PureBasic Forums - English

Danilo wrote:PureBasic.net anyone?

Last time a PB.NET was announced a couple of years ago nothing really happened...

Shield wrote:

Danilo wrote:PureBasic.net anyone?

Last time a PB.NET was announced a couple of years ago nothing really happened...

I know Deeem started something like this years ago. Don't know if there was
another project like this, i didn't check here for a long time.

Many PureBasic users really hated .NET some years ago. Don't know for sure how much has changed.
The big question is: Does it make sense? If so, in which way does it make sense?
Just compile pure PureBasic for .NET like it is now, with all its libraries? No API? It would be of very limited use IMO.
On the other side you could add more features to make it more useful and powerful, but it would become
incompatible with real PureBasic... it would be like a new language or "PB++" that includes PB but adds new
things on top of it. In this case you could just start a completely new BASIC/PureBasic-like product...?

PureBasic with its current syntax and feature set doesn't really make sense to be ported to
.NET in my opinion. The main advantages of .NET can only truly be used with "advanced" (not really)
features such as OOP and Exception Handling. Maybe even complete type safety and cast abilities.
But all that stuff would change PB completely, making it an entirely new language.

Also, keeping up compatibility to existing PB sources wouldn't make much sense either.
Mainly because of the libraries...I mean..."forcing" the PB command set and blocking
off all the existing .NET libraries would be like if you're only allowed to use
the 'A' key on your keyboard with every other key disabled just for the sake of "simplicity"...

They'd be much wiser to make PB compile mobile phone apps. That market has a huge future.

Thanks Shield! I agree!

Follow Apples lead and target LLVM

I guess in 2013 sitting on a rock with my notebook powered with solar panels programming in PureBasic the new PureWindows 1.0