PB 6.0 - ideas

Got an idea for enhancing PureBasic? New command(s) you'd like to see?
User avatar
the.weavster
Addict
Addict
Posts: 1537
Joined: Thu Jul 03, 2003 6:53 pm
Location: England

Re: PB 6.0 - ideas

Post by the.weavster »

NicTheQuick wrote:Or it would even be cooler with Interfaces

Code: Select all

Debug Vector2d(1, 2).add(Vector2Dd(2,2))\length() ; =5
Having spent all day learning and experimenting with Interfaces I want this too now :D
Trond
Always Here
Always Here
Posts: 7446
Joined: Mon Sep 22, 2003 6:45 pm
Location: Norway

Re: PB 6.0 - ideas

Post by Trond »

NicTheQuick wrote:
skywalk wrote:2. Enable jump to definition of item under cursor.
+1
For procedure calls and includes (click on the include keyword, not on the filename), you can hold ctrl and double-click.
Rinzwind
Enthusiast
Enthusiast
Posts: 638
Joined: Wed Mar 11, 2009 4:06 pm
Location: NL

Re: PB 6.0 - ideas

Post by Rinzwind »

Well here goes nothing... improve existing gadgets and add completely new modern and complex gadgets. I think the IUP framework would suit well. No need to do it all yourself (and impossible too with complex gadgets considering the company size/expertise). http://webserver2.tecgraf.puc-rio.br/iup/

The current gadgets are basic mappings to the same old win32/linux controls. With no convenience functions to speak of. Things like default listview sorting is not there out-of-the-box.

A procedural language can specifically improve from supporting returning multiple procedure values in a simple compact syntax.

Purebasic sometimes suffers from bracket () overload. Using brackets () in lists, arrays, procedure arguments and calling. Why the lists and arrays don't use []?

Autoconvert int to string for Map because mymap(Str(myid)) looks ugly.

It seems that at least HiDPI finally gets the attention it needs and will be resolved :)
smishra
User
User
Posts: 70
Joined: Tue Jun 06, 2006 3:39 pm
Location: Maryland US

Re: PB 6.0 - ideas

Post by smishra »

+1 for LLVM or C backend

Even if all the library functions (are not/ cannot be) supported on a generic LLVM/C backend

Right now I code in PB and test out on Windows, and for a non supported platform translate the code to C, and write C code equivalent for PB library functions
smishra
User
User
Posts: 70
Joined: Tue Jun 06, 2006 3:39 pm
Location: Maryland US

Re: PB 6.0 - ideas

Post by smishra »

There may be benefits to LLVM or C backend even without PB library support.

I find the warnings generated by a modern C compiler helpful

- for example unused variables can be identified
- code that will never be reached

and so on.

Many of the warnings could be applicable to PB code and help in maintaining larger projects.
GenRabbit
Enthusiast
Enthusiast
Posts: 118
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2014 5:41 pm

Re: PB 6.0 - ideas

Post by GenRabbit »

I'd like to see
Dword (unsigned 32bit)
Unsigned Word. (I use Unicode, but It looks weird in a way)
Unsigned Integer

Also better fileread support in the error responed.
Example from Manual:
Number.l = ReadLong(#File)
Return value

Returns the read value or zero if there was an error.

But what if the value there actually is Zero? Then you get an error message where there are none.

maybe something like;
Number.i = FileMessage(#File)

#PB_Window_InnerCoordinate & #PB_Window_FrameCoordinate added to OpenWindow and resize.
DontTalkToMe
Enthusiast
Enthusiast
Posts: 334
Joined: Mon Feb 04, 2013 5:28 pm

Re: PB 6.0 - ideas

Post by DontTalkToMe »

I'd like to see no new features for the time being.
Just the fixing of 3-10 years old bugs before moving forward ... :wink:
akee
Enthusiast
Enthusiast
Posts: 475
Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2004 9:52 am
Location: Penang, Malaysia

Re: PB 6.0 - ideas

Post by akee »

Is there a date on a PB 6.0 RC?
Post Reply