At 06:19 PM 3/27/01 -0000, you wrote:
> This technique is fine as long as you aren't going to trap other user
>
> This is because executing code outside the for/next loop in response
> to a button click or other user event could cause the state of the
> internal stack that LB uses to manage loops to become invalid.
>
> I'll put together a little code to do this in a more robust way.
>
> -Carl
>
I believe that the upper limit has to do with the max value of a long
integer, which is actually 65535, but one minute is pretty much the max for
a timer. I'll look forward to seeing Carl's code. Here is the way I do
it, although it is probably not the greatest.
minutes=3 'length to run timer
timer 60000, [anotherMinute]
[userInput]
print "Type something and press enter."
input var$
print "You typed ";var$
print
goto [userInput]
[anotherMinute]
totalminutes=totalminutes+1
print
print "TOTAL MINUTES IS: ";totalminutes
if totalminutes>=minutes then [done]
wait
[done]
beep:beep:beep
timer 0
print
print "TIME IS UP."
end
Hey Carl I sent you a direct email about my 1.41 to 2.0x
registration about two weeks ago. I did not and do not want to take
up list space asking business questions. Could you send me a
responding email?
I appreciate this discussion but you guy have lost me. Since I am
still working with 1.41 and TIMER is a 2.0 statement. Would someone
please explain the syntax and meaning. Also while you are at it
explain wait. AND yes I tried reading the 2.0x doc. Unfortunatly they
just look like a rehash of the 1.4X doc and some of the statements
are not even mentioned in the command reference. I may have and older
beta version of 2.0x I think it is 2.04 so I might not have the most
current help file. But I do think there needs to be a complete
rewrite of the help file.
--- In libertybasic@y..., "D. Jempson" <dj@j...> wrote:
> It seems that the TIMER statement will only work accurately with
periods of up to one minute (60000 milliseconds). For periods of
over one minute I have worked around the limitation like so:
>
> for i = 1 to minutes
> timer 60000, [anotherMinute]
> wait
> [anotherMinute]
> timer 0
> next i
>
> Is this the "correct" way to do it, or is there another, more
elegant solution?
>
> Derek
--- In libertybasic@y..., sniper_lt@h... wrote:
> Hey Carl I sent you a direct email about my 1.41 to 2.0x
> registration about two weeks ago. I did not and do not want to take
> up list space asking business questions. Could you send me a
> responding email?
Oops. Sorry about that. I'll respond privately.
-Carl
Well, what else can I say but go and download the released product!
Let me know if that improves your view. ;-)
http://www.libertybasic.com/where.html
Thanks,
-Carl
--- In libertybasic@y..., sniper_lt@h... wrote:
> I appreciate this discussion but you guy have lost me. Since I am
> still working with 1.41 and TIMER is a 2.0 statement. Would someone
> please explain the syntax and meaning. Also while you are at it
> explain wait. AND yes I tried reading the 2.0x doc. Unfortunatly
they
> just look like a rehash of the 1.4X doc and some of the statements
> are not even mentioned in the command reference. I may have and
older
> beta version of 2.0x I think it is 2.04 so I might not have the
most
> current help file. But I do think there needs to be a complete
> rewrite of the help file.
>
>
> --- In libertybasic@y..., "D. Jempson" <dj@j...> wrote:
> > It seems that the TIMER statement will only work accurately with
> periods of up to one minute (60000 milliseconds). For periods of
> over one minute I have worked around the limitation like so:
> >
> > for i = 1 to minutes
> > timer 60000, [anotherMinute]
> > wait
> > [anotherMinute]
> > timer 0
> > next i
> >
> > Is this the "correct" way to do it, or is there another, more
> elegant solution?
> >
> > Derek
When using the loadbmp command in LB v2+, as long as I use a string with
letters in it for the "name" I have no problem. When I use a numeric only
string I get the following error...
