TBC - Tokiwa BASIC gui in PureBasic

Developed or developing a new product in PureBasic? Tell the world about it.
TronDoc
Enthusiast
Enthusiast
Posts: 310
Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2003 3:50 am
Location: 3DoorsDown

TBC - Tokiwa BASIC gui in PureBasic

Post by TronDoc »

http://www.allbasiccode.com/cgi-bin/YaB ... 1050078943

it's not much right now, but I'm not good at PureBasic so
I thought I'd start a little project that I might succeed at.

here's a more direct link.. ..it bypasses all of the pre-discussion
(apologies)
http://www.allbasiccode.com/cgi-bin/YaB ... 3;start=25

Joe
peace
[pI 166Mhz 32Mb w95]
[pII 350Mhz 256Mb atir3RagePro WinDoze '98 FE & 2k]
[Athlon 1.3Ghz 160Mb XPHome & RedHat9]
PB
PureBasic Expert
PureBasic Expert
Posts: 7581
Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2003 5:24 pm

Re: TBC - Tokiwa BASIC gui in PureBasic

Post by PB »

What's it all about? I don't understand?
TronDoc
Enthusiast
Enthusiast
Posts: 310
Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2003 3:50 am
Location: 3DoorsDown

Post by TronDoc »

It's just a GUI interface I am trying to write in PureBasic
for the Tokiwa BASIC compiler. I thought if anyone had
an interest they could provide some input; if not it can
be ignored. :wink:
peace
[pI 166Mhz 32Mb w95]
[pII 350Mhz 256Mb atir3RagePro WinDoze '98 FE & 2k]
[Athlon 1.3Ghz 160Mb XPHome & RedHat9]
User avatar
fsw
Addict
Addict
Posts: 1572
Joined: Tue Apr 29, 2003 9:18 pm
Location: North by Northwest

Post by fsw »

TronDoc wrote:It's just a GUI interface I am trying to write in PureBasic
for the Tokiwa BASIC compiler. I thought if anyone had
an interest they could provide some input; if not it can
be ignored. :wink:
Maybe Fred could give some input :?:

Some times ago he said that it's not allowed to use PureBasic as a GUI toolkit for other programming languages. 8O

:?
TronDoc
Enthusiast
Enthusiast
Posts: 310
Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2003 3:50 am
Location: 3DoorsDown

Post by TronDoc »

interesting.

I did not know that.

I might understand if it was
a product capable of competing
with PureBasic; however, it's not.

that brings up another interesting point.
is it right to say what can or cannot be
programmed in any language?

for example, if I want to write a virus
to test my virus protection software;
is that not allowed by the author of
the language I am programming in?

or, if I were so talented using
PureBasic that I could write a
BASIC that could compete
with PureBasic; would that
be disallowed?

I have no doubt that it would be poor
manners to try to sell my competing
BASIC here on the PureBasic forums.

In any event, I am not so talented
as all that and that is the reason I'm
trying to write a simple program to
teach myself how to program in
PureBASIC. It is something I thought
to be useful to myself and perhaps
others; and never intended to
cause any negative concerns
nor controversy.

I don't recall this type of discussion
being held on this forum before; so if
it has already been hashed and rehashed
please point me links to the postings
so we don't have to waste time,
bandwidth, intellect and emotions here.

if the moderators wish to remove
this thread; please do so.

Joe
peace
[pI 166Mhz 32Mb w95]
[pII 350Mhz 256Mb atir3RagePro WinDoze '98 FE & 2k]
[Athlon 1.3Ghz 160Mb XPHome & RedHat9]
Fred
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 16619
Joined: Fri May 17, 2002 4:39 pm
Location: France
Contact:

Post by Fred »

This kind of discussion is not forbidden and what you have to remember
is easy:

You can write a programming langage which compete with PureBasic
directly in PureBasic, no problem. But you can't wrap the PB commands as your commandset for your langage. It means you can of course use all the PB commands to write the compiler itself (including an editor, visual designer etc...) but not base your langage commandset on PB commands. That's fair enough I think.
TronDoc
Enthusiast
Enthusiast
Posts: 310
Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2003 3:50 am
Location: 3DoorsDown

Post by TronDoc »

thanks for clearing things up Fred. :D
I would never try to compete
with PureBasic anyway.

