[Gambas-user] Some more example projects to be distributed with gambas
adamnt42 at gmail.com
Sat Sep 2 14:02:03 CEST 2023
To illustrate, this type of thing.
In the early 1970's I was employed as a "senior programmer/project
manager" on a project at a rather large international merchant bank. One
day I was hauled over the coals by the IT Director asking "Why doesn't
your system stop the dealers from selling the stock lodged as security
on a loan?". Thinking quickly I replied "Well, I guess the programmers
assumed that no moron would even try that."
I doubt that would stand up in court these days.
But I do still remember the identity of the said programmer. (Wanders
away with hands in pocket, whistling "Moonlight Shadow")
On 2/9/23 9:04 pm, BB wrote:
> On 2/9/23 8:59 pm, BB wrote:
>> On 2/9/23 8:37 pm, Martin Fischer wrote:
>>>> Are the "example" programs well documented?
>>>> you can post them here...
>>>> http://gambaswiki.org/wiki/app <http://gambaswiki.org/wiki/app>
>>>> and here...
>>>> There's a few other forums too.
>>> Hi Bruce,
>>> now I'm confused...
>>> First of all, "well documented" is very subjective.
>>> - Are these examples as well documented as the other examples
>>> distributed with gambas? Yes :-)
>>> - Are they documented good enough? Depends. They try to show a single
>>> thing. They are minimal. Not much documentation needed then. But surely
>>> they do not explain all knowledge that is required to build them. For
>>> example: the database examples use a DataSource control and arrange the
>>> data-bound controls as children of it. Why? That's something the gambas
>>> documentation shall explain. It's not documented as part of the
>>> And that's fine.
>>> After this rant: here's how I see it as a learner of gambas:
>>> When I want to learn something new I do:
>>> 1. Read the documentation.
>>> 2. Go over tutorials. I used the examples distributed with gambas for
>>> that. Some were helpful, some not. That's normal.
>>> 3. Write my own examples to familiarize myself with the ecosystem.
>>> The examples distributed with gambas are tutorials. This means:
>>> - there shall be many of them...
>>> - each area of gambas shall be covered by at least one example
>>> - each example shall focus on one topic only (sure: not always
>>> This means that an example is not some random app that someone wrote to
>>> solve a real (business-)problem. They are meant to be educational!
>>> I see the apps mentioned in the wiki and hosted on the software farm as
>>> the real application that do something useful.
>>> To sum this up:
>>> - educational, tutorial-style examples: distributed with gambas
>>> - real apps: hosted on software farm and/or mentioned in the wiki/app
>>> Am I wrong with this view?
>>> What is your take on this?
>>> ----[ http://gambaswiki.org/wiki/doc/netiquette ]----
>> Some may disagree but I reckon that well documented means a total
>> overload of everything you thought of while writing that code. In
>> defense and after a decade or so of revisiting my own sometimes years
>> old code, the phrases "FIIK if I know what I was tying to do here"
>> and similarly "WTF is this real" oft pop into mind. Even then
>> sometimes the "assumptions" astound me ("Where the hell did you get
>> the idea that this database query will always return a non-zero
>> result?", "Why does nullifying a list based control mean that I cant
>> find the row that I just deleted a moment ago?" "Who wrote this ****
>> anyway?" etc).
>> These days I have taken a leaf out of the un-lamented Ward
>> Cunningham's doctrine and usually start writing a "story" inside any
>> new procedure to try and explain to myself
>> what-it-is-thet-it-is-thet-I-am-trying-to-do-here. Unless the proc is
>> evidently so simple as to be taken for granted.
>> You know what? Documentation costs, bucketloads on Monday, a few
>> shekles on Tuesday, a grain of sand on Friday, possibly a groat next
>> week. But a concubines ransom thereafter.
>> The other bruce
> Sorry, that last one should have been "But a lack of documentation
> will cost you a concubines ransom thereafter."
More information about the User