PureBasic Forums - English

gnozal wrote:

c4s wrote:Is it worth the effort? I don't see any sense in doing this.

Imho some people are afraid to admit they are using basic, c++ is so much cooler and looks more professional, especially if the exe is big with a lot of DLLs and .NET dependency.

That is exactly it! I don't want people to know I am using basic.

I switched when I found out that MS VB6 and MS VC++ uses the exact same compiler. Only their parsers are different. C++ is no longer superior to basic. It is, in fact, inferior because it is harder to use and more prone to programmer errors.

But, basic programs have never inspired confidence. Can you blame me for wanting to hide the fact that my program was written in basic?

considering the main indicator in the code that Purebasic is being used is the occurance of the string "PB_" - there isn't anything that screams BASIC to me in those three characters.

I switched when I found out that MS VB6 and MS VC++ uses the exact same compiler.

No, this couldn't be wronger. Also your post about reverse engineering is misinformed (as pointed out by Kaeru Gaman and Thorium).

But, basic programs have never inspired confidence. Can you blame me for wanting to hide the fact that my program was written in basic?

It isn't exactly visible with PB's executables. If people knows how to look inside an executable to find out, then they should also know that it's about the programmer, not the language.

toledo wrote: But, basic programs have never inspired confidence. Can you blame me for wanting to hide the fact that my program was written in basic?

I wasted some time talking about the wrong subject then (reverse eng.)

toledo wrote:But, basic programs have never inspired confidence.

Thanks to whom ?

toledo wrote: Can you blame me for wanting to hide the fact that my program was written in basic?

No, I don't care. You are free to be victim of yours (or other people's) fixations !

LOL!

the saying "you can't teach programming to students who were infected with BASIC" is from the 80ies and from Professors.

not from nowadays, not from programmers who stand their man in business.

so you shouldn't give a fart for it nor care about people who believe in it.

Trond wrote:it's about the programmer, not the language.

Trond wrote:

I switched when I found out that MS VB6 and MS VC++ uses the exact same compiler.

No, this couldn't be wronger.

You should check your facts before you correct somebody. I got mine from Microsoft. Where did you get yours?

Trond wrote:Also your post about reverse engineering is misinformed (as pointed out by Kaeru Gaman and Thorium).

If Kaeru Gaman and Thorium already pointed it out, why do you feel the need to repeat it? To tell me I'm an idiot? Your post was useless to me and very condescending. Please don't reply to my posts anymore. I can do without your help.

Don't worry about the Trond's tone. Somewhen, you will be used to it - i'm sure there was no pun intended .

Not offense to my post TOLEDO, it's just for say my mind, and kill in the egg an useless fight

FRED have right, but it's not a news...FRED have always right
TROND is an old, kind, usefull and great member, with an enormous knowledge of programming and he try to help everybody since several years.
It's a pity to not want help of a member, only on one sentence, perhaps not understanding

Excuse me in advance to have disturb your POST
I wish you a good day to you TOLEDO

toledo wrote:That is exactly it! I don't want people to know I am using basic.

The problem is not the compiled executable. Due to the fact that is a tiny self contained exe, people will *assume* C or C++.

Your bigger problem is when they want to see the source code or ask which compiler you used - You can't get around the fact that it's a PureBasic compiler.

Unless you lie of course, in which case you can also claim that you coded it in Direct Hex.

toledo wrote:

Trond wrote:

I switched when I found out that MS VB6 and MS VC++ uses the exact same compiler.

No, this couldn't be wronger.

You should check your facts before you correct somebody. I got mine from Microsoft. Where did you get yours?

Sorry about being wrong. It turns VB6 has two different compilers, one that compiles to p-code (and has nothing in common in MS VC++) and one that compiles to native code (which I didn't know about). I bloopered twice in this thread, that's my fault, and I'm sorry.
Edit: The VC++ backend only comes with the enterprise and professional editions.

Trond wrote:Also your post about reverse engineering is misinformed (as pointed out by Kaeru Gaman and Thorium).

If Kaeru Gaman and Thorium already pointed it out, why do you feel the need to repeat it? To tell me I'm an idiot? Your post was useless to me and very condescending. Please don't reply to my posts anymore. I can do without your help.

I repeated it because you said you wanted to strip the strings to prevent reverse engineering. Then you got told that stripping the strings would NOT prevent reverse engineering. But you STILL wanted to strip the strings. So I figured you didn't find that information reliable enough. So I repeated it.

And, when you come to the official PureBasic forum and use a three page topic to say that using PureBasic is so embarrassing it must be hidden, then I feel that's not good tone either.

Actually, and please correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the PB code translated to ASM and then compiled from ASM?

If that's the case, then surely you can boast that it compiled from ASM. Screw those lame C or C++ boys, you use something that blows them out of the water!

Foz wrote:If that's the case, then surely you can boast that it compiled from ASM. Screw those lame C or C++ boys, you use something that blows them out of the water!

C and C++ is also compiled from asm (although it is sometimes passed directly between the compiler and the assembler to speed up compilation).

To me (and should be to ANY programmer) it doesn't matter what language you user so long as you can get done what you need to get done .. be it a game or what ever..

the wholke thing about people being able to tell what language your using is crap as it shouldn't matter as its the quality of the end product which counts.. which means that it depends on what YOU the programmer puts into it.

If you Write a fantastic game of course no matter what language you write it in people can and will be able to dissassemble it if they spend enough time.

I myself know of commercial programmners writting stuff in basic and even in came creators and most people don't care so long as its good and does / acts / displays / plays like its supposed to

I myself don't use scripted / tokonised languages but thats only due to the lack of speed .. but even todays computers thats not really as big a problem as it used to be.

So my suggestion to anyone is pick a language that you are comfortable with.. that you can actually work with and understand to get your work done.

toledo wrote:But, basic programs have never inspired confidence. Can you blame me for wanting to hide the fact that my program was written in basic?

I used to think like that. But customers like and use Visual Basic apps, and .NET apps which require a runtime, so when they see your tiny standalone executable they'll think it's C. Just don't mention otherwise, and don't reply to requests for the source.

UserOfPure wrote:Just don't mention otherwise, and don't reply to requests for the source.

Or just hand them the generated ASM.