[Implemented] InputBox requester

BackupUser · Post by **BackupUser** » Tue Dec 04, 2001 6:53 pm

Restored from previous forum. Originally posted by PB.

Hi Fred,

In the 'Tricks and Tips' section is an InputBox example which
would be great to have as a built-in command, rather than a lot
of code.

PB - Registered PureBasic Coder

BackupUser · Post by **BackupUser** » Tue Dec 04, 2001 8:36 pm

Restored from previous forum. Originally posted by Franco.

In the 'Tricks and Tips' section is an InputBox example which
would be great to have as a built-in command, rather than a lot
of code.

Well here is it again, my wish to create libs with PureBasic.
Have made 2 different InputBox procedures (InputRequester and OpenInputWindow) with the choice of different sizes ( 4 if I remember well...).

If the PB generated code is not 100% optimized it doesn't matter anyway.
For procedures like that it would be a great thing!

Please Fred can you consider this?

Have a nice day...
Franco

Edited by - franco on 04 December 2001 20:55:23

BackupUser · Post by **BackupUser** » Tue Dec 04, 2001 9:08 pm

Restored from previous forum. Originally posted by PB.

If the PB generated code is not 100% optimized it doesn't matter anyway.

It may not matter to you, but it does to me, and I assume many others.
I want my apps to be 100% ASM hand-optimized compilations; not part ASM
and part BASIC... a library written in PureBasic is no better than just
using a procedure.

PB - Registered PureBasic Coder

Edited by - PB on 04 December 2001 21:57:28

BackupUser · Post by **BackupUser** » Tue Dec 04, 2001 10:23 pm

Restored from previous forum. Originally posted by Franco.

It may not matter to you, but it does to me, and I assume many others.
I want my apps to be 100% ASM hand-optimized compilations; not part ASM
and part BASIC...

OK PB, I understand that but...
how fast has an InputRequester to show up?

like I said:

For procedures like that it would be a great thing

You have totally right PB, other things are a lot better in pure asm.

a library written in PureBasic is no better than just
using a procedure.

That's right but you mentioned not the speed, you mentioned:

would be great to have as a built-in command, rather than a lot
of code.

and procedures compiled to libs would bring less code.

Anyway:

I understand your point PB and I agree totally, if you like pure speed you need pure asm.

Have a nice day...
Franco

Edited by - franco on 04 December 2001 22:24:44

BackupUser · Post by **BackupUser** » Wed Dec 05, 2001 10:13 am

Restored from previous forum. Originally posted by PB.

how fast has an InputRequester to show up?

Hi Franco,

It's not just that I want the InputBox to show up fast, it's the fact that using
PureBasic libraries instead of ASM libraries makes your executables bigger too.

For example, using MessageRequester instead of the MessageBox_() API makes
your executable slightly larger, when they both do exactly the same thing.
Likewise, a PureBasic library would increase your exe's size compared to an
ASM library.

I would have no problem with PureBasic libraries if Fred make sure that they
must start with "PB_" as their filename. That way, I would know they
are not ASM libraries and I wouldn't have to use them. That would solve the
problem for both you and I.

PB - Registered PureBasic Coder

Edited by - PB on 05 December 2001 10:15:30