Why not make PureBasic Open Source ?

[Josh]

-500

It's Fred's work. If you want Open Source PureBasic, get a team and write it yourself.

+500

[IdeasVacuum]

It's Fred's work. If you want Open Source PureBasic, get a team and write it yourself.

[Tenaja]

-500

It's Fred's work. If you want Open Source PureBasic, get a team and write it yourself.

No, if you want Open Source PB, go use FreeBasic. It is nearly the same.

[BorisTheOld]

No, if you want Open Source PB, go use FreeBasic. It is nearly the same.

It's not really "nearly the same". In fact it's really quite different. It's QuickBasic with a few extra features and data types, plus bindings that allow various C libraries to be accessed. Whereas PB has everything built into the language.

The thing to remember about Open Source languages is that they evolve very slowly through the efforts of a few dedicated souls. So trying to speed up PB development by making it Open Source is a futile exercise.

Better to offer suggestions and let PB's "dedicated souls" figure out how to make it work. After all, that's what they do.

[J. Baker]

I wish the forum had an option to hide topics. I'm tired of seeing this one.

[davido]

I wish the forum had an option to hide topics. I'm tired of seeing this one.

+1

[BorisTheOld]

I wish the forum had an option to hide topics. I'm tired of seeing this one.

The feature already exists -- it's called self discipline.

You're not being forced to read a topic or post in it.

[es_91]

+500, also to your previous posting

[Kruno]

I have an idea.

Lets start a discussion on PureBasic and OOP.

[Rings]

better not.

topic moved

[tj1010]

As a professional, person who knows the fundamentals of economics, and a person who knows what it means to code night and day to finish a project, I actually wish they would make a full source code repository, and put a license on the code that prevents commercial and uncredited use.. If for no other reason than just to show why they never bothered to do it for years..

If a miracle happened and competent coders picked up some of the work-load than great, if criminals used it to find vulnerabilities, they would eventually make exploits which is still a form of work. Worst and Likely case: hundreds of BASICS with almost no other features and dead-support..

[TI-994A]

There's always good and bad in everything. In this case, the risk of damaging many years of hard work clearly outweigh the benefits of an open-source approach. Furthermore, it shouldn't be much of an issue for a product that is continually being updated and delivers cutting-edge performance.

[Blankname]

I honestly think every part of the PureBasic package that is written in PureBasic should be open sourced (with restrictions against other languages using it). This wouldn't hurt the PureBasic language at all, as that's merely cosmetics like the IDE.

[Tenaja]

I honestly think every part of the PureBasic package that is written in PureBasic should be open sourced (with restrictions against other languages using it). This wouldn't hurt the PureBasic language at all, as that's merely cosmetics like the IDE.

In theory, that's a great idea.
In practice, any source that is available, regardless of the license (assuming it is not 100% "do what you want"), gets abused (i.e. used in a manner contrary to the license) by someone. At the least, it allows a coder to "easily" reverse engineer it and replace its functionality (even if the license prohibits it--if that is even possible).

This flaw in humans forces people like Fred to accept either a) the "theft" or b) the inability to o/s code. With his previous experience of sharing IDE source, my guess would be he is accepting option b. (Although I was not here during that time, my guess is based on comments about it be ported to other platforms.) Because he was willing to try it once, I'd bet that had it gone as he'd hoped, there would be a lot more o/s stuff from him.

[Fred]

That's correct, it went the opposite of what we expected: no contributions, but reuse of the source for another (concurrent) programming language. That said, I indeed like opensource, and PB uses a lot of opensource work (just look at the integrated libs like SQLite, PCRE, libjpeg, OGRE etc.). It just doesn't fit the current PB model, so for now it won't happen. As I said somewhen in the past, if I get really bored and found no one to get PureBasic running, I will open source it (fully).