Page 10 of 13
Posted: Sat Feb 04, 2006 4:01 pm
by Fred
Sure, we don't plan to change anything, except if it's really needed.
Posted: Sat Feb 04, 2006 6:45 pm
by geoff
Fred, I hope this is the last time we need major changes.
I have just spent 5 hours converting a PB3.94 program to PB4.0, and I still have 28 other programs to do.
I agree all the changes make sense, but they create a hell of a lot of work.
Additions are fine, but changes are a nightmare.
I assume we can start posting bugs in the normal place now.
Posted: Sat Feb 04, 2006 7:00 pm
by Berikco
geoff wrote:Fred, I hope this is the last time we need major changes.
I have just spent 5 hours converting a PB3.94 program to PB4.0, and I still have 28 other programs to do.
I agree all the changes make sense, but they create a hell of a lot of work.
Additions are fine, but changes are a nightmare.
I assume we can start posting bugs in the normal place now.
28*5 okay....you deserve a drink and a pizza
Posted: Sat Feb 04, 2006 7:13 pm
by Fred
Why converting all ?
Posted: Sat Feb 04, 2006 7:16 pm
by thefool
Fred wrote:Why converting all ?
I too dont understand that..
Posted: Sat Feb 04, 2006 7:30 pm
by dmoc
Question about file commands: I have a sizeable chunk of code mirroring PB's file commands for fast file access and also so I could create and manipulate mem-only files (eg, for downloading web data to mem). Looks like this is now possibly redundant (oh yeah, oh yeah
). Can anyone confirm? Specifically, if I create a file, set an adequate buffer size and don't flush will all file ops be mem based? Also can I get the buffer address?
Posted: Sat Feb 04, 2006 8:50 pm
by Fred
yes, ops will be mem based, but i don't think it's a good idea to play with our private mem buffer at all
.
Posted: Sat Feb 04, 2006 9:59 pm
by dmoc
hmmm, not even if I be REALLY good, no altering size?
Edit: for this scenario: I'm downloading data from the web (text), so I set an ample buffer size (never exceeded) and I want to avoid intermediate buffer, ie, put it straight in the file buffer. Without this (
) I maybe have to stick with my code instead of your vastly earth shattering superior code
PS: Sorry about the multiple edits - in a rush
PPS: Pretty Please? Grovel, grovel.
Posted: Sun Feb 05, 2006 1:25 am
by Fred
the bottleneck won't be the WriteData() here, but your internet connection. And even, a writedata() is very fast, basically just a memory copy.
Posted: Sun Feb 05, 2006 2:05 am
by Hatonastick
I think we need to donate more because after all these bug reports, occasional bouts of confusion, over excitement and the almost air of hysteria here on these boards, Fred and Co are going to need a long, long holiday away from all of us. Almost makes me glad that anything I ever write is going to attract the attention of maybe 5 people so I'll have less expectations to live up to.
Bravo guys, you are braver than I'll ever be!
Posted: Sun Feb 05, 2006 2:05 am
by freedimension
Just another feature request:
Since we now got "EnableExplicit", it would be nice if type definitions after Protected could be made somewhat cleaner, i.e. easier to write and easier to read.
Code: Select all
;Instead of
Protected a.f, b.f, c.f, d.f, e.f
;or
Define.f
Protected a, b, c, d, e
; it would be nice if you simply could write
Protected.f a, b, c, d, e
Posted: Sun Feb 05, 2006 2:57 am
by Dare2
Hatonastick wrote:.. Fred and Co are going to need a long, long holiday away from all of us ..
Oi! None of that!
Donate to the "PureBasic SweatShop Warders and Enforcers Fund" instead.
(I'll pm payment details to anyone interested)
Yer, pm me mate!
Posted: Sun Feb 05, 2006 3:04 am
by Fangbeast
Dare2 wrote:Hatonastick wrote:.. Fred and Co are going to need a long, long holiday away from all of us ..
Oi! None of that!
Donate to the "PureBasic SweatShop Warders and Enforcers Fund" instead.
(I'll pm payment details to anyone interested)
Strewth, stone the flamin crows, ya think Fred's allowed out after a release like this?? No flamin way mate? Stripe me pink! Yer, I'll pay for them enforcers, stuff a flamin dingo's dongers!
Re: Yer, pm me mate!
Posted: Sun Feb 05, 2006 5:52 am
by Hatonastick
Fangbeast wrote:Dare2 wrote:Hatonastick wrote:.. Fred and Co are going to need a long, long holiday away from all of us ..
Oi! None of that!
Donate to the "PureBasic SweatShop Warders and Enforcers Fund" instead.
(I'll pm payment details to anyone interested)
Strewth, stone the flamin crows, ya think Fred's allowed out after a release like this?? No flamin way mate? Stripe me pink! Yer, I'll pay for them enforcers, stuff a flamin dingo's dongers!
I've never really understood that. Why we would want to stone crows after having torched them with a flame thrower, and don't get me started on your obsession with dingo's whatsits.
Posted: Sun Feb 05, 2006 5:54 am
by Hatonastick
Dare2 wrote:Hatonastick wrote:.. Fred and Co are going to need a long, long holiday away from all of us ..
Oi! None of that!
Donate to the "PureBasic SweatShop Warders and Enforcers Fund" instead.
(I'll pm payment details to anyone interested)
Well would you blame them when most of us sound like escapees from an asylum for the incarceration of the criminally insane?
) I maybe have to stick with my code instead of your vastly earth shattering superior code