DSP Robotics Support

MichaelBenjamin wrote:...in-excel-impossible-to-debug-programming...

I take it you've never used the VBA programming environment.

I've 'toyed' with the idea of checking out VisualBasic.

My only 'programming' experience was back in the ATARI-ST daze, using GFABasic.

It was kinda fun, and I was able to make a few useful apps for a Recording Studio I worked at. [even sold a few copies to other Atari users].

For myself, I'm looking for an easy, flexible way of putting an app together, without having to spend years to learn how to print 'Hello World'.

A 'simple', structured language that allows passing parameters to sub-routines .... with a built in error checking editor ... real time compiler. [basically, GFABasic for Windows].

Be great to have available basic template for things like VST plugins too.

Has to be 64-bit.

Is that VB ???

FlowStone might be considered a 'toy' by those with advance language experience ... but for the common man, FS offers the possibility to actually make something [except I can't send 'Hello World' to my Printer ]

Regardless ... would like to see FS advance.

RJHollins wrote:For myself, I'm looking for an easy, flexible way of putting an app together, without having to spend years to learn how to print 'Hello World'.

A 'simple', structured language that allows passing parameters to sub-routines .... with a built in error checking editor ... real time compiler. [basically, GFABasic for Windows].

Be great to have available basic template for things like VST plugins too.

Has to be 64-bit.

Is that VB ???

Except for the VST thing, yeah. The thing is, most of the stuff you're concerned with has more to do with the programming environment, not the language. Visual Studio supports a couple of dozen languages/compilers at this point, VB just happens to have one of the easier learning curves. (VBA is sort of a dumbed-down VB-only subset of Visual Studio for application extensions.)

Integrated development environments have come a long way since the Atari days...hell, they've come a long way just in the last 10 years.

.

MichaelBenjamin wrote:but aren't these languages aswell if not more and more tied to windoze OS?
i mean ofc many business if not 98% use miroshift office, and excel, and VBA.
for me this is not a good situation, if you can use python on any OS to edit these excel files i always prefer the multiplatform way because it is more sustainable and more hardened by future changes in software.
same thing could be with flowstone: ruby is multiplatform so developing some exe in ruby to translate some excel file is much better than a comparable vba script.

If you want to suggest that FS would be better off on anther OS or multiple OSs, feel free to make that case, but it's kind of pointless. "Multi-platform" inevitably devolves to "least-common-denominator". Been there, done that, and given a choice, I'll pass.

And while I realize that Microsoft-bashing is fashionable in some circles, it's a bit silly to argue that it's bad to use Windows-specific tools to process files from an app that (mostly) runs on Windows.

.

MichaelBenjamin wrote:ok, with "Real Deal" i mostly had actual "excel-business" stuff in mind, like MicheleANE brought up.
as a real world example i imagine some business probably has some pretty huge excel tables somewhere with lots data in it, now that data needs to set in some other context, reordered, reassigned, reformatted, revisualised.

What i learnt last days, is that Flowstone seems to be a pretty universal ruby2exe wrapper on windows with some caveats, with the ability to visualise in gdi+ aswell.

Oh I think I get it now! You mean as a general programming environment rather that something dedicated to making synths and stuff.

When I was looking into Ruby (learning would be the wrong term!) I realised just how powerful it is. What struck me is that it can do far more than would typically be needed by the likes of me and most other toy-makers. Plus we have the luxury, as you say, to have the option of graphical output and input and the ability to read and write files. Pretty good I think.

deraudrl wrote:

RJHollins wrote:For myself, I'm looking for an easy, flexible way of putting an app together, without having to spend years to learn how to print 'Hello World'.

A 'simple', structured language that allows passing parameters to sub-routines .... with a built in error checking editor ... real time compiler. [basically, GFABasic for Windows].

Be great to have available basic template for things like VST plugins too.

Has to be 64-bit.

Is that VB ???

Except for the VST thing, yeah. The thing is, most of the stuff you're concerned with has more to do with the programming environment, not the language. Visual Studio supports a couple of dozen languages/compilers at this point, VB just happens to have one of the easier learning curves. (VBA is sort of a dumbed-down VB-only subset of Visual Studio for application extensions.)

Integrated development environments have come a long way since the Atari days...hell, they've come a long way just in the last 10 years.

No wonder I was confused ! Had to idea it supported anything more than 'Basic' ... I mean the language.

That's why I like this forum. There is not a single person in my surrounding that knows about Programming ... let alone the various languages. [heck ... i don't even know much beyond the basics].

It's about having a hobby [in a sense]. Something to take me to a different thought process [Mastering], and to be able to take an idea and convert that into a computer program [some special utility or app that maybe applies to my Mastering work or business].

I just don't wanna have to 'quit my job' to learn to do it.

And is why I like FlowStone ...

I put together a 'TimeCard' plugin that tracks the Time when a DAW is in PLAY mode. That the basic premise.
Now it does a few other handy things that help me track 'Billing Time' on a Project.
It saves out that data to a TEXT file. From there I load into a billing Spreadsheet.

These are the type of apps that really nobody is going to put out ... but it is something I could make with FlowStone [with a LOT of help from the FS GURUS here] and not just from the 'technical' side ... I also look into the schematics posted here, and I have greatly improved my schematic Layout .... which also improved my schematic LOGIC. I wouldn't win any 'Awards' .... but even I, looking back through some of my early work .... just have to shake my head at the gnarly mess.

So there too .... FlowStone can actually help an amateur THINK in a more logical manner that is kinda important to good programming practice.

Yeah ... I'm just rambling here ... been a long week ... and we continue to be in a 'restricted' environment.

All of my Band GIGS have been cancelled since March ... not a clue when that might change

Anyway .... didn't want to deflect from what ever was the original Thread Topic.

.... and Thanks for the VB info. That actually helped !

Spogg wrote:Oh I think I get it now! You mean as a general programming environment rather that something dedicated to making synths and stuff.

Urp. Using FS as a general-purpose development tool feels a bit like using AutoCad to draw cartoons: possible in theory, but very much not the right tool for the job.

If the point of the exercise is to leverage FS/Ruby experience to move into more generalized programming, I think I'd just concentrate on standalone Ruby and start here:
http://rubyonwindows.blogspot.com/2007/ ... ndows.html
At least that way you don't have to jump through hoops to use Gems etc.

I’m not a code programmer so I have to ask if stand-alone Ruby can do the graphical stuff that FlowStone Ruby can out of the box?