Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Programming > HTML > followup to how to do this.......

Reply
Thread Tools

followup to how to do this.......

 
 
richard
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-11-2009
http://1littleworld.net/button2.jpg


A screenshot of the buttons I created using Run Basic and the code
used to create them with.

for n=1 to 50

a$="do0"+str$(n)
b$=zp$(n,1)

button #a$,b$,[display]
#a$ CSSClass("stateButton")
print

next n

Can you imagine hand coding 50 links in html the old fashioned way?

CSSClass is how you change the look of the button.
Without it, you get the standard black lettering on gray background
button.

The # is a unique identifier for each item, not an ID as in the
styling of an item.

[display] is a label meaning "Go to this section".
Without the print, the buttons would naturally be floated side by
side.

The original array was preloaded and I tap the state names from that
array. The zip codes are in the same array and they will be printed in
the same manner in another division.



 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
richard
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-11-2009
On Tue, 10 Mar 2009 21:43:38 -0400, richard <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:

>http://1littleworld.net/button2.jpg
>



http://1littleworld.net/button3.jpg

A look at how the second stage will appear and showing off the
slightly changed standard buttons.

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
asdf
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-11-2009

"richard" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> http://1littleworld.net/button2.jpg
>
>
> A screenshot of the buttons I created using Run Basic and the code
> used to create them with.
>
> for n=1 to 50
>
> a$="do0"+str$(n)
> b$=zp$(n,1)
>
> button #a$,b$,[display]
> #a$ CSSClass("stateButton")
> print
>
> next n
>
> Can you imagine hand coding 50 links in html the old fashioned way?
>
> CSSClass is how you change the look of the button.
> Without it, you get the standard black lettering on gray background
> button.
>
> The # is a unique identifier for each item, not an ID as in the
> styling of an item.
>
> [display] is a label meaning "Go to this section".
> Without the print, the buttons would naturally be floated side by
> side.
>
> The original array was preloaded and I tap the state names from that
> array. The zip codes are in the same array and they will be printed in
> the same manner in another division.
>
>
>


I don't see how this is any different from using any of the other
server-side programming languages, which, it must be said are already there
and widely supported.

In PHP for example, the code would be very, very similar, with the
(possible) exception that you would have to write a 'button' procedure. This
is hardly an arduous task, in fact it'd be a one or two liner.

So how is runbasic *better* than PHP, ASP, ASPX or server-side Java?


 
Reply With Quote
 
richard
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-11-2009
On Wed, 11 Mar 2009 13:37:47 +1100, "asdf" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>
>"richard" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>news:(E-Mail Removed).. .
>> http://1littleworld.net/button2.jpg
>>
>>
>> A screenshot of the buttons I created using Run Basic and the code
>> used to create them with.
>>
>> for n=1 to 50
>>
>> a$="do0"+str$(n)
>> b$=zp$(n,1)
>>
>> button #a$,b$,[display]
>> #a$ CSSClass("stateButton")
>> print
>>
>> next n
>>
>> Can you imagine hand coding 50 links in html the old fashioned way?
>>
>> CSSClass is how you change the look of the button.
>> Without it, you get the standard black lettering on gray background
>> button.
>>
>> The # is a unique identifier for each item, not an ID as in the
>> styling of an item.
>>
>> [display] is a label meaning "Go to this section".
>> Without the print, the buttons would naturally be floated side by
>> side.
>>
>> The original array was preloaded and I tap the state names from that
>> array. The zip codes are in the same array and they will be printed in
>> the same manner in another division.
>>
>>
>>

>
>I don't see how this is any different from using any of the other
>server-side programming languages, which, it must be said are already there
>and widely supported.
>
>In PHP for example, the code would be very, very similar, with the
>(possible) exception that you would have to write a 'button' procedure. This
>is hardly an arduous task, in fact it'd be a one or two liner.
>
>So how is runbasic *better* than PHP, ASP, ASPX or server-side Java?
>



AFAIK, run basic can do practically anything the others can do with a
major advancement. There is no need to reload the page.

When I have this completed, you won't even notice the time it takes
PHP or others to retrieve the data and display it. Unless maybe you're
using some extremely slow dial up service. Consider it something like
running a program on your hard drive at home.

What I would need to do this with in a standard php or regular html
environment is a bit of javascript. No JS here.

For me, run basic is ideal for what I need to have done on my sites.

