PureBasic Forums - English

Restored from previous forum. Originally posted by AK47.

Hi Fred.

I´m writing here today to ask for some more or less "official"
statement about PB's future. The reason for this post is my
confusion about a strange thread in the german forums in which
Danilo -one of the PB key persons here- announced that he'll quit
the PB scene and move on to use C++. A loss for sure, not a too big
thing though.
Irritating for me is just his 180 degree turn in his statements
about PB. Usually it's him to praise very convincing the current
and future features and possibilitys of PB. But suddenly he talks
about limitations and a wrong picture of PB in the public.
Finally he speaks of a "dead end street for him" about PB, since
it's just a "hobby project Fred does for fun". Well, here' s the
point where I start to feel a little bit fooled. I've yet dedicated
a considerable amount of time to develope several smaller projects
with PB. This includes also expectations of future features and
serious progress and bugfixing. My decision for PB was based also
on Danilo's former statements, now he's singing a different song.
No, he's not putting PB down or something like this - but enough
to put some doubts to me. Am I on a dead end street too?
Fred, I would appreciate very much if you could drop some lines
here about your plans with PureBasic. Can I really count on it?

Thanks, AK47 (a real PB- Fan)

Restored from previous forum. Originally posted by fred.

My plan on PureBasic are easy: develop it more and more. I'm spending all my free time to make this possible, since more than 4 years. Do you think I've waited Danilo to code PureBasic ? No. He's an excellent coder which has a great potential and has choose to move away for more 'serious' language like C++. I've said it's ok for me and everyone has to grow. Learning C++ is a great experience and Danilo is now pushing the PB limits more and more. It's just time for him to move. What's the problem ? There is none.

About the future of PureBasic and bug fix issue, just read the bug report thread on this forum and tell me if I plan to drop PB. A new release (v3.51) should be available tomorrow. I've included a 3D engine (3 months of full work to make this available). It's still beta, but will grow for sure. I'm now updating the Linux version. And I've big plan for the middle of the year with the v4.0 release (especially IA-64 support).

My last words: Yes, you can count on PureBasic, it has never be as powerful and stable as now. What can I add ?

Fred - AlphaSND

Restored from previous forum. Originally posted by Berikco.

There are some nice things comming this year for PB...so don't leave the ship to fast....
As Danilo Says in his german post, his main intrest is compilerdevelopment, and libs.
He used PB to learn WIN API, where it is indeed a very good solution for.
I don't read there he is leaving PB, but maybe my German is not good enough.
He will focus in the future on C and C++.
You can't stop Danilo from learning.....its the nature of a programmer to always want to learn and know more

Well, i learned a lot from his PB sources.....Thanks Danilo
And i Wish him the best....maybe he ever can get a good $$$ payed job as C++ coder


Regards,

Berikco

http://www.benny.zeb.be/purebasic.htm

Restored from previous forum. Originally posted by PB.

> My decision for PB was based also on Danilo's former statements,
> now he's singing a different song.

Danilo isn't the author of PureBasic, so why worry about what personal
thoughts he has? Fred is who you should listen to. If Danilo wants a
break from PureBasic, so be it. Don't let his actions dictate yours.

BTW, when Danilo spoke of PureBasic being a "hobby project" for Fred,
he meant because PureBasic is not Fred's full-time job, that's all.
Maybe that's why you panicked so much? If so, you can relax.

Restored from previous forum. Originally posted by Kale.

Thanks for the little statement Fred, it re-assures us all about the future of PB! I am really looking forward to use PB for 'serious' 3D Games development,... later this year ofcourse

Thanks,

--Kale

Getting used to PureBasic and falling in Love!

Restored from previous forum. Originally posted by geoff.

Thanks for the statement Fred. I'm just moving to PureBasic because it's up to date and appears to have a future. Obviously nothing lasts for ever, but there's a limit to how many times you want to start all over and rewrite existing code. Life's too short.

Thanks,

Geoff

Restored from previous forum. Originally posted by AK47.

Thanks to you, Fred, and also to the others. I hope nobody
feels offended, that's not my intention. To be sincere, I
don't care much about Danilo's plans. He does what he wants
and that's none of my business. But I do care about my plans,
and I felt they might be affected after reading that stuff
from somebody personally in touch with Fred.
Anyway, having this statement from you, Fred, I'm more relaxed
again.
Sorry if I put you or anybody else upset. Keep up good work!

Bye, AK47

Restored from previous forum. Originally posted by TheBeck.

AI-64? This would be like porting PureBasic to Ultra Spark, great for the server guys but who here is going to really use it? I bet no one. AI-64 is a $25,000 machine. I think it would make much more sense to port to x86-64. X86-64 is going to be both a $25,000 server and a $1,500 desktop system. X86-64 just makes more sense to me, what does everyone else think?

Restored from previous forum. Originally posted by fred.

IA-64 is like X86-64 (which doesn't exists)...

Fred - AlphaSND

Restored from previous forum. Originally posted by TheBeck.

IA-64 is like X86-64 (which doesn't exists)...

I don't know what to say to this.

> X86-64 (which doesn't exists)...
X86-64 absolutely exists, It is being supported by Microsoft Windows as well as Linux. Early chips have already been produced and the Opteron and Athlon 64 are scheduled to launch in a few months.

> IA-64 is like X86-64
The Intel IA-64 or Itanium is nothing like AMD's X86-64. IA-64 is a VLIW architecture, is very complex and not backward compatible with the X86 architecture. The AMD X86-64 is just as simple as the X86 architecture because it is simply an extension of the X86 and is backward compatible with X86. The AMD chip can execute all current code just as well as a modern Athlon. However this is not true for the Intel chip, it has a hardware emulator for X86 code that works more like an early Pentium. AMD's chip can run any existing OS in 32bit mode where the same is not true for the AI-64. About the only thing that is the same about AMD's and Intel's 64 bit chips is that they are both 64 bit chips.

EDIT: minor typos only

Restored from previous forum. Originally posted by TheBeck.

Fred:
One other thing:
The AI-64 is a high-end server chip.
The Athlon 64 is a high-end desktop chip.

Where do you want to target your product?

Restored from previous forum. Originally posted by fred.

Ok, let's say X86-64 then .

Fred - AlphaSND

Restored from previous forum. Originally posted by TheBeck.



Nathan Beckstrand - Calling from the great Pacific Northwest -=USA=-

Restored from previous forum. Originally posted by geoff.

Sounds like TheBeck knows rather more about current processor architecture than I do. But I'd like to repeat an earlier comment. When, for example, I multiply a double by a double (when that's possible) will I get an 80 bit x87 operation or a 64 bit SSE one? Or will I be able to choose? Personally I'd be happy to stick with x87 compatibility but I expect some of you are more forward thinking.

Geoff

Restored from previous forum. Originally posted by fred.

I will try to make it modular, to allow either X86-64, SSE or x87 support.

Fred - AlphaSND