Your experience with PureBasic?

[jb]

I have purchased PureBasic some time ago, but as yet have not had any time to get into it. I am looking at PureBasic as a possible development environment for some upcoming projects and would value the user community's opinions on the following questions. I would like to thank you in advance for your comments.

1. Would you use PureBasic to develop commercial applications?

2. Would you use PureBasic to develop cross-platform commercial applications?

3. Does PureBasic have the capability of utilizing ActiveX controls? If not, do you find this to be a hindrance?

4. Does PureBasic have the capability of utilizing COM type libraries? If not, do you find this to be a hindrance?

5. What affect do you feel .NET technologies will have on PureBasic?

6. Do you feel that you can accomplish development tasks using the capabilities within the language or do you regularly have to use OS API in order to accomplish your tasks?

7. Would you consider PureBasic to be a replacement product for Microsoft VisualBasic or the .NET lanquages?

[freedimension]

1. Yep

2. Nope

3. No or not easily/No

4. IMHO Yes

5. No affect because concepts are different (comparing apples to pears that is)

6. Happily using API (see 2.)

7. For VB definitely, .net see 5.

[Karbon]

1. Would you use PureBasic to develop commercial applications?

Sure, but different kinds of applications require different development approaches. kBilling is written in PB right now but has out grown it so the next version will be in a different language..

2. Would you use PureBasic to develop cross-platform commercial applications?

I've never seen the need to do so. If you are developing desktop applications for profit then why mess with OSX and Linux when they make up a tiny percentage of overall desktop users? Regardless, I've never tried it so I can't say. No matter what the language, cross-platform development is a pain in the arse.

3. Does PureBasic have the capability of utilizing ActiveX controls? If not, do you find this to be a hindrance?

While it is in the realm of possibility it is nearly impossible. It is a very big hinderance IMHO, especially if you're trying to utilize third party libraries (which you almost have to do in order to be a profitable small software shop).

4. Does PureBasic have the capability of utilizing COM type libraries? If not, do you find this to be a hindrance?

Same answer as #3. It is possible, but just barely

5. What affect do you feel .NET technologies will have on PureBasic?

None, as free said you aren't comparing apples to apples. .NET is pretty cool, but just isn't for everything. I see PB as an excellent language to develop smaller applications with.

6. Do you feel that you can accomplish development tasks using the capabilities within the language or do you regularly have to use OS API in order to accomplish your tasks?

You have to use API stuff with PB to achieve many "professional" effects, like coloring listicon rows and such. Functionality-wise there is little you can't do with the internal PB command set.

7. Would you consider PureBasic to be a replacement product for Microsoft VisualBasic or the .NET lanquages?

No, but that isn't really a fair comparision either (see above answer regarding .NET).

You are going to see a lot more of .NET in coming years. It is a bandwagon that pays to jump on. Having said that, it all boils down to the right tool for the right job. PureBasic is awesome, I love it, but no single platform and/or language is right for every situation.

[Shannara]

1. Would you use PureBasic to develop commercial applications?

Some, PB isnt suitable for all types of commercial apps.

2. Would you use PureBasic to develop cross-platform commercial applications?

Depending on what platform. Currently PB Linux and OSX have not caught up to Windows. So some windows apps coded in PB cannot run in any other OS supported by PB.

3. Does PureBasic have the capability of utilizing ActiveX controls? If not, do you find this to be a hindrance?

It does, but its a real pain the neck and generally not worth trying.

4. Does PureBasic have the capability of utilizing COM type libraries? If not, do you find this to be a hindrance?

See above.

5. What affect do you feel .NET technologies will have on PureBasic?

None, .NET is a scripting (some like calling it interpreted) language, while PB is a translated language (into asm, then compiled by fasm or some such). There is already room for a programming language over scripting languages where speed and non-open source is involved.

6. Do you feel that you can accomplish development tasks using the capabilities within the language or do you regularly have to use OS API in order to accomplish your tasks?

Hmm, for Windows version, API is used in almost everything. It's required for networking (pb is missing the close connection event). General memory manipulations, and so on and so forth. For Linux, if you want to use something like 3dsprites, your on your own, and must use the API

7. Would you consider PureBasic to be a replacement product for Microsoft VisualBasic or the .NET lanquages?

Well, the last version of visual basic microsoft made is vb6. VB.net is not visual basic, dispite the hype (same goes for "Delphi 8"). Visual basic is light years ahead of PB in concern of ease of use and design.

However, forms (windows) in PB can not be pulled from the EXE and it does not require a runtime in order to run. So PB has VB beat over privacy. AND PB has partial cross platform support, so it has VB beat over that as well. Speed wise it depends. Ive ran some tests (with debugger off) where VB beats PB But there are also other tests where PB beats VB, so I would say it averages out to be close to even.

