Restored from previous forum. Originally posted by Eikeland.
Like many of you I'm VB developer.
I have not so many complain's on MS VB (Vb6 and .NEt) they keep me alive..LOL
Anyway I was looking for a Runtime independed solution and a cross-platform solution (Win32 and Linux).
Richard
Why did you pickup PureBasic and purchase it?
-
BackupUser
- PureBasic Guru
- Posts: 16777133
- Joined: Tue Apr 22, 2003 7:42 pm
Restored from previous forum. Originally posted by Karbon.
BB3D Coming? It's been here a long time (if you're referring to Blitz3D)!
I've been playing in BlitzPlus, Blitz2D and Blitz3D for a while and really like it. I came to PureBASIC for windows application coding - I will probably stick with Blitz for game stuff (though you never know!)...
PureBASIC has blitzPlus beat hands down for windows app stuff but I'm not too sure about the game side of things.. Considering I've owned PureBASIC for exactly 2 hours, I'm not in much of a position to make that judgement yet..
-Mitch
BB3D Coming? It's been here a long time (if you're referring to Blitz3D)!
I've been playing in BlitzPlus, Blitz2D and Blitz3D for a while and really like it. I came to PureBASIC for windows application coding - I will probably stick with Blitz for game stuff (though you never know!)...
PureBASIC has blitzPlus beat hands down for windows app stuff but I'm not too sure about the game side of things.. Considering I've owned PureBASIC for exactly 2 hours, I'm not in much of a position to make that judgement yet..
-Mitch
-
BackupUser
- PureBasic Guru
- Posts: 16777133
- Joined: Tue Apr 22, 2003 7:42 pm
Restored from previous forum. Originally posted by theogott.
COming from Powerbasic (still using it most times cause it has "long strings" and most of my programms work with that),
Ihad some reasonsn:
1. I wanted to improve my ASM the "easy way". Using Basic-I/O and Debuggin making some subroutines in ASM.
The strenghts of Purebasic is clearly FASM which is nearly unbeatable as an Assembler with macros.
2. I wanted to make small programms beeing able to distribute them via my WEB-Site. Therefore they should not need any installation. Purebasic makes small and compact code.
3. At the moment my standpoint is that Purebasic has enough features, and is fast enough. Also for those who use it daily (and know its strenghts and weaknesses) it may be unbeatable.
For me - before really getting more into it I'll wait till the "Bugs-Section" gets more empty. PB developed ten times faster then any other system and of course some bugs found their way. I guess there will now be some need for consolidation. Also I'd prefer it "bug-free" instead of 10% faster.
Someone who doesn't have it, coming from other languages may get a wrong impression when reading the "Bugs_section" here in the forum.
What do we find there ?
DLL-Stuff, bug-in string-lib, math (even MORE), structures & pointer, Console ... he may ask what is left that is really reliable in PB.
Try to look at it with the eyes of a newcomer.
Ok, other languages (Powerbasic) keep their bugs-list "closed". And of course its better to show them openly like its here. However then its also a promiss to keep it short. (And delete all entries which are fixed).
I'd recommend to put all new ideas of getting 10% more speed or more features aside, for a while, and do my best to test, test, test what is there and make it really reliable.
Sometimes I think of Donald Knuth he says "everyone who finds a bug in my program gets a check with $2^8 cents".
See http://truetex.com/knuthchk.htm
*************************
The best time to do things is now !
COming from Powerbasic (still using it most times cause it has "long strings" and most of my programms work with that),
Ihad some reasonsn:
1. I wanted to improve my ASM the "easy way". Using Basic-I/O and Debuggin making some subroutines in ASM.
The strenghts of Purebasic is clearly FASM which is nearly unbeatable as an Assembler with macros.
2. I wanted to make small programms beeing able to distribute them via my WEB-Site. Therefore they should not need any installation. Purebasic makes small and compact code.
3. At the moment my standpoint is that Purebasic has enough features, and is fast enough. Also for those who use it daily (and know its strenghts and weaknesses) it may be unbeatable.
