FREEBASIC compiler

traumatic · Post by **traumatic** » Fri Jun 24, 2005 1:50 pm

AFAIK the only library PB needs is libc. Someone with an in-depth knowledge
of linux may correct me.

EDIT: way too late again...

Post by **Polo** » Fri Jun 24, 2005 1:58 pm

traumatic wrote:AFAIK the only library PB needs is libc. Someone with an in-depth knowledge
of linux may correct me.

EDIT: way too late again...

Well, it needs also SDL and GTK

But maybe it's Linux that I don't like (very possible !

)

Linux IS a collection of 3rd party libraries.

You're right, and I hate that fact

I guess it's one of the main reason I don't like being on linux

I enjoy, when I have an application or something else, to have everything in a folder, or better, everything in the executable (of course we except there the library provided by the OS which everybody has)... But on Linux they do the contrary of my point of view (which is maybe not the best, but mine

)
Well, so when I found compilers that do that on Windows, well :roll:

traumatic · Post by **traumatic** » Fri Jun 24, 2005 2:47 pm

Polo wrote:Well, it needs also SDL and GTK

Well, that's not quite right.

There are several PB functions that rely on SDL and GTK but there's no
need to use them. You could well get away writing your programs without
them.

Let's move away from Linux and think of the Windows version:
A typical PB executable needs user32.dll, kernel32.dll and crtdll.dll - all of
them being external libs according to your description.

Think of movie, sound, sprite, etc. Again external libraries needed (DirectX).

Sorry, without splitting hairs, I can't see any real difference here.

Ok, back to FreeBasic discussion...

Post by **Dare2** » Fri Jun 24, 2005 3:30 pm

Thanks. We may have a common interest.

fsw · Post by **fsw** » Fri Jun 24, 2005 5:40 pm

There is no need for Allegro to create "Hello World" in fb.
Allegro is a 3D library running on several OS.
The Allegro "Hello World" example is just an example
to show how to interact with the Allegro Engine.

Here:
viewtopic.php?t=15479
I posted a small list of fb's features.

Be aware, at this stage fb is not suitable for every one.
You need more knowledge about certain api's.

Post by **Polo** » Fri Jun 24, 2005 7:37 pm

freebasic has a nice feature set indeed, but the core language is not intuitive like Purebasic (it's btw one of the most important reason that made me buy Purebasic : easy/fast/powerful/small).
It seems it has some features that makes the compiler better than Purebasic, like the support of static librarys, which is something I would love to have in Pure

In fact one of the thing I dislike about it is the language itself : you need to write something like "variable as integrer", in Pure it's just more intuitive : "variable" or "variable.l"

for traumatic :

There are several PB functions that rely on SDL and GTK but there's no
need to use them. You could well get away writing your programs without
them.

Well... We have to don't use Gadget or Game library, then... So Purebasic Linux would become useless

A typical PB executable needs user32.dll, kernel32.dll and crtdll.dll - all of
them being external libs according to your description.

According to my description, external libs are libs which you need to install in order to use the application, the dll you quoted are part of Windows OS

Anyway I'm sure Freebasic will became something, it just need a few month/years to become a real and robust compiler

traumatic · Post by **traumatic** » Sat Jun 25, 2005 11:50 am

Polo wrote:According to my description, external libs are libs which you need to install in order to use the application, the dll you quoted are part of Windows OS

GTK should be part of your X distribution, so what?

Ok, I got your point now. The difference is, Windows is one single product
coming from one single company, which makes things easier in certain cases.

Post by **Polo** » Sat Jun 25, 2005 12:05 pm

traumatic wrote:
Polo wrote:According to my description, external libs are libs which you need to install in order to use the application, the dll you quoted are part of Windows OS
GTK should be part of your X distribution, so what?
Ok, I got your point now. The difference is, Windows is one single product
coming from one single company, which makes things easier in certain cases.

No, because actually, in order to use Purebasic (for using window or gadgets) I had to install a gtk package (devel, I think, or something like that)

You're right about Windows, but the good thing about it is it's really easy to develop application with what's originally provided, you just need a compiler, linux is so complex that you need this and that, which result in bloated stuffs :roll:

Post by **Dare2** » Sat Jun 25, 2005 1:29 pm

Actually, the difference seems to be:

Windows = blackbox = don't really need to know too much to be effective.

Linux = DIY = steepish early learning curve to know "just" enough.

Bit like buying a TV dinner or cooking from scratch. At least we don't have to butcher the cow.

So windows, with "transparent complexity" has it over linux with "opaque complexity" because people can be up and effective quicker (effective in WP, programming, whatever) which is what people (and businesses) want.

But behind the scenes they both need everything needed

in order to do everything they do.

Now this is either very profound or so trivial it was only worth postcount+1

Edwin Knoppert · Post by **Edwin Knoppert** » Sat Jun 25, 2005 1:53 pm

If freebasic is discussed based on non-support of SDK wrappers, i think it's a bad discussion.
A while back i invested time into this compiler iand i think it's awesome.
If you base your self with a comparison to PureBasic and the FB bug list then it's poor judgement imo.

but... even FB is taking the wrong road by trying to make a multi os compiler.
To bad, i expect another flawed SDK windows system will be implemented "as long if it works it's fine"..
Point is multi os is way to complex to have a nearly 100% compatible syntax.
And that's my point, things like these are dumped on the market to soon.
That's a side effect of this ckind of low budget compilers.

About two months ago i tested FB and it's syntax is nearly how i would like it.
I'm also an SDK man (the window way shown above, WINMAIN windowproc etc..)
The remark of the multi os was a big reason not to put any more time into it.
(Gosh.. did i nearly had the visual designer ready for this one

)

fsw · Post by **fsw** » Sun Jun 26, 2005 4:58 am

Ok now I'm hijacking this thread:
Did somebody test HotBasic?
If so what is your impression?
Thanks.

Stay

HienTau · Post by **HienTau** » Fri Jul 15, 2005 2:03 pm

I'd say you better look for another compiler. I tested it once, didn't like it and really don't know why one should invest money and time into it. As far as I can see it's Windows-only and isn't exactly the best tool for games. PureBasic and even FreeBasic are better for such tasks.

Apart from that your question should be posted in new thread if you are really interested. You know, this thread is called "FREEBASIC compiler"...

Post by **Dare2** » Fri Jul 15, 2005 2:41 pm

Also tried HotBasic, admittedly a while ago. The hottest bit was the hot pink webpage. The prog didn't run well at all. Can't remember all the probs but there were many. As I said, it was a while back so I might be doing it a disservice. But FreeBasic

BCX etc are probably better bets. And PureBasic is the go!

the.weavster · Post by **the.weavster** » Sun Jul 17, 2005 6:28 pm

How about this from the creator of REALbasic:

http://extremebasic.com/index.html

mlwhitt · Post by **mlwhitt** » Mon Jul 18, 2005 3:49 am

From the looks of it ExtremeBasic does show some promise.

the.weavster wrote:How about this from the creator of REALbasic:

http://extremebasic.com/index.html