PureBasic Forums - English

Adapt a BlitzBasic game (with source) to PureBasic.

Compare the different file size of the executables between PureBasic and BlitzBasic.
(Added also a DirectX9 version to the download zip)

Orginal BlitzBasic link:
http://www.blitzmax.com/Community/posts.php?topic=81367

Screenshots:




PureBasic download link :
http://dreifrankensoft.de/BLOCKS/BLOCKS.zip

v0.2 uploaded.

v0.3 uploaded

[ADD]
- Menue
- some improvements

Nice work!

I forgot to remember my score before closing it. Just thought I might post it. But I'm sure I'll play it again. When will the "Highscore" be done? As I'm guessing it's not done anyway. It didn't mention anything about a highscore at the end of the game.

IceSoft wrote:Adapt a BlitzBasic game (with source) to PureBasic.

Compare the different file size of the executables between PureBasic and BlitzBasic.
(Added also a DirectX9 version to the download zip)

Orginal BlitzBasic link:
http://www.blitzmax.com/Community/posts.php?topic=81367

Here the first PureBasic version:

PureBasic download link :
PBblocks_DX7_DX9.zip

Hi there,

nice and already good-looking... Do you think it is possible to adopt
it to Mac OS? I might give it a try, if you like.

When I tried, the impression of blocks exploding beyond the window came to my mind

Do you think that would be possible? I mean, removed blocks explode like they do,
but jump over the window-edge and fade away??? Could be a matter of transparent
windows or screens, isn't it?

nice port.

but why the need to compare two different things? blitzbasic doesn't even compile to machine code, it's byte code... and the reason the exes are big is simply because all the libraries are linked, in fact, it's the main library that ends up being huge - but I tell you what, you add all that functionality using PB and you'll go way over 1MB in your DLL.

you should compare pb against c++ and see by yourself how slow pb really is at least it'll be a realistic comparison in the sense that both languages compile to machine code. although unfair since pb is a basement project and c++ comes from a history of over 30 years from the c base.

don't get me wrong about that but it's just pointless to compare A with Z, what matters in the end is the product you come up with. if that product happens to require high performance XYZ then you'll probably want to go with C++ since performance outweighs executable size any day.

blitzbasic is in the past anyway, blitzmax is in my opinion an OK language and the compiler isn't too bad either, what really makes it shine is the fact that the libraries are open sourced (and yes, this is very useful - not only you get to learn from their code but also enhance it if required). by now you made this false picture of me being a blitz* fanboy, however I'm not.

I'm just merely pointing out that it's very unfair to compare two opposite things... just because you can doesn't mean it's right.

As a side note... code size (read as "compiled executable size") doesn't really matter if it has a purpose. for instance, one way of optimization is loop unrolling, inlining of functions and whatnot; they all increase the executable size - yet it doesn't mean its worse. Also, don't forget about alternative code paths (fixed, sse*, mmx, etc) they too increase the executable size, but it provides a fair increase in performance, at the expense of a bigger size. fair? yes, very.

Sure, the bigger exe is harder to share if you're on a 56kbps connection and it uses more system ram but those are two problems from the past.

However I'm still not sure why mark sibley (or however you spell his name) didn't compile his engine in separate modules back in the day... I'm guessing it would of added extra complexity on his sucky code and time was running out

@superadmin,
I compare only two BASIC dialects.
C++ is not a BASIC dialect so a compare between PB and C++ makes no sense here.

BTW: I should make a next update

IceSoft wrote:@superadmin,
I compare only two BASIC dialects.
C++ is not a BASIC dialect so a compare between PB and C++ makes no sense here.

but you compared the executable size, not the basic dialect. i did not see the source how would i know that pb is better than bb? maybe if compare portions of source code from bb and code from pb, and point out how this or that is better.. only then..

devski wrote:maybe if compare portions of source code from bb and code from pb, and point out how this or that is better.. only then..

Not the source is really important....it is the compiler what make the exe from the source.

yes it is the compiler that makes the exe. but didnt everybody knows that pb makes small source? besides, superadnim explained in detail already regarding the file sizes.

IceSoft wrote:@superadmin,
I compare only two BASIC dialects.

so you compared the dialect by looking at the exe file size? how is that even possible? i dont think i can do that, that is why i was asking for source comparison.

devski wrote: so you compared the dialect by looking at the exe file size? how is that even possible? i dont think i can do that, that is why i was asking for source comparison.

What are you think what you will see if you compare BASIC source dialects?
We all here knows BASIC is not really a standard.
So you can only see what we always knows:
The source IS different of course.
Compare is only usefull on the results (= exe)

And last but not least:
This threads is about BLOCKS not really about the better BASIC.
Make your own comparsions and use what you think it is the better one.

So let it as it is (Maybe you can write an own thread about which BASIC is better)

IceSoft wrote:What are you think what you will see if you compare BASIC source dialects?

why i want to see source? didnt you mention that you were comparing basic dialect? how am i supposed to follow your comparison using an exe??

IceSoft wrote:We all here knows BASIC is not really a standard.
So you can only see what we always knows:
The source IS different of course.
Compare is only usefull on the results (= exe)

yes obvisouly pb source is different from bb source. regarding the file size, supeadnim explained why. you dont want superdnim to be right. so to save yourself you went on to mention the basic dialect is the one you are comparing! lol.

IceSoft wrote: This threads is about BLOCKS not really about the better BASIC.

maybe if you did not mention that pb has a smaller file size, it will be only about BLOCKS.

IceSoft wrote: Make your own comparsions and use what you think it is the better one.

compare what? the file size? and based on which is smaller, i would assume it is the best basic dialect? or compiler? or...

remember you made the comparison. first it was file size. that was explained by superadnm. but no you mentioned it was the dialect you are comparing, but you never explained it but keep insisting on the file size lol.

IceSoft wrote: So let it as it is (Maybe you can write an own thread about which BASIC is better)

didnt you just implied that pb is better because its file size is smaller?

you obviously dug yourself a hole and cannot defend you contradicting statementss. i just want clarifications but dont bother, im just going to drop this thread.

*yawn*

devski wrote:maybe if you did not mention that pb has a smaller file size, it will be only about BLOCKS..

That is what I have told.

The prob is:
You and superadmin are want read more as I have written

0.3a uploaded.

[Changed]
Improved the animation of the falling blocks

[Add]
Levels:
Easy: each stone can be removed
Middle: removes only >=2 neighbour stones
Hard: removes only >=3 neighbour stones