For me - before really getting more into it I'll wait till the "Bugs-Section" gets more empty. PB developed ten times faster then any other system and of course some bugs found their way. I guess there will now be some need for consolidation. Also I'd prefer it "bug-free" instead of 10% faster.
Someone who doesn't have it, coming from other languages may get a wrong impression when reading the "Bugs_section" here in the forum.
What do we find there ?
DLL-Stuff, bug-in string-lib, math (even MORE), structures & pointer, Console ... he may ask what is left that is really reliable in PB.
Try to look at it with the eyes of a newcomer.
Ok, other languages (Powerbasic) keep their bugs-list "closed". And of course its better to show them openly like its here. However then its also a promiss to keep it short. (And delete all entries which are fixed).
I'd recommend to put all new ideas of getting 10% more speed or more features aside, for a while, and do my best to test, test, test what is there and make it really reliable.
Sometimes I think of Donald Knuth he says "everyone who finds a bug in my program gets a check with $2^8 cents".
See http://truetex.com/knuthchk.htm
*************************
The best time to do things is now !
-
BackupUser
- PureBasic Guru
- Posts: 16777133
- Joined: Tue Apr 22, 2003 7:42 pm
Restored from previous forum. Originally posted by fred.
I think it's important to let the users saw which bugs are actually found in PureBasic. I don't need to hide them, and it motivates me to fix them all
. About the current opened bugs, there is only the float one which is really annoying but I'm on it and it will be fixed for the next version. If you consider the 600+ command set, there is no so much bugs left, really.. Thanks to all users which have spend their time on such silly things and helped me during to this hard task.
I think it's important to let the users saw which bugs are actually found in PureBasic. I don't need to hide them, and it motivates me to fix them all
. About the current opened bugs, there is only the float one which is really annoying but I'm on it and it will be fixed for the next version. If you consider the 600+ command set, there is no so much bugs left, really.. Thanks to all users which have spend their time on such silly things and helped me during to this hard task.-
BackupUser
- PureBasic Guru
- Posts: 16777133
- Joined: Tue Apr 22, 2003 7:42 pm
Restored from previous forum. Originally posted by Max..
A compact executable!
Speed wasn't that important for me, but I hated all the stuff you had to distribute together with your program. It was hardly possible to create a setup that fits on a single disk.
Before purchasing I also checked the forums and was fond of the people willing to help. It looked that most problems occuring could be solved by just visiting the 2 main forums.
I bought very quickly and never regretted it.
Probably 20 years ago I started programming. C-64, Amiga (I had an assembler called KickAss, anyone remember?), QBasic, then long time stuck with Turbo Pascal/DOS. At a time, when Windows really became the platform of choice, I switched to Visual Basic - for a simple reason: I got the license paid, though I'd have preferred to use Turbo Pascal/Win and later Delphi. For *ix-platforms I usually use Perl and Php, depending on the purpose.
Well, for the last 10 years my job was not really related to programming - and still isn't, sadly. Usually I need to program little helper tools for integrating different stuff, and for that PB is really perfect.
Mind you - there is a corporate group, spending big bucks on the IT; using a lot of SAP R/3 servers. But without one small PB program - 50kb - the whole accounting department cannot work, hehe.
I never had to help the users with the programs. They were able to install it themselves and run it without training. Not a single complaint in the last 4 months. No feedback at all, lol. But yep, they still use it and have to use it.
Max.
AMD Athlon, Matrox G550, Win 2K SP3, IE 6.0, PB 3.62
Maybe 2 weeks before christmas, I was on sourceforge.net, if I remember right and saw an ad there for Purebasic. I downloaded the demo and it seemed to have what I lacked most from Visual Basic:Originally posted by ricardo
The question is too simple and can be interesant if every one of us say why he pick up Pure Basic. I hope every one tell us if he is somekind of beginner or comes from an other language looking for something in special.
A compact executable!
Speed wasn't that important for me, but I hated all the stuff you had to distribute together with your program. It was hardly possible to create a setup that fits on a single disk.
Before purchasing I also checked the forums and was fond of the people willing to help. It looked that most problems occuring could be solved by just visiting the 2 main forums.
I bought very quickly and never regretted it.
