What about PowerBASIC

[Patrice Terrier]

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 

Thus, while i am using different languages, PowerBASIC (except DDT) is still my favorite one

...

[Petr Schreiber]

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

[Patrice Terrier]

I 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

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 

...

[José Roca]

 

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.

[Edwin Knoppert]

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..

[Paul Squires]

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?

[Edwin Knoppert]

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.

[Marco Pontello]

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.

[Patrice Terrier]

I 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.

...

[Eros Olmi]

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 

"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.

[James Klutho]

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.

[Edwin Knoppert]

>most if not all are hobbiest.

Indeed but there are also a few very good programmers over there.
No doubt.

[Patrice Terrier]

there 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.

...

[Eros Olmi]

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.

[Edwin Knoppert]

In this case you are wrong.

But.. indeed, let's not talk about the users anymore.