I don't want to start a flame with the other BASIC dialect.
However, for me PowerBASIC is very unique under the perspective of a low level SDK API programmer.
Aka, low level SDK API programmer, means using the Windows platform only, and I don't care of other OS platforms because they are not making my living.
Also, i am confident that the next PB9 version would still fulfil my needs 8) 8) 8)
Thus, while i am using different languages, PowerBASIC (except DDT) is still my favorite one :-*
...
Hi Patrice,
I agree. If I consider just compilers, PowerBASIC is the best for what I need to do.
Fact is there are some things I do not like, but I have send requests to support, so if they will incorporate it to PB9, then I will go for it . If not ... I can stay with 8.04 as it is nice one.
I am little bit sad they behave very "static", without Josés header service I would be lost.
Petr
QuoteI am little bit sad they behave very "static", without Josés header service I would be lost.
That is correct, but things could change in the future :o
José does a tremendous work, and this is the main reason why i support his web site with contributions.
I would like to see more... from others ;)
...
Quote
I am little bit sad they behave very "static", without Josés header service I would be lost.
Contrarily to other compiler makers, PB doesn't release beta versions. When I see the release notes of other products, with a long list of bugs fixed, it makes me wonder how many other bugs remain and how many new bugs will have been introduced. This is fine for an "indie" compiler, used mainly by hobbyists, but it will quickly destroy the reputation of a commercial compiler.
I was just thinking about compilers in general.
I read the hotbasic remarks and went (again) to the website.
What annoyes me with compilers is that they introduce formengines.
It's not that i am against that since i write a developer for that.
I have a strong believe that a compiler should only have helper-functions like Left$(), Repeat$() and so on.
Iow these are the most basic functions a programmer needs.
Often the formengine is seriously flawed, to overcome this one can better *not* implement some dumb and ever to be upgraded form system.
A compiler should not have these kind of functions, i can not tell how to categorize those kind of functions to discuss this better unf.
While DDT is a handy thing, it has a few flaws, most users will not notice and of course; for compiler sellers it may be a neat commercial aspect.
For programmers it often requires work-arounds while the native SDK windows can work out perfectly.
(I would not know of a serious flaw in SDK, besides that SDK programming is somewhat uncommon, like the current implementation of a messagepump is the worst invention imo)
PureBasic also has a form system, i have dealt with that but years after years i see topics on their board things not working which are actually very trivial as one would have understand SDK.
They seem to want to keep this tool very compatible with the other os'es, fine but i also see (hobby) code to make things work under Windows.
People reset things using SetClassLong() and don't seem to care much about modular programming.
I don't believe much in multi-os compilers, but the mono-project does give me hope, there are so many fokes working on that one.
Hope is a big word, i have very little interest in other os'es then Windows at this time.
FreeBasic.. i liked it... until they introduced their formsystem, i did not obtain any info on that, i just removed it.
I don't need another PureBasic flop.
I have serious wish for static linking in PowerBASIC.
I have a need for better ActiveX integration, not workarounds and certainly no more variant misery.
But i am very happy they at least implemented com and supported late-binding.
A neat ForEach() would make my day.
Let's not forget (simple) classes, i did this my way and seeing the code i used, PowerBASIC could do a similar thing inside.
It's so handy to have automatic execution of a callback (destructor)
Of course my own syntax is not that handy, a combination of newer ActiveX support and classes could be very helpful.
Let's not discuss how OOP sucks and so, there are different kind of programmers around.
One likes OOP the other not, big deal..
Quote from: Edwin Knoppert on May 26, 2008, 09:40:29 PM
FreeBasic.. i liked it... until they introduced their formsystem,
? What form system? A few developers have put forth some GUI libraries but none have been accepted as the one for use. Do you mean the FBEdit visual designer by Kelito?
Then i may be wrong, afaik it had one, and no i don't care for other visual design tools.
But building a tool like PwrDev or PBDev around a 'lesser' form system is not my favourite.
People get accustomed to these kind of implementations but those systems often need work-arounds or fixes.
Besides some of them just are flawed in behaviour.
I too think there are no functions in the FreeBASIC runtime lib for anything GUI like.
I think that will always remain something implemented trough external libraries; makes sense since there are already so many lib & tools to choose from.
QuoteI have a strong believe that a compiler should only have helper-functions like Left$(), Repeat$() and so on.
Edwin,
I am with you on that, I also consider that the compiler must focuses on the core meat and provide essential features like built-in COM support or OOP extensions or static linking or VISTA support and same scope of controls that those found in C++.
And for the code editor I am still an UltraEdit happy user.
...
Power Basic number 1 for me too here.
I tried to move into different directions many times but no way. I always go back to Power Basic.
There is something that bring back to PB every time. Something esoteric I suppose :D
"The power of C and the easy of Basic". With PB you can choose at with level to go.