Probably 20 years ago I started programming. C-64, Amiga (I had an assembler called KickAss, anyone remember?), QBasic, then long time stuck with Turbo Pascal/DOS. At a time, when Windows really became the platform of choice, I switched to Visual Basic - for a simple reason: I got the license paid, though I'd have preferred to use Turbo Pascal/Win and later Delphi. For *ix-platforms I usually use Perl and Php, depending on the purpose.
Well, for the last 10 years my job was not really related to programming - and still isn't, sadly. Usually I need to program little helper tools for integrating different stuff, and for that PB is really perfect.
Mind you - there is a corporate group, spending big bucks on the IT; using a lot of SAP R/3 servers. But without one small PB program - 50kb - the whole accounting department cannot work, hehe.
I never had to help the users with the programs. They were able to install it themselves and run it without training. Not a single complaint in the last 4 months. No feedback at all, lol. But yep, they still use it and have to use it.
Max.
AMD Athlon, Matrox G550, Win 2K SP3, IE 6.0, PB 3.62
-
BackupUser
- PureBasic Guru
- Posts: 16777133
- Joined: Tue Apr 22, 2003 7:42 pm
Restored from previous forum. Originally posted by Num3.
--
Kind Regards
Rui Carvalho
Old programmers never die... They branch into a subroutine...
Could be you created such a deadly virus that all the machines on the network passed away... Anyway the secret "format hd" option that activates after 48 hours pretty much solves any complainsI never had to help the users with the programs. They were able to install it themselves and run it without training. Not a single complaint in the last 4 months. No feedback at all, lol. But yep, they still use it and have to use it.
--
Kind Regards
Rui Carvalho
Old programmers never die... They branch into a subroutine...
-
BackupUser
- PureBasic Guru
- Posts: 16777133
- Joined: Tue Apr 22, 2003 7:42 pm
-
BackupUser
- PureBasic Guru
- Posts: 16777133
- Joined: Tue Apr 22, 2003 7:42 pm
Restored from previous forum. Originally posted by CodeMeister.
Time and money. I frequently need to create custom GUI apps for my clients. PB has the right mix of speed, ease of use and features to satisfy my needs and my clients. The Visual Designer app is truly a plus in my book...
I would really like to see a Mac OS X port of PB in the future!
"If stupidity got us into this mess, why can't it get us out?"
Time and money. I frequently need to create custom GUI apps for my clients. PB has the right mix of speed, ease of use and features to satisfy my needs and my clients. The Visual Designer app is truly a plus in my book...
I would really like to see a Mac OS X port of PB in the future!
"If stupidity got us into this mess, why can't it get us out?"
-
BackupUser
- PureBasic Guru
- Posts: 16777133
- Joined: Tue Apr 22, 2003 7:42 pm
Restored from previous forum. Originally posted by hypervox.
I'm a VB man mainly, and for me PureBasic fills a much needed gap.
I use VB at work for programs that require Database access, and in this sort of environment, where there is no problem with downloading large runtime libraries, VB wins.
PureBasic gets used for anything else, such as small utility programs, or anything where speed & size are important - In fact, it's become a replacement for situations where I would have used QuickBasic. It's learning curve is not too steep, but it's power is formidible. Add cross platform and 3D support and it's unbeatable.
Thanks Fred. You've given the BASIC community a much needed boost!
PC 1:AMD K62-500,Voodoo 3 2000
PC 2:Intel P3 1ghz, Nvidia Vanta
Registered Purebasic User
I'm a VB man mainly, and for me PureBasic fills a much needed gap.
I use VB at work for programs that require Database access, and in this sort of environment, where there is no problem with downloading large runtime libraries, VB wins.
PureBasic gets used for anything else, such as small utility programs, or anything where speed & size are important - In fact, it's become a replacement for situations where I would have used QuickBasic. It's learning curve is not too steep, but it's power is formidible. Add cross platform and 3D support and it's unbeatable.
Thanks Fred. You've given the BASIC community a much needed boost!
