What's the difference?

[wings]

Psychophanta, if this single test this should show the real power of either Purebasic, PowerBasic or C++ then I can only say:

BULL!

[Rings]

if i had post same on Powerbasic-forum it will been censored or removed from their staff, believe me

Gosh, you are so right... The link (http://www.powerbasic.com/support/forum ... 08988.html) is completely gone! The post, the replies, everything... gone!

PureBasic it is... shows how much those guys over there care for other's opinions.

I seems that liberty and free-speech is not respectetd enough in the holy us-software-industry.bad but true.
i like Frédéric's comment on other compilers:
'I like competition' .

[Kale]

i like Frédéric's comment on other compilers:
'I like competition' .

Yes its a testament to Fred and PB's superiority when they are not scared of competition but welcome it! Fred knows he has a good compiler and is not deterred by others, PB can only go from strength to strength. PB loses a few points due to things* that should be addressed in future versions but when they are every other BASIC will simply not be compared and PB will be truly industry strength!

* doubles, unsigned vars, etc...

[Fred]

* doubles, unsigned vars, etc...

I like the way you did it

[geoff]

Psychophanta, if this single test this should show the real power of either Purebasic, PowerBasic or C++ then I can only say:
BULL!

Maybe a simple test, but still interesting, and important. If a language can't do simple loops quickly it's got problems.

These tests show that the 3 languages are all acceptable on this test and we need to look elsewhere to compare them.

I would use the term BULL to describe many of the claims made for the power of new processor architectures. These simple loops still run fastest with my 16 bit GFA Basic compiler using the processor in 16 bit mode. Not what you might expect from the "massive advances in processor technology" claimed by Intel and AMD?