BASIC PROGRAM HALTED
bitmap named 5 not found
the following snippets will serve as an example
this does not produce an error
loadbmp "1d", "bmp\2dice1.bmp" 'load our dice images
loadbmp "2d", "bmp\2dice2.bmp"
loadbmp "3d", "bmp\2dice3.bmp"
loadbmp "4d", "bmp\2dice4.bmp"
loadbmp "5d", "bmp\2dice5.bmp"
loadbmp "6d", "bmp\2dice6.bmp"
this produces the error as described
loadbmp "1", "bmp\2dice1.bmp" 'load our dice images
loadbmp "2", "bmp\2dice2.bmp"
loadbmp "3", "bmp\2dice3.bmp"
loadbmp "4", "bmp\2dice4.bmp"
loadbmp "5", "bmp\2dice5.bmp"
loadbmp "6", "bmp\2dice6.bmp"
am I doing something wrong or is there a reason for this?
Ken
--- In libertybasic@y..., "Kenneth J. Lewis, Sr." <kenlewissr@c...> wrote:
> When using the loadbmp command in LB v2+, as long as I use a string with
> letters in it for the "name" I have no problem. When I use a numeric only
> string I get the following error...
>
> BASIC PROGRAM HALTED
> bitmap named 5 not found
>
<snip>
That is curious. It doesn't look like what you're doing should be a problem.
I'll take a look at this for v2.02.
-Carl
Someone today asked me via email today how Windows deals with virtual
memory when running Liberty BASIC. Here was my answer.
-------------
Hi!
Are you getting an error from Windows, or is your machine grinding to
a crawl? Windows will certainly try to allocate enough memory as the
program runs. Usually this shouldn't be a problem. Here are some
short examples that run fine on my P166 32MB laptop.
'this runs easily, of course
dim a$(20000)
end
Now let's stick some data in the array.
'allocate 20,000*24 string bytes = 480,000
dim a$(20000)
start = time$("ms")
for x = 1 to 20000
a$(x) = Version$+DefaultDir$+BackgroundColor$
next x
print "time to run = "; (time$("ms")-start) / 1000; " seconds"
end
time to run = 5.22 seconds
Then I increased this four-fold to allocate almost 2 million bytes.
'allocate 80,000*24 string bytes = 1,920,000
dim a$(80000)
start = time$("ms")
for x = 1 to 80000
a$(x) = Version$+DefaultDir$+BackgroundColor$
next x
print "time to run = "; (time$("ms")-start) / 1000; " seconds"
end
time to run = 26.75 seconds
When I increased to 400000 (or 10 megabytes), it ran but took 6
minutes as shown:
time to run = 306.49 seconds
Once you begin to exceed the free RAM things get very slow. Windows
will indeed allocate virtual memory, but every time the automatic
garbage collector kicks in your hard drive will thrash like crazy
because it is examining all the application memory space, swapping
things in and out of virtual memory just to get a look at each piece.
This is a bit like running the disk defragmentor over and over (have
you ever sat and watched for hours while your hard disk got
defragmented?).
On my 32MB laptop it seems like once I try to allocate more than 15
or so megabytes for strings, then it starts to thrash. A little more
than that, and it becomes extremely sluggish to switch between
applicatons or do anything else.
Trying this on the current 32-bit LB v3 work, I get the 400000 array
example to run in 56 seconds, an improvement of more than 5x!!!
However, once I try to exceed my available RAM, it runs into hard
drive thrashing problems almost as bad as the 16-bit LB.
So the lesson is, RAM is golden. Get as much of it as you can!
-Carl
Another point to consider is that if you let windoze manage your virtual
memory, it is constantly checking and changing the swapfile size. This slows
things down even more. I have my virtual memory set to a minimum of 200 MB
and a maximum of 200 MB. If your minimum and maximum are the same windows
doesn't mess with it, If they are different then windows will be constantly
checking and resizing it.
Ken
----- Original Message -----
From: <carlg@...>
To: <libertybasic@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Saturday, April 07, 2001 1:56 PM
Subject: [libertybasic] What happens when you run low on RAM?
> Someone today asked me via email today how Windows deals with virtual
> memory when running Liberty BASIC. Here was my answer.
>
> -------------
>
> Hi!
>
> Are you getting an error from Windows, or is your machine grinding to
> a crawl? Windows will certainly try to allocate enough memory as the
> program runs. Usually this shouldn't be a problem. Here are some
> short examples that run fine on my P166 32MB laptop.
>
> 'this runs easily, of course
> dim a$(20000)
> end
>
> Now let's stick some data in the array.
