True 64-bit Applications in PureBasic and Huge Numeric Types

[Danilo]

One must always go deeper than skin-deep. Intel compiler fully relies on Microsoft C++ compilers. Microsoft is loudly honestly clear about their 64-bit compilers: They are NOT true 64bit compilers. Micro$oft’s 64-bit compilers create hybrid software: 32bit+64bit. NO object can exceed the 2GB size limit!

How could Intel’s “64-bit” compilers go beyond the limits of their fathers?

Always think deeper, boys and “bloody” girls!

I understood now what you meant with "hybrid software: 32bit+64bit".

What you said is possible with Microsoft's Managed C++ for .NET -
but that's a total different story from what i was talking about.

Intel C++ does not support programming for .NET, it is a native
compiler that compiles to 32bit or 64bit, but no hybrid apps.
The same is possible with Microsoft's C/C++ compiler, just do not
compile for .NET targets, but native 32bit or 64bit exe/dll/obj/lib.

[Zach]

So I found the source

Here Anyone care to take a crack at a fast PB version (feel free to throw some ASM in if it helps)? Or should I try to embarrass myself with my own attempt at something speedy?

Although that post on his own forums sounds like he has taken his toys and gone home. I guess having to learn something new is too complicated for a lottery programmer..

Anyway, I have to get back to my awesome new version of "Hello World" that I am coding.

[c4s]

Seriously? His code is a joke. As far as I can tell he's just using the RND function of PowerBasic. Using such a function multiple times doesn't make a number more random... There is really nothing more to say on this.

[luis]

The problem in all this, for me at least, is the fact there is nothing wrong with someone asking for an advice, or a question. The silly thing is when someone charge in writing a neverending list of nonsense telling you this is the real truth that you, poor fellow, ignored until now.

Not talking about the rest (and we could), just read all the inanities he wrote about PB after trying it for a day, if not an hour.
Again not asking about it... but telling you how things are.

It would be only a little rude to write that in your first few posts if it was all real, but it's just depressing when it's wrong.

I believe this look is the appropriate response, until that disposition won't change.

[skywalk]

Any of the spam bots are less intrusive than the luck master.
Yet, it is also eye opening and saddening to peer inside the brain of an author via his childish, poorly conceived posts.
Woe to those not privy to these outbursts.

[Zach]

If you think this thread and/or his web site were that bad, you should see the Google hits for his name with various search terms added

[Ion Saliu]

skywalk, luis et al.:

Envy hurts badly those with a deep complex of inferiority. You don’t even capitalize your names …

What have you created — any useful programs? NOT! You just ruminate in choking pain …

As of PureBasic, basically I said it is not BASIC at all. It is more like C. So, what? It doesn’t mean anything bad. I admit it was my fault: I should have read the manual first. Mea culpa (don’t fry your brains over this one)!

[skywalk]

Do not mistake humility for inferiority.
Clearly, the former is sadly lacking in your failed apology.

If you care to rationally discuss the merits of this tool and others, you must refrain from personal attacks and wild accusations.
Otherwise this topic is soon to be locked.

[Danilo]

As of PureBasic, basically I said it is not BASIC at all. It is more like C. So, what? It doesn’t mean anything bad.

After working with PureBasic for some time, it is more easy (IMO) to learn
the C family languages. PureBasic -> C -> C++ / Java / C#.

It is a side effect of the PureBasic syntax that is not so standard BASIC.
Worked for me and many other guys here. It can be a big advantage later
if you know all this languages and can mix them. Write a DLL with C++
and the GUI with PureBasic for example. It is more freedom than just using
'QBASIC like' languages.

So PureBasic can serve as a springboard to the C language family, if you want.
Nothing against the other BASIC's. It's purely a matter of taste.

[MachineCode]

After working with PureBasic for some time, it is more easy (IMO) to learn
the C family languages. PureBasic -> C -> C++ / Java / C#.

So true. I've always been a Basic coder and could never read C to save my life... until I bought and learned PureBasic. Now I can read any C source and pretty much know what it's saying and doing, and how to convert it to Basic. It's great!

