Slashdot Mirror


QBASIC Programming for Dummies

HeavyJay writes "When I purchased QBASIC Programming for Dummies, I expected a clear, concise tutorial on how to construct programs in QBASIC. I'm new to the world of programming, and, having had luck with the Dummies series before, thought this the best place to start off. How very wrong I was." Read on for more; readers with recommendations for better (newer?) QBASIC books are encouraged to contribute. QBASIC Programming for Dummies author Douglas Hergert pages 399 publisher IDG Books Worldwide, Inc rating 5 out of 10 reviewer HeavyJay ISBN 1568840934 summary "The Fun and Easy Way to Learn QBasic Programming."

I've read countless books and online tutorials on QBASIC, C++, PHP, and other various languages. I'm sure all you wise programmers can tell me the first sample program that comes to mind with any language, can't you? The classic 'Hello, world!' example. This easy app starts off would-be programmers with a level of confidence and understanding. To my surprise, Douglas Hergert decided not to use the ever-popular example program. So, you might be wondering, what did he use in it's place? A four-page-long currency converter.

This was Mistake #1.

The book started off making me feel stupider than I actually am. This oftentimes discourages readers from pursuing, and the book takes to the shelf, perhaps never to be picked up again. I've noticed that the best way to capture a reader's attention (and explain the most) is to start off with PRINT, INPUT, IF...THEN and GOTO. Then move on to loops, and get technical from there. It best prepares the reader for everything in store, rather than making them feel like idiots. The book didn't do this at all. It started off making in such a way that anyone without experience would be completely lost. IF...THEN doesn't even come in until the eleventh chapter, despite being one of the most important tools in the language!

So, what good can I say about the book? Not much, except that it came with some practical applications. This brings up another grievance I have with it, that being the lack of an accompanying disc. I feel every book on programming with long examples ought to come with a disc containing all example programs, so that the reader can tweak and observe them as he sees fit, without typing in five pages of code. The best way to learn is often by example, and discouraging lazy people doesn't help the learning process along.

Alas, the book does contain some humour, as it's other brothers and sisters from IDG often do. With chapter titles such as Text, Lies, and Videotape and How to Manage Arguments and Influence People, a book can't be completely bad.

Although I suggest beginners steer clear of this book, it can be useful to experienced programmers (supposing they don't think QBASIC a waste of time). It goes deeply into data structures, arrays, and databases. There are many helpful features, but it's definitely not a book to learn from.

You can purchase the QBASIC Programming for Dummies from bn.com. Slashdot welcomes readers' book reviews -- to see your own review here, read the book review guidelines, then visit the submission page.

12 of 630 comments (clear)

  1. Redundant??? by (54)T-Dub · · Score: 5, Funny

    Isn't "QBASIC Programming for Dummies" a bit redundant?

    --

    "I can not bring myself to believe that if knowledge presents danger, the solution is ignorance" - Isaac Asimov
    1. Re:Redundant??? by WndrBr3d · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You know, flame all you want but we all know everyone started in this programming language. And if you were any good at it, you could make some pretty dope applications. I mean, what better way to show off to your junior high programming class than making a DOS based Paintbrush application by hooking the mouse interrupt.

      Didn't get me any women, but it (QBasic) as a good springboard into computers.

    2. Re:Redundant??? by Atzanteol · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Ahh, the good old teenage "Well, I've never used it, and don't know where it's used, so it *must* be obsolete!" attitude. You use 'PASCAL'? How ten years ago!

      What's wrong with PASCAL? I'd rather learn on PASCAL than VB anyday. PASCAL looks more like C++ and Java (and C#) than VB does. Learning VB from any other 'decent' language is a snap. But learning C++ or Java from VB is a pain in the ass.

      Students should be learning with a command line. No GUI apps to start. Learn from the ground up. Otherwise you'll be able to do things, but not necessarily understand them.

      And yes, I still believe in teaching assembly...

      --
      "Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge"

      - Charles Darwin
  2. go ahead and laugh by cr@ckwhore · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Go ahead and laugh, but I work for a company that still writes/maintains qbasic software and sells it to unsuspecting clients for $50,000 bucks a pop. I think we need a "software purchasing for dummies" book.

    --
    Skiers and Riders -- http://www.snowjournal.com
    1. Re:go ahead and laugh by nicomen · · Score: 5, Funny

      Cool, you work at Microsoft? How's the salary? I'm considering applying for a job there.