>
> 'allocate 20,000*24 string bytes = 480,000
> dim a$(20000)
> start = time$("ms")
> for x = 1 to 20000
> a$(x) = Version$+DefaultDir$+BackgroundColor$
> next x
> print "time to run = "; (time$("ms")-start) / 1000; " seconds"
> end
> time to run = 5.22 seconds
>
> Then I increased this four-fold to allocate almost 2 million bytes.
>
> 'allocate 80,000*24 string bytes = 1,920,000
> dim a$(80000)
> start = time$("ms")
> for x = 1 to 80000
> a$(x) = Version$+DefaultDir$+BackgroundColor$
> next x
> print "time to run = "; (time$("ms")-start) / 1000; " seconds"
> end
>
> time to run = 26.75 seconds
>
> When I increased to 400000 (or 10 megabytes), it ran but took 6
> minutes as shown:
>
> time to run = 306.49 seconds
>
> Once you begin to exceed the free RAM things get very slow. Windows
> will indeed allocate virtual memory, but every time the automatic
> garbage collector kicks in your hard drive will thrash like crazy
> because it is examining all the application memory space, swapping
> things in and out of virtual memory just to get a look at each piece.
> This is a bit like running the disk defragmentor over and over (have
> you ever sat and watched for hours while your hard disk got
> defragmented?).
>
> On my 32MB laptop it seems like once I try to allocate more than 15
> or so megabytes for strings, then it starts to thrash. A little more
> than that, and it becomes extremely sluggish to switch between
> applicatons or do anything else.
>
> Trying this on the current 32-bit LB v3 work, I get the 400000 array
> example to run in 56 seconds, an improvement of more than 5x!!!
> However, once I try to exceed my available RAM, it runs into hard
> drive thrashing problems almost as bad as the 16-bit LB.
>
> So the lesson is, RAM is golden. Get as much of it as you can!
>
> -Carl
>
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> libertybasic-unsubscribe@egroups.com
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
> I believe that the upper limit has to do with the max value of a
long
> integer, which is actually 65535, but one minute is pretty much the
max for
> a timer.
I believe in most languages that would be called an unsigned
integer. A long integer is four bytes and has a value of over four
billion.
Tom Lake
When using the loadbmp command in LB v2+, as long as I use a string with letters in it for the "name" I have no problem. When I use a numeric only string I get the following error...
Last night I visited 'All BASIC Code' and found that they were still touting
LB v1.4, telling that LB v2.0 would be out soon. So here is a copy of the
note that I sent them, In hopes that they would update their site.
Ken
----- Original Message -----
From: "Kenneth J. Lewis, Sr." <kenlewissr@...>
To: <abc@...>
Sent: Friday, April 06, 2001 9:35 AM
Subject: Liberty BASIC
> Just a note to let you know, Liberty BASIC v2.01 is currently available.
> version 2.02 will soon be out. With 32bit Liberty BASIC v3.00 in the works
> and scheduled to be released sometime during the last half of this year.
> There are lots of exciting things happening with Liberty BASIC. One of the
> greatest is the users group libertybasic@yahoogroups.com. this is the
most
> helpful group I have ever had the pleasure of being associated with.
> Thanks for your time;
> Kenneth J. Lewis, Sr.
> a serious Liberty BASIC user/programmer
>
It occurred to me whilst laboriously testing my latest creation this afternoon that we ought to have an easy means of making our programs available to other group members for testing. This way, the program originator gets feedback about his/her programs and the "testers" could pick up a few tips about program construction.
I run a small Web design and hosting company in the UK and could easily make a page available for this purpose. The .bas, .tkn or .exe files would need to be zipped and sent to me by e-mail along with a brief description of what the program does and an e-mail address for feedback. Testers could then download anything that takes their fancy and give it a try.
If I receive a favourable response to this I'll go ahead and set it up, but please don't send anything in the meantime.
In the program I'm currently working on, I need to show the day of
the week for a given date (usually the run date but other dates are
possible).
The date$() function doesn't return the week day name (e.g. Tuesday)-
is there an API call to get this that anyone knows of?
<*> Jim
Eldron -
The file title sounds promising but something must have gone awry in
the file transfer process. After downloading all I have is a one byte
file. Is it small enough to paste in a message?
