
Little Class Preprocessor Released
-
- Enthusiast
- Posts: 169
- Joined: Thu Oct 05, 2006 6:44 am
- Contact:
Ups, just saw that, sorry...
@Chrono Syndrome:
Didn't work on it in a looong time because there was actually no feedback at all, pretty disappointing.
But hey, it's ok.
What do you mean by progress? What do you miss?
@bembulak
Well it's coded in PureBasic, so if instead of RAedit the build in EditorGadget would be used, and every API command would be wrapped into a "compiler if", then yes it could be compiled for Linux.
Actually the GUI could be totally stripped out, but my first intention was to make a small editor out of it with proper syntax highliting.
@SFSxOI
You are welcome.
Just took a look at the code again, it was last September when I touched it.
@Chrono Syndrome:
Didn't work on it in a looong time because there was actually no feedback at all, pretty disappointing.
But hey, it's ok.
What do you mean by progress? What do you miss?
@bembulak
Well it's coded in PureBasic, so if instead of RAedit the build in EditorGadget would be used, and every API command would be wrapped into a "compiler if", then yes it could be compiled for Linux.
Actually the GUI could be totally stripped out, but my first intention was to make a small editor out of it with proper syntax highliting.
@SFSxOI
You are welcome.
Just took a look at the code again, it was last September when I touched it.

-
- Enthusiast
- Posts: 169
- Joined: Thu Oct 05, 2006 6:44 am
- Contact:
@fsw:
Take a look at: http://blitz.pp.ru/forum/attachment.php ... stid=17785
I want something like this, but better: with properties and static methods
.
Take a look at: http://blitz.pp.ru/forum/attachment.php ... stid=17785
I want something like this, but better: with properties and static methods

Don't try to catch ze Night !
Remember: 'z' is better zen 'th' =) !
Sorry for bad english.
Remember: 'z' is better zen 'th' =) !
Sorry for bad english.
Thank you.Pantcho!! wrote:nice one!
Looks good.
This was my intention, only because no user keywords can be added to the PB-Editor.Pantcho!! wrote:i think what Chrono meant for progress is the IDE and other well known PB keywords such as for user librarys and etc.
If this can be implment in a mini JaPBe editor that will be a blast!
But first there was no user feedback, second a bug with properties and strings that isn't fixed as of now (to make private methods), third all the negative bashing about PureBasic and OOP here on the forum.
And somewhere I read coding should be fun...
Will take a look at itChrono Syndrome wrote:@fsw:
Take a look at: http://blitz.pp.ru/forum/attachment.php ... stid=17785
I want something like this, but better: with properties and static methods.

- Hroudtwolf
- Addict
- Posts: 803
- Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 3:35 am
- Location: Germany(Hessen)
- Contact:
Hey, FSW. 
That's a cool tool (I know, I said it already. But I wanted to give a feedback in your tools homethread.).
I were very interested for a further developed version.
My wishes for a next version.
- Preprocessing per commandline. (useful as IDE-Tool.)
- Compiling after preprocessing.
- Selectable Class-Templates (for individual OOP-Style)
Best regards
Wolf

That's a cool tool (I know, I said it already. But I wanted to give a feedback in your tools homethread.).
I were very interested for a further developed version.
My wishes for a next version.
- Preprocessing per commandline. (useful as IDE-Tool.)
- Compiling after preprocessing.
- Selectable Class-Templates (for individual OOP-Style)
Best regards
Wolf
Thank you very much.Hroudtwolf wrote:Hey, FSW.
That's a cool tool (I know, I said it already. But I wanted to give a feedback in your tools homethread.).
These are all good ideas.Hroudtwolf wrote: I were very interested for a further developed version.
My wishes for a next version.
- Preprocessing per commandline. (useful as IDE-Tool.)
- Compiling after preprocessing.
- Selectable Class-Templates (for individual OOP-Style)
I wanted to create a small editor to get the proper Keywords hiliting.
But I got side tracked with other programming languages...
If there would be a PB editor where keywords can be added than it would be obsolete. I asked Freak once if this is possible for the future but his answer was: "It's not planned".
Preprocessing per commandline would be possible in a snap, but then there would be no syntax hiliting (well for now LCP is not usable as editor either...).
Compiling after preprocessing would be cool.
For implementing selectable class templates (for individual OOP-Style) inside LCP I would have to know about the different coding styles.
Or do you mean the user should be able to create these templates and LCP should react accordingly. This would be a lot of work.
Thanks again for your input, every feedback is truly appreciated, and motivating. (If you don't believe me ask FangBeast)
- Hroudtwolf
- Addict
- Posts: 803
- Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 3:35 am
- Location: Germany(Hessen)
- Contact:
Hey, the most of the freaks here in the community was developed on the good old bread box (c64). There wasn't any syntaxhighlighting.Preprocessing per commandline would be possible in a snap, but then there would be no syntax hiliting (well for now LCP is not usable as editor either...).

