informative)
In my experience, a far better book for beginners than Qbasic for Dummies is The Idiot's Guide to Qbasic. It is very straight forward and much easier for an absolute beginner to understand.
Setting the Wayback machine a bit further, Perhaps the best "beginner's basic" book that I have ever seen was How to program the Commodore 64 (If you have never programmed a computer before). Although very system specific, it explained concepts like arrays in language a beginner might actually understand.
BASIC... (Score:2)
QBasic? (Score:2)
I wrote in it, as a passing interest. I made a few executables of stupid graphic programs (draw moving lines and dots) with our BBS names and phone numbers in it.. That was back in the days of scripting BBS's and other passively fun things..
Maybe they should have a review of BBS's for dummies, so we can relive other things that are long since dead.
Why use QBASIC at ALL? (Score:5, Informative)
16-bit 100% compatible DOS compiler...
32-bit Console Compiler and GUI Compiler for Windows. Full GUI programs in less than 2k. VERY fast compiled code, very small, no RTL, compile to EXE or DLL. PowerBASIC is really cool. I use their compilers all the time.
AND they are coming out with a Linux compiler! w00t.
No Disc can be a good thing. (Score:5, Interesting)
Here's a nice quote from a /real/ programming book (Score:2, Interesting)
It is practically impossible to teach good programming style to students that have had prior exposure to BASIC : as potential programmers they are mentally mutilated beyond hope of regeneration. [E.W. Dijkstra]
What the Hell??? (Score:2)
WTF? (Score:5, Interesting)
I'm new to the world of programming...
and the review (also written by HeavyJay) says:
I've read countless books and online tutorials on QBASIC, C++, PHP, and other various languages.
So WTF... you've read countless books on QBASIC, yet you claim to be new to the world of programming and therefore need to read "QBASIC for Dummies"? Something doesn't make sense here...
Punctuation error (Score:2)
Is Qbasic even still shipping? (Score:2)
Or did i miss something here?
And the reason for learning this language is? (Score:2)
I mean, COBOL is lively compared to Qbasic. COBOL is a fucking RAVER compared to Qbasic.
MS doesn't even include Qbasic in it's OS's anymore. Didn't they stop with Windows ME?
QBasic vs. Others (Score:3, Insightful)
No, learn C++ first. (Score:3, Flamebait)
So, I suggest C++. That may sound appauling at first to some, but here's why.
Programmers absolutely have to know how to work with memory. It's a fact and it's one I think will never change, no matter how abstracted or garbage-coll
QBASIC skills remain important today. (Score:2)
QBasic Fundamentals (Score:2)
I just googled the professors name with QBasic and came up with a new textbook at Amazon [amazon.com]. Although I haven't seen it myself I'm sure it will be very useful.
Why 5 out of 10 rating? (Score:2)
People often complain about ratings inflation in
How can the author give such a negative review then rate the book at 5 out of 10?
What does a book have to do to rate a 2, kill someone?
QBasic is still used (Score:5, Informative)
The author claimed that it wasn't a QBasic application, but the error messages when it crashes tell a different story.
The QBasic integrated editor was a real joy, and it's hard to find a good, lightweight equal. Python [python.org] is too big, C++ [bloodshed.net] lacks the "fun" factor...
Lua [lua.org] with the SciTE [scintilla.org] editor comes close, if only it had builtin help.
I only stopped using QBasic after repeatedly running into the 32K memory barrier. I moved to Euphoria [rapideuphoria.com], a nice interpreted language. I missed the QBasic editor that I ended up writing a clone for Euphoria [rapideuphoria.com].
Heck, QBasic left such a mark that I ended up writing a Basic interpreter of my own [sourceforge.net].
Get 4.5 (Score:4, Interesting)
And it's a good read. I remember a track meet I went to in elementary school, where I spent at least half the time reading that book..
Incidentally, QuickBasic 4.5 has amazing online documentation. Anything and everything about the language is documented in there. Very useful.
If I were you, I'd go looking around for a used copy of QuickBasic 4.5, and make sure you get the ref manual with it. It's definitely a worthwhile investment, for someone who's just learning, and for anyone who wants to actually do something with QuickBasic.
For those of you who are wondering "why the heck would he choose qbasic," let me just say this in qbasic's defense. It really is still the best language out there for the average beginning programmer. QBasic's included with all the early Microsoft OSes, so it's on all the old hand-me-downs from yesterday. And it's fun.
I'll always have a soft spot in my heart for QB. I've used Borland Pascal, which was amazing, but flawed in it's graphics. (BGI was a pain in the ass; everybody wrote their own graphics lib instead.) By comparison, QB's elegant..
SCREEN 13
CIRCLE 100, 100, 50, 3
Ah, QB.. *sigh*... You were the perfect language, at the time..
Old review, but stirs up some nostalgia (Score:4, Interesting)
Of course, I wasn't playing a whole lot of cool games on my 286 with a 10 meg harddrive, and 1 meg of RAM. So I just played around with MSDOS, tried to figure out how it worked, how programs worked. I started just editing
I took a Pascal class in 9th grade, and quickly found my calling. Not 2 weeks into the class I was learning how to write x86 assembly using the asm { } calls in Pascal, and inline() code as well. I had cool text fading effects and smooth scrolling, etc. And no, I wasn't learning it from the teacher, they were still on println, I was learning a good bit on my own. Turbo Pascal 7 had a pretty decent help system. I used Pascal quite a bit, especially in the BBS scene, as it was the programming language of choice for BBS software and doors, Telegard, Renegade, Iniquity, Oblivion/2, TriBBS, all written in Pascal. By this time I had moved from MSDOS 5 to OS/2 Warp 3. I was running a telnet BBS software using some of dink's software to create the TCPIP->Fossil emulation. Those were fun times, before the dot coms were stealing money from investors and before we had big government enacting foolish laws.
I then came across Linux. It was a 1.x version, one of the early Red Hat distributions. Just like today, it was crap. I quickly picked up the SAMs (or maybe QUE) Slackware book that had a CD of the distro on it. I found myself a platform I could start learning C on. Once I got into Linux, a whole new world opened. C, shell scripting, Perl, eventually PHP, I started into Java, and so on and so forth. And the learning never stops. Good times, good times.. Now I have to worry if something I program will be used by terrorists and I'm going to end up in jail for "aiding" terrorists, facilitating the spread of MP3s, or other Copyrighted programs. I miss those days.
Re:Arghh (Score:2)