There are some PB designers (none up to par with VB's designer) but they are very close. So for ease of designer use PB is getting there.

So all in all, if you want even partial cross platform support, give PB a shot. If your looking at Windows only, I guess it's up to you as I find VB a bit easier then PB.

Anyways, .NET is a great scripting technology if you love burdening users with huge runtimes. And dont mind your source code open for the world to modify as they wish. I prefer privacy. So .NET doesnt even compare to any real languages out there.

[PB]

> Would you use PureBasic to develop commercial applications?

Yes. Bear in mind there's some "real-world" limitations at the moment,
such as not natively supporting large numbers (nothing over longs), but
this is on the drawing board to be fixed very soon.

> Would you use PureBasic to develop cross-platform commercial applications?

If I wanted to, yes. I don't really care for less popular systems like Linux.

> Does PureBasic have the capability of utilizing ActiveX controls?

Yes, but not easily. But why use ActiveX anyway? They're just bloated
blocks of code used by Visual Basic people who can't write their own code
routines to accomplish something.

> Does PureBasic have the capability of utilizing COM type libraries?

I haven't done so, but I seem to recall seeing numerous COM examples
in these forums. Do a search for it.

> What affect do you feel .NET technologies will have on PureBasic?

None. It requires runtimes, it's interpreted, it's crap. Anyone who's in the
know would prefer a real standalone exe any day.

> do you regularly have to use OS API in order to accomplish your tasks?

Sometimes -- but APIs in PureBasic are just like a normal Basic keyword,
so it's no more difficult to implement. No need to declare them all first like
you do with Visual Basic -- just call the API command and you're done.
If you know the APIs, then you can use them like any normal command.

> Would you consider PureBasic to be a replacement product for Microsoft
> VisualBasic or the .NET lanquages?

Most definitely. I own Visual Basic but stopped using it years ago after I
bought PureBasic. Now my VB is just gathering dust on the shelf.

[blueznl]

1. yes
2. not yet
3. don't care (actually, don't like until it's made simple )
4. duhuh same
5. f* .net, don't like the whole concept of selling out to m$
6. quite a bit of api although things are getting better
7. yes (but then i don't use those )

[fsw]

I second what the other users said, except the commercial part, because I'm not coding for a living I can't judge it.

Sorry if it's a bit off topic, but I have one question about AVALON the upcoming WINDOWS GDI API:

Can it be used as normal API without .net

I've seen a release of AVALON on XP but it was said that it needs C# or VB.NET to be able to code for it.

Is this #TRUE

[Shannara]

Yep, and in order to uninstall Avalon from Windows XP you gotta reformat your computer

Anything that is not really OS related, shouldnt need a reformat to uninstall.

[fsw]

Yep, and in order to uninstall Avalon from Windows XP you gotta reformat your computer

Anything that is not really OS related, shouldnt need a reformat to uninstall.

This is a joke, isn't it

[Randy Walker]

1. Would you use PureBasic to develop commercial applications?
applications?

I just ported my application from GFA basic over to PureBasic. 11300 lines of original code translated to 12600 in PureBasic. That all went very well, averaging about 100 to 150 lines per day. The project is commecial based in the sense that it is a helpdesk I created exclusively for the company I work for. Services include customer database, historical database, troublshooting and ftp file sharing. I do not consider myself a programmer so my greatest chanllenges have been to aquire an understanding of the new code. So far, PureBasic has provided a solution to all my needs... and then some. Now if by commercial application, you mean building a complex controller system for industrial manufacturing or something along the lines of recreational gaming, I don't know what to tell you.

2. Would you use PureBasic to develop cross-platform commercial applications?

I work for a Linux based software company and we use windows for global comatibility with all our clients (most people use windows for their office needs, accounting, email etc.). Because we a Linux based, some of our people think we should be 100% Linux. That is one reason I went to PureBasic... thnking I might be able to accomodate them.

In reality, as shanarra pointed out, PB/Linux is not up to speed with PB/Windows. What shanarra didn't point out, and has trouble accepting. is that the problem here is Linux... NOT PureBasic. Shanarra wants his Ferrari to share all the advantages of his Jeep, and vice versa. Two very different machines with two totally different purposes. Linux was not ORIGINALLY desiged with user friendly GUI interfaces in mind. Windows was from it's conception. That is why cross platform is not currently available in PureBasic... Linux just does NOT have what it takes to compete in the GUI market... currently. This is the reason I have also shelved any idea of attempting to create a Linux heldesk release myself. At least in the near future. Maybe one day LINUX will catch up to Windows and this will ALLOW PB/Linux to catch up with PB/Windows.

The way I look at it, if that day ever comes, I will have the advantage of having started on a product that strives to proivide cross copatibility and this should save a lot of time on any transition to Linux.