 
Reply With Quote
 
Jonathan N. Little
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-11-2009
richard wrote:

>
> AFAIK, run basic can do practically anything the others can do with a
> major advancement. There is no need to reload the page.
>


Says who? Your little examples are just doing standard POST and GET
transactions...

> When I have this completed, you won't even notice the time it takes
> PHP or others to retrieve the data and display it. Unless maybe you're
> using some extremely slow dial up service. Consider it something like
> running a program on your hard drive at home.


Not quite.

>
> What I would need to do this with in a standard php or regular html
> environment is a bit of javascript. No JS here.


There is not AJAX there, you must hit a submit button, just like any
other server-side script. Only difference is other server-side scripting
*is* installed by default on servers.

>
> For me, run basic is ideal for what I need to have done on my sites.
>



--
Take care,

Jonathan
-------------------
LITTLE WORKS STUDIO
http://www.LittleWorksStudio.com
 
Reply With Quote
 
cwdjrxyz
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-11-2009
On Mar 10, 8:43*pm, richard <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> http://1littleworld.net/button2.jpg
>
> A screenshot of the buttons I created using Run Basic and the code
> used to create them with.
>
> for n=1 to 50
>
> * a$="do0"+str$(n)
> * b$=zp$(n,1)
>
> * button #a$,b$,[display]
> * #a$ CSSClass("stateButton")
> * print
>
> next n
>
> Can you imagine hand coding 50 links in html the old fashioned way?
>
> CSSClass is how you change the look of the button.
> Without it, you get the standard black lettering on gray background
> button.
>
> The # is a unique identifier for each item, not an ID as in the
> styling of an item.
>
> [display] is a label meaning "Go to this section".
> Without the print, the buttons would naturally be floated side by
> side.
>
> The original array was preloaded and I tap the state names from that
> array. The zip codes are in the same array and they will be printed in
> the same manner in another division.


I think the essence of what you are saying is that you can use a loop
to write much of the html code when you need code that varies in a
known way for each increment. Of course you can often do this locally
using a JS document.write in a loop, and you can use just about any
language you wish on a server to do so, since most languages that will
handle math and write commands can do something of this sort. I
usually use php rather than JS to avoid differences in JS response on
different browsers(not as important now as during the browser war era)
and the few cases when someone may have JS turned off. In addition JS
document.write is an xml error if you write and serve xhtml code
properly. However there are many other languages one can use on the
server that may be better adapted for some things than is php. If you
own the server, you can put just about any language you wish on it
that you can afford, but if you use a shared server provided by a
host, they may not be willing to install many other languages. There
are many special math programs that can be installed either on a
computer or a server. However many of these will cost you thousands of
US dollars, and some may require quit a bit of effort to install, even
if you know servers fairly well. The last I checked, various versions
of C and even Fortran could be bought and stored on a server. However,
if you share the server, some of these types of programs can greatly
slow down the server for others. For example, there are C and Fortran
programs that can take even several hours to run and that gobble up
most available memory on the server. In such cases, it often is much
better to run the programs on a local computer rather than on the web
using a server as a substitute for a modern mainframe computer or
supercomputer.

If you like to use basic, be my guest. However, at least for what I
usually do, I can get by with php and a bit of JS now and then when
something must be done locally on the computer. Even here you have to
be careful. JS and php are just enough alike to get you into trouble
if you use both. You keep having to remind yourself "I am writing php,
not JS" to avoid mixing JS and php. I would consider using another
server side language only if I had to do something that could not be
done in a reasonable way with what I now have.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Jonathan N. Little
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-11-2009
Martin Jay wrote:

> What advantages does Run BASIC offer?


IFAICT if you are a GWBasic fan and know no other languages...

--
Take care,

Jonathan
-------------------
LITTLE WORKS STUDIO
http://www.LittleWorksStudio.com
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Re: How include a large array? Edward A. Falk C Programming 1 04-04-2013 08:07 PM
How to followup for certificate Sachin Parab Microsoft Certification 3 08-19-2005 10:32 PM
USB vhdl code (followup) Rob Maris VHDL 3 08-08-2004 10:10 AM
followup: CGMP, IGMP Snooping, and the PIX Mike S. Whitlow Cisco 0 02-27-2004 05:43 PM
new acl ? followup Brian Bergin Cisco 0 11-21-2003 04:29 PM



Advertisments