-> Disagree and I mean no disrespect.  Modern programming consists
-> generally of two major sections - the meat and the user interface.
-> The meat" is what I like the best and it most assuredly takes
-> practice and therefore an environment in which to learn.
->
-> One can go directly to something like VB and need to dork with a
-> complex GUI while learning programming logic.  Or one can use a nice
-> environment like QB to learn.  My implication isn't that learning in
-> QB is as far as it can go.  I wrote a nice billing program in QB.
-> Chris Gunn earns most of his living in QB/PDS.
->
-> So I think you take offense prematurely.
I didn't take offence at all! Having taught school for a number of
years - including teaching programming - I have developed a good tough
hide. Offending me is not easy.
Clearly, your first paragraph above is true. However, my point is that
there are languages which are so unlike BASIC in their fundamental
concepts and structures that, if fluency in one of these languages is
the ultimate goal, practicing with QB may turn out to be more of a
hindrance than a help. If you want to speak Chinese, it's not much use
learning Spanish first!
I do agree that if you want to learn VB or some other language that is
conceptually like QB in most respects, then QB is a nice stepping-stone
on the way there. However, this raises the question of why to learn VB
at all, if you intend to become fluent in QB first. As Alan Turing
proved, many years ago, all programming languages (above a certain very
minimal level) are essentially equivalent. They can all be used to write
programs that will do identical things. No programming problem is
solvable in one language that is not also solvable in all the others.
True, some languages may require programs that are much more complex and
slower to run than others, but they are all capable of performing the
same tasks.
My own experience is that one can become a much better programmer, in
the sense of being able to write programs quickly and reliably which
will efficiently perform any required task, by becoming really
proficient in one language rather than by messing around with a whole
lot of them. Half-learning QB, then half-learning VB, and half-learning
C++, and so on, is a lot less useful than knowing any one of them really
well. If you know QB then, generally speaking, stick to it. Don't let
yourself get blown this way and that by the winds of trendy fashion.
Time to get off my soap-box1
                             dow
--- PCBoard (R) v15.3 (OS/2) 5
---------------