Moderators, FB community

[speedfixer]

I don't want anybody banned.

I don't want fxm to stop writing docs.
I would LIKE that he show compassion for a beginner that has no experience. Write a VERY simple example. A more complex one after that is OK.

As for the lock and deletions:

Still no expression of regret. That implies he thinks what he did is OK. THAT is wrong.

So ... if we can't call out a moderator, then we can't call out our politicians, we can't call out our police.

Now where does that lead us all?

The manual is the source for use of a keyword.
Some languages have very dry, very technical manuals. The entry barrier for these languages tend to be high.
This is a flavor of BASIC. The entry bar is NOT supposed to be high.

Simple first.

Some of the keywords ABSOLUTELY are not so simple.
Some simple first, then more detail: some REQUIRE more technical and detailed explanations and examples.

There might be a desire, but not a rule about how the docs are written.

I have said before: mostly - no complaints.
If I were the only person with these observations I would have stayed away longer (as I have tried to do.)

But if this is BASIC, and anybody here wants more, not less, users like I do - it is hard for me to keep my mouth shut sometimes.

Mr. Swiss frequently objects to so many things - he takes hits for it.
I think he has good intent, just a poor method of expression. But all generally allow him his voice.
Deletion and locks weren't applied to him. (Short bans, maybe, but not deletions and locks.)

For me, the lock and deletion show a lack of respect for others.
Let me extend this to another touchy subject: Albert and dodicat

I have tremendous respect and admiration for the patience, tolerance and effort dodicat shows toward someone that clearly just 'isn't going to get it.'
There is a problem, there. This might be Albert's only interest and means of expression allowed to him (my guess.)

If each of you 'adopted' one person that needs that kind of patience, this could be a better world. I have done that so many times.
I don't expect that to happen.

I DO hope you, anyone, everyone would show that respect to everyone else.

At the end:

reversing an error or misjudgement does NOT qualify as an apology. Not here. Not in most legal systems. Not in politics. Not with your girlfriend. Not with your mom.

How were you raised?

[fxm]

david,

I blocked the "String index doc" topic for a night to get some users to think about what a "reference" is (I had already offered good reads), rather than claiming the same untruths in successive posts for a full day.
But I now consider that this was not the right solution.

You then created a new topic "String Index Doc: wtf!" with a post to complain about this locking and it is your right.

In the morning, when I unlocked the topic, I transferred your post to this reopened topic because your post also contains a technical judgment (positive) on the notion of "reference".
Yet I thought it was good to do this rather than leaving your post all alone in a corner, but now I apologize.

I now consider the incident to be quite simply closed from my point of view.

fx

[dodicat]

fxm.
You forgot the m in your sign off.

[jj2007]

The manual is the source for use of a keyword.
Some languages have very dry, very technical manuals. The entry barrier for these languages tend to be high.
This is a flavor of BASIC. The entry bar is NOT supposed to be high.

Of course, I fully agree with you, David. The problem is that it is extremely difficult to produce information that is both correct and digestible. For example:

The problem here is that the operator [] can work, in get mode, in two different ways, and the only apparent difference lies in the Dim ByRef:

Dim a As String = "Hello world"
Dim ByRef As ubyte r=a[6] ' the operator [] returns a REFERENCE, which can be used e.g. as r=123
Dim As ubyte c=a[6] ' the operator [] returns a simple NUMBER (a ubyte in this case)

In all cases (whatever its use) the 'a[6]' expression is similar to the differentiation of a pointer.
In the case of 'a' is a string:
'a[6]' is equivalent to '*Cptr(Ubyte Ptr, Strptr(a) + 6)'[/tt]

fxm is a very experienced coder, and probably an expert for C/C++, too. So it's probably just my ignorance that prevents me from understanding what he means with "the differentiation of a pointer". Maybe I should stick to BASIC?

[fxm]

fxm.
You forgot the m in your sign off.

No it's voluntary, the initials of my first name are fx.

Note for jj2007:
I don't know much about C/C++.

[badidea]

... "the differentiation of a pointer" ...

I think you mean "pointer dereferencing".

