Close this section

Got an idea for enhancing PureBasic? New command(s) you'd like to see?
User_Russian
Addict
Addict
Posts: 1519
Joined: Wed Nov 12, 2008 5:01 pm
Location: Russia

Re: Close this section

Post by User_Russian »

Marc56us wrote:You may not have been here long, but you should know that Fred has indicated several times that he reads everything and that a feature request is only made if it is:
1. It is technically feasible.
2. Several people are interested.
3. It will not make the current system unstable or slow.
I have posted requests many times that are useful to many, but so far they have not been implemented. Here are some of them.
viewtopic.php?f=3&t=52929
viewtopic.php?f=3&t=62866
viewtopic.php?p=485110#p485110
viewtopic.php?f=3&t=73190
viewtopic.php?f=3&t=58892
viewtopic.php?f=3&t=55209
viewtopic.php?f=3&t=54720

I must admit that I also have thoughts that this section needs to be closed.
Yes queries are implemented, but sometimes important ignored for decades.
BarryG
Addict
Addict
Posts: 4129
Joined: Thu Apr 18, 2019 8:17 am

Re: Close this section

Post by BarryG »

PureBasic's greatest strength is also its greatest weakness: it's cross-platform. This means any new feature additions must (generally) work on Windows, Linux, Mac. Fred has stated this in the past in these forums. There are minor exceptions, but the cross-platform approach explains why there's no Windows Registry library in PureBasic (or example), despite repeated requests for one.

Now, throw SpiderBasic into the mix, and it changes things even more: anything PureBasic does has to work on the web as well. So, Fred isn't going to add things to PureBasic that SpiderBasic can't do because it breaks the cross-platform paradigm.

Another problem is when people post their own short versions of requests to help others: that's really cool and nice, but it stops that feature/idea being added officially to PureBasic because Fred and Freak can point to it and say, "There's no need for us to add that; look, here's a six-line procedure to do it which you can add as a Tool in the IDE's Tool menu." This response has literally happened in the past. To me, the Tool menu was added as a way to reduce the number of requests they need to add.

BTW, these forums did have a voting feature in the past, but it was removed. There was a discussion why but I can't find it right now.

Anyway, TL;DR: requests are usually granted for small/easy features that can be cross-platform. "Usually" being the key word.

To keep it balanced, 5.60 was a "feature request" release:
Fred wrote:We took a deep look in the "feature and request" forum and tried to implemented some of the most wanted wishes
Source -> viewtopic.php?t=67584
Last edited by BarryG on Wed Jun 24, 2020 1:34 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Kuron
Addict
Addict
Posts: 1626
Joined: Sat Oct 17, 2009 10:51 pm
Location: Pacific Northwest

Re: Close this section

Post by Kuron »

FlatEarth wrote:My latest wish is to close the "Feature Requests and Wishlists" section
Technically, you made a feature request, not a wish. Luckily this section accepts both. :mrgreen:
Rinzwind
Enthusiast
Enthusiast
Posts: 679
Joined: Wed Mar 11, 2009 4:06 pm
Location: NL

Re: Close this section

Post by Rinzwind »

I was actually referring to instant array initialization. C-code that uses array tables or passing a one-time-use array to a function is much cleaner and less error prone than the PB version of that code. Same with structures initialization and default values. There is no argument here and it has been asked many times.

O and yes, that procedure in structure idea to support 'object-like' behavior has a lot of use cases too in regard to cleaning up code structure without any impact on the ones who do want to not use it or hate anything with 'object' in it (it doesn't make PB an OOP language in any way). Especially should be looked at if you consider the humps, hard bumps and curves multiple people take to get at similar functionality without language support which is not patchwork I would like to see popup multiple times (by not just anybody) if I were the author of PB.

Maybe this is why it is a lifetime license. We do not have the right to ask for something because we just paid once and accepted that version. With no official effort to involve and follow-up with long time users, this section usefulness is very limited. This forum area is like a filled-up Suggestion-box at a random company. Almost zero interaction last years.

Also just because it is cross-platform does not mean it should not have platform specific libraries. SpiderBasic is a different thing entirely.

