I demand v4.61, v4.70... and for good measure v5.0
I hope you have this planned - take your time though...
5 Minor features that users would like to get
Re: 5 Minor features that users would like to get
hmmm.... feature requests...
I demand v4.61, v4.70... and for good measure v5.0
I hope you have this planned - take your time though...
I demand v4.61, v4.70... and for good measure v5.0
I hope you have this planned - take your time though...
Re: 5 Minor features that users would like to get
This is also what I do, but it's complicated by the fact that the language I want does not exist in the fashion I desire it.Danilo wrote:For serious work i choose something that works better for me.
It just happens that I can implement the thing that works better for me IN PureBasic.
So that's what I'm doing.
Science ensues: I am writing a compiler and lightweight virtual machine to produce a managed environment for the programming language I want.
I'm sure I'll be (the rest of the way) mad before the year is out.
Re: 5 Minor features that users would like to get
IsSoundPlaying()
SoundPosition()
SoundLength()
I find it rather silly that all sorts of graphical things can be done, but I can't figure out if a loaded sample is still playing or not...
SoundPosition()
SoundLength()
I find it rather silly that all sorts of graphical things can be done, but I can't figure out if a loaded sample is still playing or not...
( PB6.00 LTS Win11 x64 Asrock AB350 Pro4 Ryzen 5 3600 32GB GTX1060 6GB)
( The path to enlightenment and the PureBasic Survival Guide right here... )
( The path to enlightenment and the PureBasic Survival Guide right here... )
-
Zach
- Addict
- Posts: 1675
- Joined: Sun Dec 12, 2010 12:36 am
- Location: Somewhere in the midwest
- Contact:
Re: 5 Minor features that users would like to get
I kind of feel the same way.
PB does a lot of neat stuff, and a lot of it is indeed very useful. But then it also doesn't do stuff that most people might consider, the bare essentials no?
It's not really my intent to start a long drawn out debate about that, however.
I know what PureBasic is, and what it can do. There are things I would like to see, and things I can't even begin to understand, but I take it for what it is. A Hobbyist language aimed mostly at people like me that want to write programs, and have great ideas for them, but are too intimidated by larger more successful tools such as C, C++, Java, etc.
I often grasp the with notion of outgrowing PureBasic and become frustrated.. Well if I can use C or C++ or whatever to add this functionality I want to PB, or I learn the syntax so I can maybe write a wrapper and port something useful to PB - why bother with the "to PB" part? Why not just go on in the next language?
It can be a real morale dilemma for some people. I would love to see PB continue to grow and succeed and have all kinds of neat, wonderful features. But I also know that it is just 2 guys that can't always have time to work on PB, and don't seem at all interested in trying to make a real go at it as a commercial product, trying to make a full-time income out of it.
Mostly I just accept this, because I have gotten much farther in PB than other language (doesn't say much about my skills) and I hope to continue to be able to use it for years to come.. I don't care if OOP never comes to PB because that's not what it was built for. But even I too, look at simple things like the lack of multi-line commands and multi-line comments, and feel a little befuddled.
Sure, maybe some people think they are "stupid" and pointless "waste of time". But many others also feel the opposite and would like to see some of these more simple requests, implemented.
PB does a lot of neat stuff, and a lot of it is indeed very useful. But then it also doesn't do stuff that most people might consider, the bare essentials no?
It's not really my intent to start a long drawn out debate about that, however.
I know what PureBasic is, and what it can do. There are things I would like to see, and things I can't even begin to understand, but I take it for what it is. A Hobbyist language aimed mostly at people like me that want to write programs, and have great ideas for them, but are too intimidated by larger more successful tools such as C, C++, Java, etc.
I often grasp the with notion of outgrowing PureBasic and become frustrated.. Well if I can use C or C++ or whatever to add this functionality I want to PB, or I learn the syntax so I can maybe write a wrapper and port something useful to PB - why bother with the "to PB" part? Why not just go on in the next language?
It can be a real morale dilemma for some people. I would love to see PB continue to grow and succeed and have all kinds of neat, wonderful features. But I also know that it is just 2 guys that can't always have time to work on PB, and don't seem at all interested in trying to make a real go at it as a commercial product, trying to make a full-time income out of it.
Mostly I just accept this, because I have gotten much farther in PB than other language (doesn't say much about my skills) and I hope to continue to be able to use it for years to come.. I don't care if OOP never comes to PB because that's not what it was built for. But even I too, look at simple things like the lack of multi-line commands and multi-line comments, and feel a little befuddled.
Sure, maybe some people think they are "stupid" and pointless "waste of time". But many others also feel the opposite and would like to see some of these more simple requests, implemented.