Page 4 of 5
Posted: Mon Mar 31, 2008 7:34 pm
by thefool
milan1612 wrote:What seperates PureBasic from FreeBasic is IMHO the feature rich standard library.
That's what keeps me from using C, FreeBasic and C++ more often, because it
makes (effectiv) programming so much easier...
yeah i'm becoming pretty satisfied with purebasic in that areas. Especially with 4.2, i already wrote two programs at work which use the new mail library for sending reports to clients..
Posted: Mon Mar 31, 2008 8:39 pm
by Seldon
I don't know much about FreeBasic, but I don't like any Basic dialect that comes with a M$ syntax. I do prefer the PB dialect, because I'm used to it... from old BlitzBasic Amiga days. Besides from a technical point of view, the progress of PB is simply gorgeous.
Posted: Mon Mar 31, 2008 8:44 pm
by Mistrel
I agree. The PureBasic syntax is excellent.
Posted: Tue Apr 01, 2008 7:21 am
by Heathen
Derek wrote:Heathen wrote:The only thing I don't like is the syntax of freebasic, other than that, it seems to be a great language, probably better than PB in terms of features and functionality.
Traitor.
Seriously though, it doesn't look that bad features wise, there are a few things that PB could do with that are already implemented in FB.
But I think I'll stick with PB.
I still prefer PB because of the syntax and 'pureness'.
. Just based on the feature list and what's included in the base package, freebasic seems to have a little more to offer, thats all.
Posted: Tue Apr 01, 2008 8:21 am
by Dare
FreeBasic is akin to PowerBasic et al in its syntax, etc.
Whereas PureBasic marches to the beat of it's very own drum - and the beat rocks!
Long long time since I used FreeBasic so this is probably obsolete but back then I found it was cumbersome. Like QBasic and Powerbasic.
Not knocking it (it worked okay) but you couldn't throw together an app quicksmart like you can with Pure; You had to write your own "gadgets" and etc or hope there was a thirdparty lib available; The install, IDE and syntax were all a bit clunky (or required many more actions like keystrokes, etc) compared to Pure.
However, that was back then. Maybe things have changed.
Regardless, there are very smart people involved in the development of both.
Posted: Thu Apr 03, 2008 2:58 am
by sampb
Thanks a lot!!!
Now I have some points to answer my friend.
Posted: Thu Apr 03, 2008 8:01 am
by blueznl
I went for PureBasic as I came from GfaBasic, and PureBasic is more akin to GfaBasic then all the MSBasic descendants.
There's simply too much typing in other dialects
Posted: Fri Apr 04, 2008 11:56 pm
by utopiomania
Fred wrote:
Both languages are now very complex, you can't just compare them based on one or another small feature
But freebasic is version 0.18.4 Beta, and PureBasic is 4.10?
I REFUSE to accept that freebasic can compare at all, or am I looking at the wrong freebasic or what
Re: purebasic vs. freebasic
Posted: Mon Oct 24, 2011 2:14 pm
by littlebigman
Since this thread dates back to 2008, I think it'd be useful to update the FAQ to provide a fair comparison between PureBasic and FreeBasic so that users can make an educated decision.
Re: purebasic vs. freebasic
Posted: Mon Oct 24, 2011 4:41 pm
by xorc1zt
today, the main differences between PB and FB :
purebasic :
- non free
- closed source
- x64
- mac os
freebasic :
- free
- open source
- OOP
- x86 only (but x64 and ARM planned)
free basic has a more libs but less documentations.
Re: purebasic vs. freebasic
Posted: Mon Oct 24, 2011 4:55 pm
by ts-soft
xorc1zt wrote:free basic has a more libs but less documentations.
no, freebasic has wrappers for many free dlls and libs!
Re: purebasic vs. freebasic
Posted: Mon Oct 24, 2011 5:07 pm
by Kiffi
my personally main difference between PB and FB :
purebasic :
- easy-peasy window programming
freebasic :
- beastly hard window programming
Greetings ... Kiffi
Re: purebasic vs. freebasic
Posted: Mon Oct 24, 2011 5:25 pm
by xorc1zt
when you say "window" do you mean a GUI or microsoft windows the os ? because free basic has now good visual designers like firefly or FBEdit
http://sourceforge.net/projects/fbedit/
http://www.planetsquires.com/firefly_freebasic.html
Re: purebasic vs. freebasic
Posted: Mon Oct 24, 2011 6:44 pm
by Kiffi
xorc1zt wrote:when you say "window" do you mean a GUI or microsoft windows the os ?
i mean GUI programming. Sorry for the missunderstanding (see my signature
).
Code: Select all
#myWindow=0
#myButton=0
If OpenWindow(#myWindow, #PB_Ignore, #PB_Ignore, 200, 200, "myWindow")
ButtonGadget(#myButton, 10, 10, 100, 20, "Please press!")
Repeat
Select WaitWindowEvent()
Case #PB_Event_Gadget
Select EventGadget()
Case #myButton
MessageRequester("", "Thanks!")
EndSelect
Case #PB_Event_CloseWindow
Break
EndSelect
ForEver
EndIf
Can you provide some FB-Code similar to the PB-Code above?
Greetings ... Kiffi
Re: purebasic vs. freebasic
Posted: Mon Oct 24, 2011 10:24 pm
by bembulak
i mean GUI programming. Sorry for the missunderstanding (see my signature
).
Code: Select all
#myWindow=0
#myButton=0
If OpenWindow(#myWindow, #PB_Ignore, #PB_Ignore, 200, 200, "myWindow")
ButtonGadget(#myButton, 10, 10, 100, 20, "Please press!")
Repeat
Select WaitWindowEvent()
Case #PB_Event_Gadget
Select EventGadget()
Case #myButton
MessageRequester("", "Thanks!")
EndSelect
Case #PB_Event_CloseWindow
Break
EndSelect
ForEver
EndIf
Can you provide some FB-Code similar to the PB-Code above?
Agreed!
The missing crossplattform GUI-lib is one of the reasons, why FB unusable for me. Yes, I know, there's a wxWidgets-wrapper (that does NOT support sizers!) and a GTK wrapper, but I don't want my users to "must install" GTK on Windows.
Furthermore: FB does not support Mac OSX!