I think we would bear that without sh.

Yes, exactly.Or do you mean the user should be able to create these templates and LCP should react accordingly. This would be a lot of work.
But that isn't the most important.
According to my opinion would be "preprocessing per commandline" the most important feature.
'Cause it would be fewer exertion to work OOP.
"->" is used to access the object propertySFSxOI wrote:I'm just now getting a chance to try this out on an actual project. I have a question; The '->' and 'This', are these the same as used in C++ or C#?
"This" is used for the object address pointer
Look at the examples, it should show you how to use them.
There is also a minimalistic doc file.
Thank you for trying it out.
Super!
A few ask, I would still have:
- why is C++ Borland-syntax here uses become? The methods should be in the class.
- gives it to also modifier later?
- can Can one use several Basic-classes?
I found this is a good syntax:
A few ask, I would still have:
- why is C++ Borland-syntax here uses become? The methods should be in the class.
- gives it to also modifier later?
- can Can one use several Basic-classes?
I found this is a good syntax:
Code: Select all
;{ CBasic
Class Abstract CBasic ; the class cannot using with 'NewObject'
Public
Method CBasic()
*this\String = ?CBasic::MySection
EndMethod
Method ~CBasic()
; call by free the class
EndMethod
*String.s{255} ;/ public-variablen
Private
Method.l Method1()
MethodReturn *this\InternMethod()
EndMethod
Protected ; only using in this class
Method.l InternMethod()
ProcedureReturn @CBasic::InternMethod()
EndMethod
Global ; this modifier is for all objects
DataSection MySection
Data.s "MyString"
EndDataSection
EndClass
Procedure CBasic::CBasic()
*this\String = ?CBasic::MySection
EndProcedure
;}
;{ CBasic2
Class CBasic2
Public
Fixed Public lValue.l ; can´t change this variable at the 'Public'-even
EndClass
;}
;{ CClass
Class Sealed CClass Extends Public CBasic, Private CBasic2
Public
Method CClass(lParameter.l)
Debug "create class with parameter"
EndMethod
Public
Method GetValue.l()
MethodReturn *this\lValue ; return an extends variable
EndMethod
EndClass
;}
Define NewObject *obj.CClass(104)
*obj\String = "Hallo"
Debug *obj\Method1()
FreeObject *obj
Thanks.Leonhard wrote:Super!
Why should it be in the class?Leonhard wrote:A few ask, I would still have:
- why is C++ Borland-syntax here uses become? The methods should be in the class.
Both ways are common in different programming languages.
I decided for a C++/Java one.
The benefit for the way I went would be more visible when static libraries are compiled, because if you compile method by method to a object file the resulting exe stays as small as possible because the not used methods are not linked to.
Wait, Purebasic can't compile static libraries...
Ok, forget that.
Suppose english is not your native language.Leonhard wrote:- gives it to also modifier later?
Sorry, don't know what you mean with this one.
Not at the same time.Leonhard wrote: - can Can one use several Basic-classes?
Look at the doc and you see how extends is used.
Leonhard wrote: I found this is a good syntax:Code: Select all
;{ CBasic Class Abstract CBasic ; the class cannot using with 'NewObject' Public Method CBasic() *this\String = ?CBasic::MySection EndMethod Method ~CBasic() ; call by free the class EndMethod *String.s{255} ;/ public-variablen Private Method.l Method1() MethodReturn *this\InternMethod() EndMethod Protected ; only using in this class Method.l InternMethod() ProcedureReturn @CBasic::InternMethod() EndMethod Global ; this modifier is for all objects DataSection MySection Data.s "MyString" EndDataSection EndClass Procedure CBasic::CBasic() *this\String = ?CBasic::MySection EndProcedure ;} ;{ CBasic2 Class CBasic2 Public Fixed Public lValue.l ; can´t change this variable at the 'Public'-even EndClass ;} ;{ CClass Class Sealed CClass Extends Public CBasic, Private CBasic2 Public Method CClass(lParameter.l) Debug "create class with parameter" EndMethod Public Method GetValue.l() MethodReturn *this\lValue ; return an extends variable EndMethod EndClass ;} Define NewObject *obj.CClass(104) *obj\String = "Hallo" Debug *obj\Method1() FreeObject *obj
And the benefit is?