      --
      Nicolas Mendoza
      Prepare for MSIE 7
  3. Coming up next on Slashdot Book Reviews... by ecc0 · · Score: 5, Funny

    "Making your own Apple I keyboard in 21 days"

    "Changing Vacuum Tubes in your ENIAC for Dummies"

    "4004 Assembly Made Easy"

  4. It is not bad to learn QBasic... by halivar · · Score: 5, Insightful

    For all those folks ranting at WHY someone would want to learn QBasic, I like to consider myself a QBasic "success story."

    WAY back when when I got my first computer, DOS was this wierd arcane alter-world from Windows 3.1, I found QBasic. It CAME with my computer. I didn't have the internet, so free, downloadadable compilers were not an option. For me, QBasic was my only link to the programming world.

    I never had a book, btw, so all I had to learn BASIC was a vague memory of LET and PRINT commands, and the help file. The help file was awesome. It is, to date, the only good docs I have ever seen from MS. After 6 years, I could do stuff in BASIC that my friends who started out in Pascal and C++ could not dream of doing. Why? Because their learning curve made it impossible.

    Before I found QBasic, I wanted to be a writer or a chef or something silly like that. QBasic introduced me into the programming world in which I can now call myself a professional.

    So, I'm going to do something right now that, as a Linux user, I thought I would never do...

    Thanks, Microsoft.

  5. Re:Q-what? by Tablizer · · Score: 5, Funny

    I would feel pretty stupid actually reading a QBASIC book in 2003. Modern programming languages are easier to learn than QBASIC.

    They are? By what reconning? These days they turn this:

    print(a + b)

    Into this:

    am = new math.ArithmeticManager()
    opA = new math.Operand((float) a)
    opB = new math.Operand((float) b)
    am.addOperand(opA)
    am.addOperand(opB)
    am.operator = new math.operators.Addition()
    am.executeMathOperation()
    system.io.output.print(am.mathOperationResult())

  6. Why use QBASIC at ALL? by arashiakari · · Score: 5, Informative

    ...when there is PowerBASIC. (www.powerbasic.com)

    16-bit 100% compatible DOS compiler...

    32-bit Console Compiler and GUI Compiler for Windows. Full GUI programs in less than 2k. VERY fast compiled code, very small, no RTL, compile to EXE or DLL. PowerBASIC is really cool. I use their compilers all the time.

    AND they are coming out with a Linux compiler! w00t.

  7. No Disc can be a good thing. by Kevin+Stevens · · Score: 5, Interesting

    "This brings up another grievance I have with it, that being the lack of an accompanying disc. I feel every book on programming with long examples out to come with a disc containing all example programs, so that the reader can tweak and observe them as he sees fit, without typing in five pages of code. The best way to learn is often by example, and discouraging lazy people doesn't help the learning process along." Not having a disk forces you to type the programs in. Even in autotype drool mood, you pick up alot more than copying and pasting code and running it. Lazy people wont learn programming by copying and pasting code. They are the type that will read individual words without comprehending their meaning and 'finish' the book, and say they 'know' programming while absorbing mebbe 1% of the material. At least if they have to sit there and type the code, they might pick up something, and when they inevitably make mistakes in copying it, have to figure out how to fix it, which is a forced interactive process that gets the wheels spinning. In a more advanced type book, like a data structures or design pattern type book you can get away with code on a disc, but in a beginner book I do not think it is appropriate.

  8. WTF? by evilquaker · · Score: 5, Interesting
    HeavyJay writes:
    I'm new to the world of programming...

    and the review (also written by HeavyJay) says:
    I've read countless books and online tutorials on QBASIC, C++, PHP, and other various languages.

    So WTF... you've read countless books on QBASIC, yet you claim to be new to the world of programming and therefore need to read "QBASIC for Dummies"? Something doesn't make sense here...

    --
    To within half a percent, pi seconds is a nanocentury. -- Tom Duff
  9. Re:Q-what? by metamatic · · Score: 5, Funny

    Ah, but at least you know your code to add two numbers and print the result will be reuseable and extensible. Imagine if you had to reinvent that piece of code every time you needed it? *cough*

    --
    GCHQ Quantum Insert installed. If only our tongues were made of glass, how much more careful we would be when we speak