Anyway, back to coding in PB ;P
User avatar
the.weavster
Addict
Addict
Posts: 1576
Joined: Thu Jul 03, 2003 6:53 pm
Location: England

Re: Close this section

Post by the.weavster »

BarryG wrote:Now, throw SpiderBasic into the mix, and it changes things even more: anything PureBasic does has to work on the web as well. So, Fred isn't going to add things to PureBasic that SpiderBasic can't do because it breaks the cross-platform paradigm.
I think that's a one way street, PureBasic can already do many things SpiderBasic can't do (e.g. make tcp servers) but SpiderBasic is being hamstrung because its widgets are being made to match PureBasic's which are quite limited (particularly the table / grid widget).

I have requested a 21st century WebGadget for PB so SB could be liberated from compatibility and then used to create UIs (cross-platform even for ARM) for PB but sadly (imo) that idea didn't gain any traction.
User_Russian
Addict
Addict
Posts: 1519
Joined: Wed Nov 12, 2008 5:01 pm
Location: Russia

Re: Close this section

Post by User_Russian »

the.weavster wrote:cross-platform even for ARM
It is not known when this version will be released and under which platforms.
Fred
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 18162
Joined: Fri May 17, 2002 4:39 pm
Location: France
Contact:

Re: Close this section

Post by Fred »

I can confirm read all the topic and put some on the wishlist if they are useful and/or doable in a reasonable timeframe. We already have implemented 858 wishes (and we didn't spent the time to flag new one) search.php?keywords=Implemented&terms=a ... mit=Search , so I don't know really why you imply this section is useless.
User avatar
Saki
Addict
Addict
Posts: 830
Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2020 11:28 am
Location: Pandora

Re: Close this section

Post by Saki »

With all due respect,
one should also take care not to put everything that comes to mind on the wish list,
but only carefully considered and meaningful wishes :o
地球上の平和
Rinzwind
Enthusiast
Enthusiast
Posts: 679
Joined: Wed Mar 11, 2009 4:06 pm
Location: NL

Re: Close this section

Post by Rinzwind »

There is a rapidly declined number of [Implemented] topics over the years. I hate to say, and its not all saying, but well..

2020 2
2019 1
2018 1
2017 3
2016 11
2015 9
.
.
2012 30
2011 38
2008 several pages
2006 ditto

Hence the filled suggestion box analogy.
Last edited by Rinzwind on Wed Jun 24, 2020 4:48 pm, edited 1 time in total.
IdeasVacuum
Always Here
Always Here
Posts: 6426
Joined: Fri Oct 23, 2009 2:33 am
Location: Wales, UK
Contact:

Re: Close this section

Post by IdeasVacuum »

With all due respect,
one should also take care not to put everything that comes to mind on the wish list,
but only carefully considered and meaningful wishes
+1
IdeasVacuum
If it sounds simple, you have not grasped the complexity.
BarryG
Addict
Addict
Posts: 4129
Joined: Thu Apr 18, 2019 8:17 am

Re: Close this section

Post by BarryG »

Rinzwind wrote:2008 several pages
2006 ditto
PureBasic was still in its infancy then, so naturally it'll have more requests. It's more mature now.
User avatar
Kuron
Addict
Addict
Posts: 1626
Joined: Sat Oct 17, 2009 10:51 pm
Location: Pacific Northwest

Re: Close this section

Post by Kuron »

User_Russian wrote:
the.weavster wrote:cross-platform even for ARM
It is not known when this version will be released and under which platforms.
Purely a guess, but I am guessing the ARM version for macOS will debut sometime in 2021 after the new ARM-based Macs.
Rinzwind
Enthusiast
Enthusiast
Posts: 679
Joined: Wed Mar 11, 2009 4:06 pm
Location: NL

Re: Close this section

Post by Rinzwind »

In 2011 it was also considered mature already.
BarryG
Addict
Addict
Posts: 4129
Joined: Thu Apr 18, 2019 8:17 am

Re: Close this section

Post by BarryG »

Maturing never stops, that's why I said "more mature". Like an aging cheese, or wine. LOL!
User_Russian
Addict
Addict
Posts: 1519
Joined: Wed Nov 12, 2008 5:01 pm
Location: Russia

Re: Close this section

Post by User_Russian »

By the way, I remembered the topic viewtopic.php?f=3&t=57765
In this topic, I asked to add code optimization in PB.
This problem was solved Danilo who created tool DeadProcedureRemover.
The tool worked perfectly in PB 5.2x, but with the release of PB 5.30, the assembler code format changed, which has not changed for many years. An accident or ...? It seems that Fred is not interested in PB creating small executable files...
Post Reply