PureBasic 6.00 released !

Developed or developing a new product in PureBasic? Tell the world about it.
User avatar
CDXbow
User
User
Posts: 24
Joined: Mon Aug 12, 2019 5:32 am
Location: Oz

Re: PureBasic 6.00 Alpha 1 released !

Post by CDXbow »

Marc56us wrote: Sat May 22, 2021 6:39 am
CDXbow wrote: Sat May 22, 2021 2:06 am Big thanks to Fred and the team, you guys are brilliant.
I've recompiled & run half a dozen small programs without problems.
I can't see any speed difference in the exes, but I have noticed the C compiled programs are about 30% bigger.
For the tests I have done so far with my existing programs, I have found 2% to 8% more size (so insignificant given the small initial size of PB programs)

As cas said: Be careful not to confuse the 32bits compiler. 32-bit versions are often 30% smaller than 64-bit versions.

I'm recompiling all my current programs, just to test, and it's amazing: everything works. The only modification I had to do (sometimes) is to adapt the lines using #PB_Compiler_Processor (put the numerical value 6 in addition for x64 programs)

:wink:
Yes you are right, I'm a dummy, I did use the 32bit one by mistake. I'm getting so many different versions of PB It's getting confusing! Given how small PB programs are it's almost irrelevant.
User avatar
oryaaaaa
Enthusiast
Enthusiast
Posts: 791
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2004 11:40 pm
Location: Okazaki, JAPAN

Re: PureBasic 6.00 Alpha 1 released !

Post by oryaaaaa »

Thanks Fred, I'm working on the next stage in my daily research and development of music playback software, and I've established a method to solve the CPU jitter problem that occurs in various computers. Currently, PureBasic has about 30,000 lines of source code, most of which is written in macros, and the final number of lines is 6 million. At the REASM stage, the PureBasic.asm used for building is 9 million lines due to cache avoidance instructions and FASM macro instructions to make constants that do not use numbers (variables created by INC SHL). I am very interested in the new C backend. Inevitably, optimization from FASM has issues with execution speed, and I cannot implement processes that require performance.
davido
Addict
Addict
Posts: 1890
Joined: Fri Nov 09, 2012 11:04 pm
Location: Uttoxeter, UK

Re: PureBasic 6.00 Alpha 1 released !

Post by davido »

@Fred and Team,
I haven't noticed any difference so far. It appears more like a good beta rather than Alpha 1!!
I noticed very little difference size and speed.
Excellent. Thank you for all the hard work. :D

Two questions:

1. Hopefully this version will have a better pricing structure; like Spider Basic. Will it?
2. Is it likely to work better with anti-virus software?
DE AA EB
jack
Addict
Addict
Posts: 1336
Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2003 11:10 pm

Re: PureBasic 6.00 Alpha 1 released !

Post by jack »

@davido
are you using the C back-end?
because you have to select it in compiler options, see Fred's opening post
I hope that I didn't offend you, it's just that you are likely to see some differences
Cezary
User
User
Posts: 89
Joined: Sun Feb 12, 2017 2:31 pm

Re: PureBasic 6.00 Alpha 1 released !

Post by Cezary »

Trying to compile with C backend I get this message (with fasm everything is ok):

purebasic.c: in function 'processcontrol$f_btnstop_handler':
purebasic.c1557:1: error: 'PB_DEBUGGER_LineNumber'
undeclared (first use in this function)
PB_DEBUGGER_LineNumber=50332567;;;
^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
purebasic.c1557:1: note: each undeclared identifier is reported
only once for each function id appears in
purebasic.c: in function 'processcontrol$f_btnstop_handler':
purebasic.c1581:1: error: 'PB_DEBUGGER_LineNumber'
undeclared (first use in this function)
...
^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

What it means?
User avatar
Keya
Addict
Addict
Posts: 1891
Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2015 7:10 am

Re: PureBasic 6.00 Alpha 1 released !

Post by Keya »

Cezary wrote: Sat May 22, 2021 10:25 pmWhat it means?
It's a bit hard to say when you havent provided example source code that's triggering the problem
cas
Enthusiast
Enthusiast
Posts: 597
Joined: Mon Nov 03, 2008 9:56 pm

Re: PureBasic 6.00 Alpha 1 released !

Post by cas »

Cezary wrote: Sat May 22, 2021 10:25 pm What it means?
This bug was already reported. Temporary fix until new update is to disable OnError lines support.
https://www.purebasic.fr/english/viewto ... 43&t=77317
BarryG
Addict
Addict
Posts: 3293
Joined: Thu Apr 18, 2019 8:17 am

Re: PureBasic 6.00 Alpha 1 released !

Post by BarryG »

davido wrote: Sat May 22, 2021 6:51 pm 1. Hopefully this version will have a better pricing structure; like Spider Basic. Will it?
2. Is it likely to work better with anti-virus software?
I hope for both of these, too.

I can't test #2 because my app won't compile with 6.00 and I use modules from others that I can't debug (plus I have no time).