[Kuron]

Seriously? His code is a joke.

code? Hell, I can't get past what might possibly be the worst looking & designed web site.

[luis]

Envy hurts badly those with a deep complex of inferiority. You don’t even capitalize your names …

*YAWN* ... sure (pat on the head)

What have you created — any useful programs? NOT! You just ruminate in choking pain …

*YAWN* .... sure (pat on the head, wearing a disposable glove)

Now, back on topic

As of PureBasic, basically I said it is not BASIC at all.

As I said before: "just read all the inanities he wrote about PB after trying it for a day, if not an hour.
Again not asking about it... but telling you how things are."

My problem with people like you it's all there. When they are wrong. You were.

Un-Pure Basic uses longer function names which definitely affect the performance. You won’t notice that in “Hello, world!” programs, but you will de definitely shocked in lottery programs.

You wrote a stupid thing. It's also false.

It is much faster to PRINT #1, than using the PureBasic cumbersome functions.

This is another stupid thing, simply because it's a nonsense. You would need to know how a compiler works to understand why it's a nonsense.

Actually, you can’t print directly to files. You must first create arrays and then dump them to file.

You wrote another stupid thing. It's also false.

Unfortunately, writing to an array uses the now hidden REDIM PRESERVE

SCI-FI, nonsense, meaningless sentence. Does not compute.

The 64-bit “PureBasic” is slower than the 32-bit PBCC.

So far, a baseless opinion. Probably due to your poor coding skills in general (you can't be so HOT after all the stuff you wrote here), and not-existing abilities with PB in particular.

I thought the 64-bit would be faster by an order of magnitude! NOT!

You thought a lot of stupid things.

It is more like C.

That's the only not stupid thing you wrote.

You are happy to believe all that crap because you are not interested in the reality, your are not interested in learning, and you are full of hot air.

So long, EOT.

[Ion Saliu]

skywalk, luis, kuron et al.:

You are NOTHING but a bunch of stupidiots — envious, resentful, and struck by BIPOLAR DISORDER. Another member here gave you a good piece of advice: Google my name and then google your names!!! You are inexistent nullities (NULL like in C)! You only know to kick arse. But as cowardice as you are, you beg not to be responded to in like …

I stick with my basic complaint that PureBasic is NOT a dialect of the Basic programming language. Reasonable persons here understood my point. I was just misled by the Pure and Basic and I jumped at my first 64bit compiler.

And a secondary point I stick with: You ain’t no programmers. Printing “Hello, world!” is NOT programming. See my post in response to Bloody F**k …

[Ion Saliu]

Danilo:

Your posts are appreciated. You used your mind — ‘cuz you do have a mind — and wrote heads-up posts.

I would have moved to C/C++ if I it had happened at least10 years ago. I have written lots of programs with thousands of lines of code each. Migration to another programming language is simply mission impossible.

I wanted to migrate to 64-bit computing the easiest way possible. Basic-to-Basic was my only option. PowerBasic had made some unwanted (in my book!) changes to their Basic from 16-bits to 32-bits. But it still was 90% Basic. Maybe they’ll step up to 64-bit programming …

Best of luck!

[Kuron]

skywalk, luis, kuron et al.:

You are NOTHING but a bunch of stupidiots — envious, resentful, and struck by BIPOLAR DISORDER. Another member here gave you a good piece of advice: Google my name and then google your names!!! You are inexistent nullities (NULL like in C)! You only know to kick arse. But as cowardice as you are, you beg not to be responded to in like …

I stick with my basic complaint that PureBasic is NOT a dialect of the Basic programming language. Reasonable persons here understood my point. I was just misled by the Pure and Basic and I jumped at my first 64bit compiler.

And a secondary point I stick with: You ain’t no programmers. Printing “Hello, world!” is NOT programming. See my post in response to Bloody F**k …

I have no idea what I have done to elicit your wrath, but if it makes you happy, go for it. You do seem very confused about something. Having your name show up in Google searches is NOT a good thing.

The simple question is if you do not like PureBasic, why are you here? If you don't like it, don't use it. It really is that simple.