PureBasic Forums - English

IdeasVacuum wrote:remember we were all worried about sRod

Not everyone, someone informed us about his death if you remember correctly.

luis wrote:

IdeasVacuum wrote:remember we were all worried about sRod

Not everyone, someone informed us about his death if you remember correctly.

That'll be fangles sozzled brain cells playing tricks on him again.

Nope it wasn't good old fangles. I don't think he's that kind of animal. Isn't he a gruffalo by the way ?

luis wrote:Nope it wasn't good old fangles. I don't think he's that kind of animal. Isn't he a gruffalo by the way ?

OI!! No peeking, I'm shy!!!

I'm hoping Gnozal comes back then, if only to open-source his code.
I know he's not legally or morally obligated to do so, but if he's going
to take long absences, then he should really consider it because lots
of us rely on his stuff to work.

I've seen a lot of good regulars come and go here (Danilo, Sparkie,
and srod to name three) so perhaps Gnozal will be next to return.

Wow, all this from a question about where Gnozal is.

We're killing time until he turns up.

...but.... but... what if we start the Cult Of Gnozal?

Good grief. Okay, the thread is obviously hijacked beyond redemption.

Back ontopic, until this thread appeared, I was unaware anybody was still using Gnozal's libraries. Which particular one(s) were you using, PB?

POP3, SMTP and ZIP. Sure, there's code in these forums to do some of
those, but those codes don't support all the features that his libs did,
meaning it's not a simple matter of quick drag-and-drop replacement.

This is an obvious point, but I have to say it: PB's own Packer library now supports ZIP.

> Packer library now supports ZIP

But not with passwords, like Gnozal's does.
That's why it's not a drag-and-drop replacement.

TI-994A wrote:

Demivec wrote:...In almost all cases when you used an 'Assembler' you used 'Assembler' language...

Hi Demivec. That statement of yours is akin to saying that when you used a compiler you used compiler language.

GCC, MSVC and Objective-C are all C language compilers. Anyone who uses any one of these compilers can accurately say that they program in the C language. But to be compiler-specific, they'd have to specify the compiler name.

Along the same logic, you could simply say that you used assembly language; but to say that you used an assembler language, you'd have to be specific, for example the IBM S/360 assembler language.

Along the same logic, it is also true if you programmed in BASIC you had to specify if you were using gwBASIC, or TurboBasic, or PureBasic.


My main point was that when a person spoke of programming in 'Assembly' they were thinking of the end result more (Assembly being more or less equal to machine code) but when they were talking of programming in 'Assembler' they were talking about the higher functionality and features of an assembler.


I don't think I can add anything more. It's been a lengthy discussion, when is Gnozal supposed to show up?

Demivec wrote:...It's been a lengthy discussion, when is Gnozal supposed to show up?

And it's been fun too, but I couldn't agree with you more.