PureBasic Forums - English

Now that we can create PureLibraries with PB 6.20, would introducing an additional file extension for the source code of PureLibraries make sense?

Personally I don't think so, they are just standard PureBasic code afterall.

Standard code does not use ProcedureDLL. Also this code is not intended to create dll files.
pbl?

Quin wrote: Sat Dec 21, 2024 12:06 am Personally I don't think so, they are just standard PureBasic code afterall.

Well, the source code of UserLibs is hardly suited for being included into other source code with „XIncludeFile“ (although it's technically possible, of course). And no UserLibs can be created from the PBI files that we use as include files. In my opinion, different file extensions would simplify the use of the respective files in both cases.

AZJIO wrote: Sat Dec 21, 2024 10:41 am Standard code does not use ProcedureDLL. Also this code is not intended to create dll files.
pbl?

I'd also go with pbl.

jacdelad wrote: Sun Dec 22, 2024 8:20 am I'd also go with pbl.

That was my first idea, too. However, the lowercase l can easily be confused with i or I.
So personally I'm currently using the extension pbu for the source code of userlibs.