Joe
peace
[pI 166Mhz 32Mb w95]
[pII 350Mhz 256Mb atir3RagePro WinDoze '98 FE & 2k]
[Athlon 1.3Ghz 160Mb XPHome & RedHat9]
wcardoso
User
User
Posts: 80
Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2003 5:06 pm
Location: Uruguay

Post by wcardoso »

Fred:
Why we can´t wrap PB commands ?. When you wrote PB really where "wrapping" ASM commands to produce the exe file. This is the meanning of compilers, isn´t it ?
8O
with love from Uruguay
freak
PureBasic Team
PureBasic Team
Posts: 5929
Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2003 5:21 pm
Location: Germany

Post by freak »

wcardoso:
That's not quite true.

You need to look at this from 2 points. The one side is the compiler. here
you are right, the PB compiler is written in ASM, like every compiler is
written in some lower level language. That's not what i call 'wrapping'
something. Fred also said here, that you might write another compiler in PB, that can compete with it, and there would be no problem at all.

The problematic point are the Librarys that come with PB. Some of the
Librarys contain very much code, that Fred spend a great amount of time,
to make them work.

Now think a bit of that... Somebody creates his own compiler using PB,
and it is working fine, and everybody likes it... all is ok so far... now this
guy goes ahead and says: "look, my language also has some cool and
easy Movie commands", but what he really did, was just putting one line
of code in his compiler that calls PB's movie commands.

Now tell me, if this is a fair deal for Fred!

Or even less complex: Somebody from, let's say the BlitzBasic community
says: "look, i wrote some cool commands for easy GUI creating" and sells
a dll with them. But what he really did, was just putting all PB's GUI
commands in a dll.

Is that fair?

I think you got my point. There is a difference between the compiler and
the libs. The PB libs are mean for programming in PB, not for extending
somebody else's programming language.

Timo
quidquid Latine dictum sit altum videtur
User avatar
blueb
Addict
Addict
Posts: 1041
Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2003 2:15 pm
Location: Cuernavaca, Mexico

Post by blueb »

:)

Could not have said it better!

Thanks Timo

--blueb
wcardoso
User
User
Posts: 80
Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2003 5:06 pm
Location: Uruguay

Post by wcardoso »

freak:
When you use an API function what are you doing ?, you´re calling a Microsoft "hard work" for your own business, isn´t it ?.
Imagine if Microsoft say "You can use our OS as you like, but you can´t use our API calls for doing another compiler". What a nightmare !!
:wink:
with love from Uruguay
freak
PureBasic Team
PureBasic Team
Posts: 5929
Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2003 5:21 pm
Location: Germany

Post by freak »

lol, you don't get the point, do you?

API is "Application Programing Interface", and is designed to be used
by all Windows programs.

... But that is actualy not such a bad example...

the WinAPI is designed to be used for Windows Apps. Imagine somebody
would extract the code, and use it for a Program that runs on the Mac or
on Linux.

Don't you think, Microsoft would call it's loyers, and throw that guy into jail?

That's just the same! The PureBasic libraries are designed to be used
with PureBasic! Don't you get that?

@Fred:
Maybe it's time to put up some kind of license that clearly states things like that.

Timo
quidquid Latine dictum sit altum videtur
Fred
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 16619
Joined: Fri May 17, 2002 4:39 pm
Location: France
Contact:

Post by Fred »

I'm on it, will be included in v3.70.
User avatar
tinman
PureBasic Expert
PureBasic Expert
Posts: 1102
Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2003 4:56 pm
Location: Level 5 of Robot Hell
Contact:

Post by tinman »

freak wrote:Don't you think, Microsoft would call it's loyers, and throw that guy into jail?
Didn't MS get very annoyed at WINE, which deosn't even replicate the code, just the API? I think they'd get majorly annoyed at stealing code :)
If you paint your butt blue and glue the hole shut you just themed your ass but lost the functionality.
(WinXPhSP3 PB5.20b14)
User avatar
GedB
Addict
Addict
Posts: 1312
Joined: Fri May 16, 2003 3:47 pm
Location: England
Contact:

Post by GedB »

When you call an API call you are calling a runtime library that must be preinstalled on Windows. The API calls will not work on Linux.

In order to use it you have to first buy Windows. Microsoft have already been paid for there hard work.

What Fred is referring to is generating a new langauge that is 90% PB and then selling it on without giving Fred a penny for his hard work.

You could write a language based on PB that would only work if you are a registered user of PB. It could be a preprocessor language, for example, that generates PB code for compiling. Similar to Eiffel generating C++ code.

As long as the user was required to register PB to use it, I'm sure there would be no problem (Could someone please confirm).
Post Reply