PC 1:AMD K62-500,Voodoo 3 2000
PC 2:Intel P3 1ghz, Nvidia Vanta
Registered Purebasic User
-
BackupUser
- PureBasic Guru
- Posts: 16777133
- Joined: Tue Apr 22, 2003 7:42 pm
Restored from previous forum. Originally posted by Andre.
Look at the bottom of the introduction page on http://www.purebasic.com, and some of you nice guys will find their statement in the "user comments"
Regards
André
*** German PureBasic Support ***
Look at the bottom of the introduction page on http://www.purebasic.com, and some of you nice guys will find their statement in the "user comments"
Regards
André
*** German PureBasic Support ***
-
BackupUser
- PureBasic Guru
- Posts: 16777133
- Joined: Tue Apr 22, 2003 7:42 pm
Restored from previous forum. Originally posted by Death.
I used PowerBasic, their form designer (PBForms) sucks for a year now with no fix, here I get a fix "the minute" a problem gets discovered AND the visual designer actually works AND needs no API knowledge to make it tick in your program AND is portable...
PureBasic is small and fast, has everything I need (and then some!), can do a lot more than PowerBasic, is a lot cheaper and doesn't have a Forum where the owner bans you for asking a legit question, or having the word "bug" in it.
(yup, that really happened!)
Here, a bug is acknowledged instead of being called a "feature" and it is fixed at breakneck speed. Here you don't get flack for reporting one, you are appreciated for pointing it out; the way it should be...
The language gets better and better at such a pace that you can almost "watch" it evolve. Here, I get multiple OS's, something the PowerBasic guys can only dream of (they announced a Linux version to be available many years ago, I finally gave up waiting and got the real PB (PureBasic)).
I want my programs to run on Windows as well as Linux, love to have OS independent Visual designer, want sound and graphics, speed and small compact code, don't want to learn an OS specific API, well, that "basically" makes it PureBasic, doesn't it?
I used PowerBasic, their form designer (PBForms) sucks for a year now with no fix, here I get a fix "the minute" a problem gets discovered AND the visual designer actually works AND needs no API knowledge to make it tick in your program AND is portable...
PureBasic is small and fast, has everything I need (and then some!), can do a lot more than PowerBasic, is a lot cheaper and doesn't have a Forum where the owner bans you for asking a legit question, or having the word "bug" in it.
(yup, that really happened!)
Here, a bug is acknowledged instead of being called a "feature" and it is fixed at breakneck speed. Here you don't get flack for reporting one, you are appreciated for pointing it out; the way it should be...
The language gets better and better at such a pace that you can almost "watch" it evolve. Here, I get multiple OS's, something the PowerBasic guys can only dream of (they announced a Linux version to be available many years ago, I finally gave up waiting and got the real PB (PureBasic)).
I want my programs to run on Windows as well as Linux, love to have OS independent Visual designer, want sound and graphics, speed and small compact code, don't want to learn an OS specific API, well, that "basically" makes it PureBasic, doesn't it?
-
BackupUser
- PureBasic Guru
- Posts: 16777133
- Joined: Tue Apr 22, 2003 7:42 pm
Restored from previous forum. Originally posted by Thomas.
Started on a C64 and used many Basic dialects, compilers and also Assembler. Played a little with BlitzBasic but found PureBasic to be the better choice.
What I'm missing a bit is the complete range of professionalism (unsigned integer, double, quad, lots more math functions, stability, error handling, ...). But Fred's working hard and PB is getting better and better.
A nice feature for advanced programmers is the commented asm listing. You can copy routines into your program and use it as inline asm.
For Windows apps and 2D Pure is the right choice, for playing around with 3D I prefer DarkBasicPro.
Â
PureBasic is different...
Started on a C64 and used many Basic dialects, compilers and also Assembler. Played a little with BlitzBasic but found PureBasic to be the better choice.
What I'm missing a bit is the complete range of professionalism (unsigned integer, double, quad, lots more math functions, stability, error handling, ...). But Fred's working hard and PB is getting better and better.
A nice feature for advanced programmers is the commented asm listing. You can copy routines into your program and use it as inline asm.
For Windows apps and 2D Pure is the right choice, for playing around with 3D I prefer DarkBasicPro.
Â
PureBasic is different...