New commands or having a more stable version!?

[Ralf]

i updated my windows pb version to the latest 3.90 update. as i could tested with some of my projects and have read all the tons of 3.90 bug reports on the german and english forum i want ask you fred, how is this possible??

A lot of commands worked fine and stable in the old versions but now they are buggy. I have really no idea what you are doing there! Its just only unbelievable that old working libs/commands are from one day to the next day buggy without official changes on the lib/commands. A working routine should normaly work in all future versions without problems.

I have seen some members on the german and english forum still waiting for a MAC version. Just a small question to this members. What it more important for you, a very stable windows version or a new MAC version?

Fred, maybe you should first fix ALL KNNOWN BUGS AND PROBLEMS for the next release before adding any new libs or commands. Any other way isnt good for newbies and the comunity.

By the way, why dont you have changed the "TransformSprite3D()" command as follow with optional y parameters?

TransformSprite3D(#Sprite3D, x1, x2, x3, x4, [y1, y2, y3, y4])

This would make a lot more sence, even if coders dont need the y stuff. On the other side coders using in there projects "TransformSprit3D()" will get very confused since 3.90. This people have complete to change there engines/games..

still think about this. thanks.
best regards

[Karbon]

Before I start into this you should realize that you're using a "bleeding edge" release. Typically for production purposes I wait for a few revisions before upgrading everything.

i updated my windows pb version to the latest 3.90 update. as i could tested with some of my projects and have read all the tons of 3.90 bug reports on the german and english forum i want ask you fred, how is this possible??

If you have to ask then you must not be a software developer. Bugs happen.

A lot of commands worked fine and stable in the old versions but now they are buggy. I have really no idea what you are doing there! Its just only unbelievable that old working libs/commands are from one day to the next day buggy without official changes on the lib/commands. A working routine should normaly work in all future versions without problems.

Ok, now I know you aren't a software developer. Just because there was a userlib or library with the same NAME in older versions doesn't mean it's the same thing. I'm sure that all sorts of things changed with the new features and those changes had implications that even the divine all-knowing Fred couldn't see

I have seen some members on the german and english forum still waiting for a MAC version. Just a small question to this members. What it more important for you, a very stable windows version or a new MAC version?

PureBasic is VERY stable. Saying otherwise just isn't true.

Forward motion is always good. You have to balance stability with features or no one will ever be able to use your software. If you wait to release your software until perfection is reached then you will never make it to version 1.0 - no software is ever even close to perfect.

Fred, maybe you should first fix ALL KNNOWN BUGS AND PROBLEMS for the next release before adding any new libs or commands. Any other way isnt good for newbies and the comunity.

Maybe you should be a little more understanding of what you are asking. I'm positive that Fred never said "Oh, lets introduce a new bug!" in 3.90. Again, if we waited for perfect software we'd be waiting forever.

Be specific as to what bugs/features/problems you are talking about. If this was a request for help it was a very bad one. The biggest problem I ran into with 3.90 was GadgetID() and WindowID() - but I managed to fix all that in an hour or so. Sure I complained, but I also sucked it up and rolled with the change.

If there are bugs you are having trouble with, help out, don't just sit back and complain!

[freak]

Fred, maybe you should first fix ALL KNNOWN BUGS AND PROBLEMS for the next release before adding any new libs or commands. Any other way isnt good for newbies and the comunity.

By the way, why dont you have changed the "TransformSprite3D()" command as follow with optional y parameters?

TransformSprite3D(#Sprite3D, x1, x2, x3, x4, [y1, y2, y3, y4])

You ask Fred to not add anything new until every last possible bug is killed,
and in the next sentence, you ask for a new feature to be implemented.

Do you see the problem here?

Timo

[Anden]

Although it's true that bugs happen (even in the smallest program), at least the changes should be pointed out clearly.
E.g. the biggest problem with GadgetID/WindowID() is, that the compiler doesn't complain. The error raises at runtime and that's a very bad thing (it's manageable for some lines of code but checking a longer program is more than a simple headache).

My first "no more beta" release didn't even link some PB codes, i had to update the update immediately.

What does the new #pb_resize event do in detail? Here's is a part of a win callback routine for window resizing:

Code: Select all

      Case #WM_GETMINMAXINFO
        *SizeTracking.MINMAXINFO = lParam
        *SizeTracking\ptMinTrackSize\x = 360
        *SizeTracking\ptMinTrackSize\y = 200
        *SizeTracking\ptMaxTrackSize\x = 2048
        *SizeTracking\ptMaxTrackSize\y = 2048
      Case #WM_SIZE
        Select wParam
          Case #SIZE_MINIMIZED
            If (TRAYMINIMIZE) : ShowWindow_(WindowID(#client), #SW_HIDE) : EndIf
            HIDDEN = 0 ;=next status after hiding
            SIGNALDATA = #False
          Default
            ww.l = lParam & $FFFF ;lo-word
            wh.l = lParam >> 16 ;high-word
            ResizeRichEdit(ActiveRT, 10, 35, ww-170, wh-100)
            ResizeGadget(#RTPanel, -1, -1, ww-261, -1)
            ResizeGadget(#SissyPanel, ww-251, -1, -1, -1)
            ResizeGadget(#TBPanel, ww-153, -1, -1, -1)
            ResizeGadget(#users, ww-150, -1, -1, wh-62)
            ResizeGadget(#msg, -1, wh-60, ww-220, -1)
            ResizeGadget(#btn_send, ww-210, wh-60, -1, -1)
            UpdateStatusBar(#StatBar)
            RedrawWindow_(WindowID(#client), #NULL, #NULL, #RDW_INVALIDATE|#RDW_UPDATENOW) ;w95/98 need that in any case
        EndSelect

