PureBasic V4.0 Question for the team...

netmaestro · Post by **netmaestro** » Wed Jan 25, 2006 8:45 pm

Will it run alongside an existing 3.x install without problems?

Trond · Post by **Trond** » Wed Jan 25, 2006 8:57 pm

Num3 · Post by **Num3** » Wed Jan 25, 2006 9:38 pm

You can use any version of PB you like, just install them in diferent folders!

I have a 3.93 and a 3.94!

Trond · Post by **Trond** » Wed Jan 25, 2006 10:02 pm

Num3 wrote:You can use any version of PB you like

Wow, can I use PB 4 already?

Post by **Berikco** » Wed Jan 25, 2006 10:11 pm

Trond wrote:
Num3 wrote:You can use any version of PB you like
Wow, can I use PB 4 already?

Sure, just send me $10.000

I have all versions 3.0 to 4.0Alpha installed, works just fine.

Killswitch · Post by **Killswitch** » Wed Jan 25, 2006 10:26 pm

$10.000, that's only like £6! Amzing! I'll send you that! Although it is a bit strange that you deicded to give $10 to 3dp, when it clearly doesn't need the decimal places!

(What was it, a typo or do you guys use . instead of ,?)

thefool · Post by **thefool** » Wed Jan 25, 2006 10:29 pm

Yes we use , instead of . in decimals

So he DID write 10 000.

I still wonder why the hell we dont use the same

Joakim Christiansen · Wed Jan 25, 2006 11:16 pm

thefool wrote:Yes we use , instead of . in decimals
So he DID write 10 000.

I still wonder why the hell we dont use the same

Indeed, I think . looks nicer

Post by **Dare2** » Thu Jan 26, 2006 2:04 am

lol. Too many funny things here.

Killswitch · Post by **Killswitch** » Thu Jan 26, 2006 8:38 am

If you use .'s instead of ,'s how do you show decimal numbers?

blueznl · Post by **blueznl** » Thu Jan 26, 2006 8:49 am

, instead of .

sorry

us 10,000.00 = eu 10.000,00

second writing may make more sense (better visibility) but as the whole world is 'americanizing' anyway, many people are leaving out the 'k' dots these days and use decimal point instead of decimal comma

so thanks to computers we have a decimal mess in europe

a way of writing that is slowly beginning to show is 3k5, 3k598.45 etc... not sure if that's any better though

MikeB · Post by **MikeB** » Thu Jan 26, 2006 11:42 am

It's always puzzled me why when we used decimal points in numbers for a long time, when computers came along we started using full stops for the decimal. Most of my utilities, designed for my use only, replace the full stop with the decimal point which I find much easier to read with no chance of misinterpretation. So 3.14159 is shown as 3•14159. This means that the full stop at the end of the sentence cannot be misinterpreted.

cyberseth · Post by **cyberseth** » Thu Jan 26, 2006 3:16 pm

Hello all,

Here is what Wikipedia has to say on the subject.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decimal_separator

The comma was used by France and other European countries, since the full stop was already in use to distinguish roman numerals. At the same time, the US preferred to use the full stop as the decimal separator, and to use the comma in order to distinguish between groups of three digits.

The use of the middle dot was introduced in the British Empire, in order to differentiate between the European use of the dot, however it was rejected due to it already being present in mathematical formulae to represent the dot product. Instead, the British joined the Americans in using a point as a decimal separator.

Trond · Post by **Trond** » Thu Jan 26, 2006 3:53 pm

MikeB wrote:It's always puzzled me why when we used decimal points in numbers for a long time, when computers came along we started using full stops for the decimal. Most of my utilities, designed for my use only, replace the full stop with the decimal point which I find much easier to read with no chance of misinterpretation. So 3.14159 is shown as 3•14159. This means that the full stop at the end of the sentence cannot be misinterpreted.

3•14159 = 3*14159

Amiga5k · Post by **Amiga5k** » Thu Jan 26, 2006 8:20 pm

It's just one of those things that countries do differently that we have to get used to, such as dates:

The 4th of March:
America 3-4-2006

Other countries:
4-3-2006 (which would be interpreted as April 3rd in America).

On a date like today, 1-26-2006, there's no problem, as there is no 26th month. The day/month switch is obvious.

At least Roman numerology hasn't prevailed:
I-XXVI-MMVI or XXVI-I-MMVI (Although some commercial and governmental entities still use them on occasion for some reason: "Superbowl XL", for example).

Russell

p.s. Speaking of dates, on June 6th of this year the date will be 6-6-6...
SPOOKY!!! I wonder what Pat Robertson will "predict" for that day...