For #1, all Fred needs to do is grandfather all existing users to honour the lifetime license they paid for. It makes good sense.
User avatar
Tenaja
Addict
Addict
Posts: 1948
Joined: Tue Nov 09, 2010 10:15 pm

Re: PureBasic 6.00 Alpha 1 released !

Post by Tenaja »

BarryG wrote: Sun May 23, 2021 1:49 am
davido wrote: Sat May 22, 2021 6:51 pm 1. Hopefully this version will have a better pricing structure; like Spider Basic. Will it?
2. Is it likely to work better with anti-virus software?
I hope for both of these, too.

I can't test #2 because my app won't compile with 6.00 and I use modules from others that I can't debug (plus I have no time).

For #1, all Fred needs to do is grandfather all existing users to honour the lifetime license they paid for. It makes good sense.
No matter what, Fred is not going to take away the license we paid for. The PB we have is perpetual.

I, on the other hand, prefer Fred starts to charge a (small) maintenance fee. I would happily pay it, in the hopes that it should help add a full time developer, for upgrades. (Our occasional contributions by contractors.) After all, we paid for a pb that emits asm, not one that emits C, so technically, this new version is a totally different product. The only thing it has in common with the original one is the syntax and libraries.
User avatar
Keya
Addict
Addict
Posts: 1891
Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2015 7:10 am

Re: PureBasic 6.00 Alpha 1 released !

Post by Keya »

Tenaja wrote: Sun May 23, 2021 5:34 amAfter all, we paid for a pb that emits asm, not one that emits C
well it still ultimately emits asm, it just converts PB to C before gcc emits the asm. You can use gcc to dump the assembly source code
BarryG
Addict
Addict
Posts: 3293
Joined: Thu Apr 18, 2019 8:17 am

Re: PureBasic 6.00 Alpha 1 released !

Post by BarryG »

Tenaja wrote: Sun May 23, 2021 5:34 amNo matter what, Fred is not going to take away the license we paid for. The PB we have is perpetual.
Yes, that's exactly what "grandfathering" means. I'm not saying we should have anything taken away from what we've paid for. It's only new users who buy starting from v6.00 that would not get free updates for life. But, the choice is his. I think he's totally crazy if he doesn't, though. It's noble to say money means nothing, but it's the lifeblood of any business, and a lot of profit is needed to pay for development and living expenses.
User avatar
mk-soft
Always Here
Always Here
Posts: 5335
Joined: Fri May 12, 2006 6:51 pm
Location: Germany

Re: PureBasic 6.00 Alpha 1 released !

Post by mk-soft »

I think the appeal for donations should have more meaning here.
My Projects ThreadToGUI / OOP-BaseClass / EventDesigner V3
PB v3.30 / v5.75 - OS Mac Mini OSX 10.xx - VM Window Pro / Linux Ubuntu
Downloads on my Webspace / OneDrive
User avatar
Saki
Addict
Addict
Posts: 830
Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2020 11:28 am
Location: Pandora

Re: PureBasic 6.00 Alpha 1 released !

Post by Saki »

I don't think it's our business to discuss how to market or market a product,
that we didn't create ourselves.
地球上の平和
User avatar
Tenaja
Addict
Addict
Posts: 1948
Joined: Tue Nov 09, 2010 10:15 pm

Re: PureBasic 6.00 Alpha 1 released !

Post by Tenaja »

Saki wrote: Sun May 23, 2021 2:43 pm I don't think it's our business to discuss how to market or market a product,
that we didn't create ourselves.
I don't agree. This is the only one remaining software I've purchased with "free updates for life." Every other one I've purchased has gone belly-up, or abandoned updates. And no, I would not say that pb was the best of all of the software.

It IS my business to be interested in its longevity, and since it appears that the model does not last long term (in general--obviously PB is the one exception...so far...), then I will encourage a departure.

The problem is, my $25 will have no impact. It will get Fred a coffee and a meal at a cheap diner. But then it's gone. However, if 3000 of us (half of the forum user count) gave him that same 25 every year, then he might be able to focus, and give up the job hunt... Or maybe hire a junior coder.

And history shows us that in open source models, donations do not exist. Even with 100's of thousands of users, donations would not buy a very nice meal once a year. Will it be any different with pb? I doubt it. (That's one reason I haven't donated--instead, I paid for a license for another user.)

On the other hand, $20 annually might be The Last Straw that pushes a few users away. But does it matter? Many leave for greener code pastures anyway. Who knows?

What I do know is that 6000 forum users over 20+ years means that Fred is doing this as a passion/hobby, and certainly not an income. So, maybe it's all moot.
User avatar
Saki
Addict
Addict
Posts: 830
Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2020 11:28 am
Location: Pandora

Re: PureBasic 6.00 Alpha 1 released !

Post by Saki »

We won't be able to influence it anyway, i think.
The official statements are well known.
I think it is not appropriate to discuss how other people earn or should earn their living.
Anyone can donate, and anyone who can do so financially should do so.
The active coders are also important.
Without active coders, no codes, without codes, ... difficult.
地球上の平和
Post Reply