Thanks!
<*> Jim
--- In libertybasic@y..., "Eldron Gill" <egill@e...> wrote:
> Jim,
> Found this hidden away. By Michael T. Rankin
> Hope it helps.
>
> Eldron
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Jim Harre
> To: libertybasic@y...
> Sent: Tuesday, April 10, 2001 5:07 PM
> Subject: [libertybasic] What day is it?
>
>
> In the program I'm currently working on, I need to show the day
of
> the week for a given date (usually the run date but other dates
are
> possible).
>
> The date$() function doesn't return the week day name (e.g.
Tuesday)-
> is there an API call to get this that anyone knows of?
> <*> Jim
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> libertybasic-unsubscribe@egroups.com
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
Service.
' ************************************************************* ' * Liberty Basic Day of the Week(entered maually) * ' * Written by Michael T. Rankin * ' * September 13, 1998 * ' * * ' *************************************************************
' Set up the days of the week in an array. ' I figured out ahead of time how the days should be set up. ' It's based on Jan 1, 1900 if you're interested.
'Set up the array for the days of the week day$(0) = "Mon" day$(1) = "Tue" day$(2) = "Wed" day$(3) = "Thu" day$(4) = "Fri" day$(5) = "Sat" day$(6) = "Sun"
'Set up the array for the months of the year month$(1)="Jan" month$(2)="Feb" month$(3)="Mar" month$(4)="Apr" month$(5)="May" month$(6)="Jun" month$(7)="Jul" month$(8)="Aug" month$(9)="Sep" month$(10)="Oct" month$(11)="Nov" month$(12)="Dec"
'Set up the array for the number of days in each month nod(1)=31 nod(2)=28 nod(3)=31 nod(4)=30 nod(5)=31 nod(6)=30 nod(7)=31 nod(8)=31 nod(9)=30 nod(10)=31 nod(11)=30 nod(12)=31
[year]
if y < 1900 then goto [baddate] ly = y / 4 ly = ly - int(ly) if ly = 0 then ly$ = "y" else ly$ = "n"
[month]
if m < 1 or m > 12 then goto [baddate] if m = 2 and ly$ = "n" then daze = 28 if m = 2 and ly$ = "y" then daze = 29 if m = 1 or m = 3 or m = 5 or m = 7 or m = 8 or m = 10 or m = 12 then daze = 31 if m = 4 or m = 6 or m = 9 or m = 11 then daze = 30
[day]
if d < 1 or d > 31 then goto [baddate] if d > daze then goto [baddate]
'The following line is the algorithm to see how many days past since 1900 julian = ((y-1901)*365)+Int((y-1901)/4)+d
dty=0 if m > 1 then for x=1 to (m-1) dty = dty + nod(x) next x end if
if ly$="y" and m>2 then dty = dty +1
julian = julian + dty
'find out how many weeks have past since 01/01/1900 if julian > 6 then julian = julian / 7 julian = julian - Int(julian) julian = julian * 7 + 0.001 end if
'make sure results are an integer julian = INT(julian)
The file title sounds promising but something must have gone awry in the file transfer process. After downloading all I have is a one byte file. Is it small enough to paste in a message?
Thanks! <*> Jim
--- In libertybasic@y..., "Eldron Gill" <egill@e...> wrote: > Jim, > Found this hidden away. By Michael T. Rankin > Hope it helps. > > Eldron > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Jim Harre > To: libertybasic@y... > Sent: Tuesday, April 10, 2001 5:07 PM > Subject: [libertybasic] What day is it? > > > In the program I'm currently working on, I need to show the day of > the week for a given date (usually the run date but other dates are > possible). > > The date$() function doesn't return the week day name (e.g. Tuesday)- > is there an API call to get this that anyone knows of? > <*> Jim > > > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > libertybasic-unsubscribe@egroups.com > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: libertybasic-unsubscribe@egroups.com
Eldron -
Perfect! I was able to cut and paste the text just fine.
The file attachment still only brings me a one byte length file -
strange!
Thanks for your speedy and diligent efforts.
<*> Jim
--- In libertybasic@y..., "Eldron Gill" <egill@e...> wrote:
> Here it tis. Watch for line wraps.
