USCode wrote:I only asked because you mentioned here "applications" and "production code" and I assumed it was a product you were marketing
I was just refering to our in-house code generators, and the like.
USCode wrote:Do you find your customers are ever hesitant with you using PureBasic for projects?
What made you choose PureBasic to convert your code over to vs. others such as XOJO (REALBasic), etc.?
I don't give them a choice. Our customers, who tend not to be programmers, are more concerned about whether stuff works than what it's made of. We've done work in COBOL, PL/I, Assembler, VB, PowerBasic, and now PB.
Our main language for the past few years has been PowerBasic, but I wanted to move into Linux. However, PowerBasic needs to run under Wine with Linux, and the results are not very inspiring. About six years ago I ran some trials with RealBasic, but it was too big and too buggy. I like using languages that have many features, but which can be pushed beyond their normal limits. So although PB is missing some of the standard BASIC features, it has the ability to work with many different libraries, on three platforms. Plus it can access dynamic libraries created by other languages. PB is flexible enough that we can write our own versions of BASIC features, such as the Format statement and the Currency data type. The example I linked to above, shows the kind of stuff we're doing.
PB must have something going for it if, after 50 years of programming, I choose to work with it rather than anything else.

For ten years Caesar ruled with an iron hand, then with a wooden foot, and finally with a piece of string.
~ Spike Milligan