[futurebasic] Classes Shells Wrappers Objects and FB Now.

Message: < previous - next > : Reply : Subscribe : Cleanse
Home   : December 1997 : Group Archive : Group : All Groups

From: Robert Covington <t88@...>
Date: Fri, 19 Dec 1997 00:49:08 -0800
>In a message dated 12/18/97 8:54 PM, you wrote:
>>When can we start working on this and............what's it gonna be???
>One thing that you will start seeing probably very soon after the release
>of FB^3, is a collection of freeware classes to be used with the FB^3
>object class library.  Because of time constraints (you guys are so
>impatient!  ;^) ), the base class library will be full-featured, but
>probably very simple to start off.  Object libraries inherently lend very
>well to programmers adding on by building their own subclasses, so the
>fact that the library starts out simple won't be a problem.  I am sure we
>will end up setting up a section for third-party classes on our site -
>I'd like to have a central place availalable for collection.
>So you guys may want to start thinking about writing code you can "wrap"
>in class shells when the time comes, and ideas on what types of objects
>you would like to see added to the collection.
>Just a thought...  :-)
>|       David Blache - Developer       |


 I must have missed class class; I slept through it, I reckon. What would
be some examples of classes, subclasses, and perhaps skipped classes?

What is an object exactly; an example of one? Why are they called objects?

I mean how do all these things relate to what is known as a LOCAL FN in
today's FB? And if they are just pre-written FN's you can plug in why can't
they be called that?  Are they just pre-compiled codeballs you pass
parameters to like a CDEF?

What are class shells in terms of the current FB syntax and structure?
Another name for an include file or big LOCAL FN?

I find this confusing. Still. If these questions are dumb, well, that's
because this stuff isn't explained well as regards terms, and I have no
idea what is going on here (duh :) )...yet. Probably mentioned in the big
terror thread a while back, but I must have missed it or found it
unfathomable as presented.
Is there any alternative lingo for all this stuff that relates to the world
as we know it now in FB that makes this more understandable?

Class and SubClass and Objects and Inheritances seem to be like Quantum
Theory for BASIC; they can be explained, but in doing so, what is being
explained seems to become unexplainable. <G>

I want Newtonian BASIC, even Relativistic BASIC. Quantum BASIC isn't basic
anymore, though I guess it would be cool to be able to use $uper$trings,
but that is only a theory at this point. I mean string.


Robert Covington