In general. Technical (code) documentation is hard. The most accurate documentation is the code itself, which is often not very readable. So non-exact and abstract words are used to explain other abstract things. Where possible words are used that can be compared with things in the physical world like pointers, roots end trees. But some things cannot be visualized easily in the real world and are harder to understand. For higher level languages the terms often become more abstract. At assembly level (or at transistor level) terms like reference have less or no meaning.

(edit: wrong quote above, it was fxm)

[fxm]

Yes, dereferencing. It's a slip of the tongue on my part.

[deltarho[1859]]

Write a VERY simple example. A more complex one after that is OK.

I wholeheartedly agree. To my mind a Help file should be aimed at the lowest common denominator. Each topic should start off simply and then get 'heavier' as the topic progresses. Any other approach is not a Help file. It could be argued that the FreeBASIC Manual is a manual and not a Help file. Manuals/Handbooks tend to be concise (short and clear, expressing what needs to be said without unnecessary words). The FreeBASIC manual is more than that, so I guess it is trying to be a Help file. However, in some areas it is not particularly helpful and some topics start with the bar too high even for experienced coders.

With regard disrespect, it is my opinion that the moderation on this forum is not strong enough. When Bob Zale was alive, he ruled PowerBASIC with an iron fist. I thought that was too much. Treating people with kid gloves is, to my mind, too little. A middle approach is not difficult to achieve. So, who should moderate a moderator? The other moderators obviously - it is not rocket science.

[speedfixer]

I am happy that many aired their opinions either way.
This arrogant parasite is pleased to call this and any other incident closed.

david

[Lost Zergling]

As a Zergling, I must say that I know a lot about parasitism. I feel invested with a mission: let me tell you that parasitism is in no way license to arrogance: they are two distinct concepts. Any good parasite that respects himself must put its parasitic mission above everything else, including his ego. Can't be twice same time. This in order to restore the honor of the parasites, a little too cavalierly trampled on by everyone.

Finally, and even if everyone agrees to close the incident (at different moments), I must say that it leaves me with a bitter taste in my mouth: unless I am mistaken, fxm had to apologize twice for his error moreover corrected by himself at request, but above all I remain on the feeling of an assumed indelicacy because I would have liked that it is no longer made or allusion nor caution to political references : "reversing an error or misjudgement .. Not in politics.".
Speedfixer, I was not asking for a reversal and not even an apology, but simply that you no longer assume your derogatory remarks about France in general, however you may have leave to think the opposite impression, probably a missinterpretation on my part, but if not the case we should have further discussion. Maybe I should force myself to review or reread more often "The Voyages of Gullivers"
I do not wish to comment or or position statement on personal exchanges between people who assumes themselves the incident closed.

[marcov]

Ref manuals are usually too fragmented anyway for beginners, without much head or tail.

From my experience: manuals are the hardest type of documents and have most detailed information, documentations are a down to earth piece of information for both beginners and intermediate users, you could think them as reference books, and the last, tutorials, for pure beginners. I feared reading manuals most. I used to read the Free Pascal compiler's manual and I think I'm lost. I like the Wiki more, easy to read, easy to understand. But I have not really tried to learn the language and the compiler yet.

FPC has as additional fact that a large share of the users migrate from Delphi. Many users have a base knowledge, and there are whole libraries and second hand book shops full Delphi introductionary texts. That is both a blessing (having a 2nd source) and a curse (harder for introductionary texts to get traction).

This is probably where the docs are so referency. Wiki is mostly 3rd party contributed with very variable quality. Both varying in style and correctness/completeness.

[dodicat]

IMO the freepascal .chm help files are not very good.
Easier to just Google, pascal is pretty well documented online.
I am talking about the pure pascal language, lazarus to me is just a black box language.
I have posted a few times to the lazarus forum.
The various code snippets generally posted by members mostly don't compile, you have to second guess which units are used and fill in the rest of the program.
Then you need the whole lazarus ide set up, a pascal compiler on it's own is not enough.
At least 99% of posted fb code actually compiles and runs which makes fb much easier to pick up and use than lazarus freepascal.

Delphi is well documented, but alas it is not free.

[marcov]

IMO the freepascal .chm help files are not very good......

I don't recognize the picture you paint at all. Not even parts.