We've been over this. "It bugs me" is independant from "It is a bug".
INPUT does not assign empty string to a variable
We've been over this. "It bugs me" is independant from "It is a bug".Yes. But that statement doesn't help your argument at all. There's really no way to tell whether this is a bug or not (without contacting SmileBoom), so you think of it as a bug because you don't like it, and I think of it as a feature because I like it. Neither of us is right here, and this entire discussion is pointless.
It wasn't meant to help my argument. "INPUT doesn't give the input" needs no help. It was meant to show that your argument has no help at all... except that you like it.We've been over this. "It bugs me" is independant from "It is a bug".Yes. But that statement doesn't help your argument at all. There's really no way to tell whether this is a bug or not (without contacting SmileBoom), so you think of it as a bug because you don't like it, and I think of it as a feature because I like it. Neither of us is right here, and this entire discussion is pointless.
I'm not sure why you want to keep arguing like this. Neither of us are right, but you won't even admit it.
It doesn't matter whether the current behavior of INPUT is "good" or "bad", what matters is whether SmileBoom INTENDED it or not.
They've made plenty of "bad" decisions, and you can't assume that something's a bug because of that.
It is the intentions and expectations of the users (the direct users, the SmileBasic programmers), at least as much as of the developers (SmileBoom), that determine 'bugginess'. An expectation for INPUT to give the user's (user of the SmileBasic program) input is reasonable. An unwarranted expectation for it to do otherwise, is not.