And, very important as José mentioned: stability and almost bug free. You can count on PB stability always, and concentrate on your own code. If something is wrong, I'm sure 99.9999% it is my fault.
I agree with Eros. I have tried Pure Basic but the syntax is funky and all the bug fixes make my head spin. I could never get into Ebasic (Ibasic) though I try and like it. If I were to play with an alternative basic it would be Freebasic. Hands down the most important thing Powerbasic brings is stability (I KNOW mistakes are mine) and the forum. I have written a niche industry program that I am proud of. It start in C 10 years ago and only became a reality due to Powerbasic and all the help I received from the forum. I have never seen much useful on the Freebasic,Ebasic(Ibasic), or Purebasic forum - most if not all are hobbiest.
>most if not all are hobbiest.
Indeed but there are also a few very good programmers over there.
No doubt.
Quotethere are also a few very good programmers over there
Good perhaps, but are they doing their living with it?
With PowerBASIC you can, because it is rock solid and no code obscurfication as long as you go the SDK road.
...
If you concentrate on the users and not on the product, ... well, quite sure you can start a flame.
Who cares about the users? All Pro were hobbiest before being Pro, or not?
Good programmers are everywhere. Much important are ideas and the attitude to achieve them, to reach set targets.
In this case you are wrong.
But.. indeed, let's not talk about the users anymore.
QuoteWho cares about the users?
Software programmers who are making a living from their job, must take care of their users, or they will get soon out of work.
:'(
...
Quote from: Patrice Terrier on May 27, 2008, 06:28:35 PM
QuoteWho cares about the users?
Software programmers who are making a living from their job, must take care of their users, or they will get soon out of work.
:'(
I think that Eros is talking about the users of the compilers, not the users of your applications.
I sometimes have played a little with other compilers, but when I have to write a commercial application, I use proved and stable tools.
+ it's not that a compiler like PureBasic is't suitable for professional stuff.
If it's tested and it works...?
It's that they tend to make things without concern for the future.
Note that i don't spend much time over there, i sometimes follow threads and have the feeling to cry but also like i said, some are really clever.
Somehow this compiler attract people not to serious.
My remarks should not be seen as flaming, it's just a different group of people (like so much languages having people behaving unexpected).
So be it.
QuoteSoftware programmers who are making a living from their job, must take care of their users, or they will get soon out of work.
--José
Yep, but this would also apply to the authors of the compilers themselves :)
Quote from: Patrice Terrier on May 27, 2008, 06:28:35 PM
QuoteWho cares about the users?
Software programmers who are making a living from their job, must take care of their users, or they will get soon out of work.
:'(
I was meaning that discussing about users in this thread has no meaning and it is very bad someone "judge" or classify users in other forums. Users (people) can move, evolve, change mind or interests.
If I'm not wrong we were talking about products and not users of that particular product that is a matter of the product developer.
Thanks José for getting it.
My vote definitely goes to PowerBasic for windows. Though I am not as advanced as many of you, and BTW have many of you to thank for helping me out over the years, it has been and I hope will continue to be a joy to work with PB compilers.
The one thing that I see with the CC version is that is seems to get slower as it adds new features, that is the compiled programs seem slower. That is why I still use, though not much any more, PBcc2.x when using CC and pb6.x together with pbcc4.x and pbwin8.x
You may say that is dangerous but havent had any problems to speak of so far. My use of SDK is limited
and I don't require anything fancy for gui so DDT does the majority of the work for me.
As so many have said before, the best thing about PB is the support from tech and pro users all of which are very unselfish in their help. I appreciate that so much.
I use PowerBASIC for all my serious programming because of the support and bug free nature of the software. Having said that, I find that FreeBASIC is becoming a serious player. All it needs is a few more seriously talented 'developers' to compliment their existing developer base in order to help push development faster. You can already see the momentum building for FB over the last year or so.
FB is already functional in Windows, Linux, and DOS and has many features that PB programmers have been asking for years. Granted, there are also areas (e.g. string handling) where PB rocks over FB. I also like the fact that you can create console and gui programs all from one compiler. Also, the goal is to do an integration with the gcc compiler so when that happens you will see some serious code and speed optimizations for FB. I do wish that they would drop all of the language compatibility modes (i.e. FB, QB, FBlite, Deprecated) and just focus on the FB mode. The other modes are nothing but a distraction and cater to legacy coding practices that are better left in the past.
FB is the only other BASIC compiler that I have any interest whatsoever in.
I have mentioned using BSTR's several times on the pb forum.
Something which annoyed be greatly since ansi BSTR's are good for nearly any Windows API purpose.
We already know why BSTR's are handy anyway.
I have to explain over and over and then still a flawed string implementation.
Geeh, sounds like i know best, also annoying :)
Btw, they had support for ~32kb at first, later this was finally improved but no BSTR.
It may even be that nul chars are no allowed, not sure though.
FreeBasic has BSTR and work fine. Not native but with some include files.