> I also attached again.
>
> Eldron
Sounds a great idea I would like to join in both posting and testing.
--- In libertybasic@y..., "D. Jempson" <dj@j...> wrote:
> It occurred to me whilst laboriously testing my latest creation
this afternoon that we ought to have an easy means of making our
programs available to other group members for testing. This way, the
program originator gets feedback about his/her programs and
the "testers" could pick up a few tips about program construction.
>
> I run a small Web design and hosting company in the UK and could
easily make a page available for this purpose. The .bas, .tkn
or .exe files would need to be zipped and sent to me by e-mail along
with a brief description of what the program does and an e-mail
address for feedback. Testers could then download anything that
takes their fancy and give it a try.
>
> If I receive a favourable response to this I'll go ahead and set it
up, but please don't send anything in the meantime.
>
> Derek
--- In libertybasic@y..., "D. Jempson" <dj@j...> wrote:
> It occurred to me whilst laboriously testing my latest creation this afternoon
that we ought to have an easy means of making our programs available to other
group members for testing.
Is there a problem with uploading the beta program to the "files" section of
this egroup, and describing it as a beta/test version?
Just so that people are not in the dark, Liberty BASIC v2.02 has not been
released yet. The released versions of LB2 have a rather nasty bug which
affects the calling of functions inside of functions. This took me some time to
track down and now it looks as if I've fixed it. There will be some more
testing, and then LB v2.02 should finally be released if all goes well (probably
before the end of the month).
Thanks for your patience,
Carl
Thanks for the update.
--- In libertybasic@y..., carlg@l... wrote:
> Just so that people are not in the dark, Liberty BASIC v2.02 has
not been released yet. The released versions of LB2 have a rather
nasty bug which affects the calling of functions inside of
functions. This took me some time to track down and now it looks as
if I've fixed it. There will be some more testing, and then LB v2.02
should finally be released if all goes well (probably before the end
of the month).
>
> Thanks for your patience,
>
> Carl
--- In libertybasic@y..., "D. Jempson" <dj@j...> wrote: > It occurred to me whilst laboriously testing my latest creation this afternoon that we ought to have an easy means of making our programs available to other group members for testing.
Is there a problem with uploading the beta program to the "files" section of this egroup, and describing it as a beta/test version?
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: libertybasic-unsubscribe@egroups.com
That depends on whether or not this group has been changed back to private
again. I don't mind LB users testing my programs and seeing my code. But I
would prefer not to have it available to the general public untill it is a
final version.
Ken
>
> Is there a problem with uploading the beta program to the "files" section
of this egroup, and describing it as a beta/test version?
>
At 09:23 AM 4/14/01 -0500, you wrote:
> That depends on whether or not this group has been changed back to private
> again. I don't mind LB users testing my programs and seeing my code. But I
> would prefer not to have it available to the general public untill it is a
> final version.
> Ken
This is the [libertybasic] group. I've just checked the main page and it
indicates that archives are for members only. The [lbnews] page still
indicates public archives. I don't know if that means messages, files or
both.
Alyce
Of course, ideally it would be private, but if you don't want to post your code or programs for whatever reason you don't have to. Anyone who isn't overly concerned that there might be someone wandering around egroups peeking into test/beta files with negative intent should certainly have the opportunity to drop it into a folder that makes it available for feedback. Or perhaps another option might be to require a password for that particular folder. (I'm assuming even Yahoo has made such an option available to the moderator/listowner)
That depends on whether or not this group has been changed back to private again. I don't mind LB users testing my programs and seeing my code. But I would prefer not to have it available to the general public untill it is a final version. Ken
> > Is there a problem with uploading the beta program to the "files" section of this egroup, and describing it as a beta/test version? >
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: libertybasic-unsubscribe@egroups.com
Hi All
I am back on the list,my computer went dead and had to
build another one,but I am back now.
David Mosley
dmosley2002@...
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail.
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
I'm in the middle of writing a program to do class scheduling. I'm
storing data in 2 dimensional string arrays that need to be saved to
disk (and later read back in).
Is there an easier way to write an array to disk than iterate thru
each "field" (2nd dimension) of each row (1st dimension)?
Thanks!!
Send Email
