On 10/15/2012 11:45 AM, Tim Deaton wrote: > I haven't tried StarBasic, but in the past did use VBA for > Applications in Excel and Access. Personally, because of the danger > of malicious mischief, I think having something that can only do > things within your own product would be a VERY good thing. If I > understood Andreas correctly, that's the way StarBasic works. So I'd > say fix the bugs and don't change its mission. > > Then, if you need something that interacts with other things outside > of LO, use another tool designed for that, and make sure LO safeguards > adequately protect against the possibility of mischief. > > -- Tim
The problem with any macro is the possibility of it accessing parts of the OS that could allow for someone to inject malware into the system. This issue is actually independent of the macro language. I remember several VBA macro malware from about 2000 being a major problem; partly because of MS Office at the time default of executing any macro in a file and the relative newness of the Internet and email to most users. How LO and MSO currently protect is to not allowing unverified/unvalidated/uncertified macros from running by default. > =========================== > > On 10/15/2012 8:38 AM, Andreas Säger wrote: >> Am 15.10.2012 13:31, Tom Davies wrote: >>> Hi :) >>> No-one is suggesting dropping Star Basic! That would be a huge >>> nightmare for many people i'm sure. >>> >>> I was just curious what might be better. A quick look at what >>> languages can be used for macros in LO reveals 4 choices; LO Basic, >>> Python, BeanShell, or JavaScript. I was just wondering which was >>> 'best'. Are all 4 really well implemented in LO? I guess "LO >>> Basic" is the Star Basic being referred to in this thread? >>> >>> I think Andreas was just suggesting that choosing to use Star Basic >>> is not the best choice. However one of the great things about >>> OpenSource is that you do get choices. We can all disagree about >>> almost everything and still end up co-operating with each other even >>> if we didn't want to. >>> >>> Outside of IT choice is usually seen as a good thing. Many >>> countries see democracy as good and ostensibly give a choice of who >>> you can vote for to rule. In shops people would be outraged if >>> there was nothing else to buy except baked beans. People expect to >>> be able to buy a wide range of diferent products from different >>> companies and for it all to work together well enough. Somehow IT >>> seems to demand dictatorships and freedom FROM choice rather than >>> freedom OF choice. We don't all do the same things and even if we >>> did we probably wouldn't do them the same way so it's fairly insane >>> to expect 1 product and 1 company to be the only thing worth using. >>> >>> I was just curious about other people's choices to help me >>> understand more about a subject i know little about. >>> Regards from >>> Tom :) >> StarBasic is a separate lingo implemented to call the API of this >> particular software only. It can not do anything outside the scope of >> the office. It comes with a few convenience features related to this >> particular API and the code is easier to be stored within office >> documents. It does not include any math library beyond triangular >> functions and basic arithmetics. It handles arrays in the most >> complicated ways, it does not know any hashes, it has far too many bugs >> and short comings, it is extremely complex and awkward (Null, Nothing, >> Empty, Missing are different types of the same). >> Basic is a 100% procedural lingo talking to an strictly object oriented >> API which is the reason why you can not write any extensions in Basic. >> MS Office and this office are the last resorts of this extinct lingo of >> the MS dominated 90ies. >> The alternatives are full featured, popular and mature programming >> languages with dozends of modules to program anything you want. >> A little bit of glue code makes them UNO compatible, callable from >> within the office suite (Tools>Macros), from the command line and as UNO >> components as well. Plain souce code files are much easier to maintain >> and a programmer can use whatever source code editor he wants (the Basic >> editor is no more than a cheap plastic toy). >> All the object oriented languages can be used to write seamlessly >> integrated extensions. >> >> > > -- Jay Lozier jsloz...@gmail.com -- For unsubscribe instructions e-mail to: users+h...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