UpdateStatusBar(#StatBar) is not needed any more, that's the good point.
What about RedrawWindow_() (especially for w95/98/me)? Is that still needed? How can one distinguish between #WM_GETMINMAXINFO, #WM_SIZE and #SIZE_MINIMIZED? Or is #pb_resize just the equivalent to #WM_SIZE and all of the Resize calls are still manually triggered?

It's a great idea to provide a multi platform compiler but it seems, that this "feature" comes with a very high price: Degrading Stability AND Continuousness

Maybe a step by step solution would be the better idea (while having only 24h a day): Stable win version THEN stable linux version THEN MAC version (and don't forget my trusty AMIGA)

[dell_jockey]

Before I start into this you should realize that you're using a "bleeding edge" release.

Mitch,
from this I could infer that 3.90 is not a stable version just yet. The download site doesn't mention this and it doesn't offer the 3.81 download any longer either (at least not for the Win32 platform).

So, what's the status of 3.90? Should I indeed shy away from it for the time being?

[LarsG]

If it is vital that your program work, because of commercial reasons, or other things, then the resonable thing is to do a copy of the PureBasic folder, and upgrade to the latest version on one of them, to testcompile your project..
Personally, I don't this except for the betas, but if you feel it is critical, you really should do it..

Another thing, is to keep older versions of PB.. I 've kept every upgrade programs, and betas, since I bought it at version 3.51..
This way I can easily reinstall any older version I see fit..

just my 2 cents though..

[GedB]

I would never describe PB as buggy.

Take a look at the English forums. There are just 153 posts in the Bug Reports forums, compared to 936 in Feature Requests and Wishlists.

As far as I have seen the bugs raised for 3.90 have all been of the obscure type. These really are unavoidable.

Remember that 3.90 saw a significant change in the way PB handles resources. Almost every library had to be updated.

I haven't seen anything significant. Can you point out any single bug that warrents this type of hysteria?

[Kris_a]

A lot of these bug reports are just due to user error

(Including a lot of mine )

[Doobrey]

I`d like to see 2 versions of PB developed
1. A rock solid version, with all known bugs fixed but no new commands/features.
2. A beta of the next release, with the new commands/features.

Like many others, I`ve kept backups of every release before I`ve updated, but even these have known bugs in them (as it`s fixed in the upgrade)
Most often a fix comes out with a new release of PB, which judging by the Bug Reports forum, fixes the known bugs, but includes new ones because of new features.

[Fred]

It's a nice idea, but maintaining 2 branchs of the same software is really time consuming. Think than the v3.90 was a 'special' release in the way than many libs was reworked for support dynamic objects, something which willn't occurs at each release.

[StarHawk]

Here's the skinney. Fred, you should add this bit of english to the download site and take the actions I recommend so you don't have people complaining after each upgrade.

"PureBasic maintains a system of a current "Stable" and "Latest" version.

Recommend time of use:
Stable version when your product is due to ship in less than 2 months.

Latest version when your product is expected to ship in 2 or more months. This gives you time to ensure there are no bugs. "

Then, simply keep the "stable" version, in this case 3.80, available on the web site for download along side the "latest" version, in this case 3.90.

[StarHawk]

One more thing, you don't need Fred to implement this strategy of 2 months for yourself. If you have a deadline to ship date of less than 2 months, don't upgrade your PureBasic to the latest version.

If your ship date is 2 or more months, then download the latest upgrade. Simple. Or, make it 3 months or even 6 months if that fits your business better.

This is just common sense and you don't need Fred to spell this out for you, or create two versions (stable versus latest), do it yourself. In my excellent opinion, if you have a deadline of 2 months or less, and you upgrade PureBasic to the latest version, you are playing roulette, you are gambling, and for your stupidity, you deserve what you get.

[Dare2]

StarHawk, that makes good sense.

Maybe even without any time frames associated with the stable/current stuff, therefore not commiting anyone to deadlines (sometimes pressure can lead to mistakes)

[Berikco]

I have all versions always installed, from the first version a bought, i can start any version i wish.
Have a menu witch shorcuts to all IDE's. Just remember that the last IDE started is the one that will be launched when you doubleclick a *.pb file.
Just put one comment in your source to know wich version it's developed on.
When there is a new release, i copy the PureBasic directory, rename it to the old version, and start working with the new version.

[Dare2]

I am now doing the same.

But I only have two folders

Still a newbie!