freebasic and powerbasic, which better?

For other topics related to the FreeBASIC project or its community.
bigfish
Posts: 1
Joined: Jun 05, 2006 13:22

freebasic and powerbasic, which better?

Postby bigfish » Jul 02, 2009 14:05

i use freebasic ,at same powerbasic, i have find them is similar ,which better?
vdecampo
Posts: 2982
Joined: Aug 07, 2007 23:20
Location: Maryland, USA
Contact:

Postby vdecampo » Jul 02, 2009 14:17

I personally like that FreeBASIC can statically link with libraries. I have PowerBASIC and FreeBASIC. I'm sure they each have strengths in certain areas, but I personally have not found anything PowerBASIC can do that I cannot do with FreeBASIC.

-Vince
jcfuller
Posts: 324
Joined: Sep 03, 2007 18:40

Postby jcfuller » Jul 02, 2009 15:40

vdecampo wrote:I personally like that FreeBASIC can statically link with libraries. I have PowerBASIC and FreeBASIC. I'm sure they each have strengths in certain areas, but I personally have not found anything PowerBASIC can do that I cannot do with FreeBASIC.

-Vince


Wow. You can create com severs with FreeBASIC. Please show me how.

James
vdecampo
Posts: 2982
Joined: Aug 07, 2007 23:20
Location: Maryland, USA
Contact:

Postby vdecampo » Jul 02, 2009 16:00

jcfuller wrote:Wow. You can create com severs with FreeBASIC. Please show me how.James


You can access COM via ASM and C so I know you use FreeBASIC to do it. You can also use COM via AxSuite.

The COM Programmer's Cookbook

-Vince
angros47
Posts: 1680
Joined: Jun 21, 2005 19:04

Postby angros47 » Jul 02, 2009 19:20

PowerBasic is very similar to FreeBasic in -lang fblite, and it has almost the same features (speed similar to C, pointers, inline assembly and so on).
Anyway, there are some differences:

PowerBasic
-Expensive
-No source code available
-One basic dialect, with some options (macro, preprocessing) to customize it
-Available to Windows and Dos 16
-MSVCRT not required
-Manual in PDF, reference guide in Windows Help
-IDE (a bit old style) included
-No support, under Windows, for basic graphic commands.
-No OOP

FreeBasic
-Free
-Source code available and customizable (GPL)
-Three basic dialects, with some options (macro, preprocessing) to customize them
-Available to Windows, Linux, Dos 32 and some others (experimental)
-MSVCRT required
-Reference guide as a wiki
-Ide not included, needs a separate install
-Support, under Windows, DOS and Linux, of all basic graphics command
-Partial OOP support

So, in my opinion, you should save your money and go to FreeBasic: by now, it has the same features as PowerBasic and much more.
MichaelW
Posts: 3500
Joined: May 16, 2006 22:34
Location: USA

Postby MichaelW » Jul 02, 2009 22:09

FreeBASIC has some significant advantages in inline assembly. It’s possible to use the GAS macro system to automate coding tasks, you can use GAS directives to align code, and you don’t have to jump through hoops to get a clear picture of how your inline assembly fits in with the compiler-generated code.
Antoni
Posts: 1393
Joined: May 27, 2005 15:40
Location: Barcelona, Spain

Postby Antoni » Jul 03, 2009 8:18

Unless PB has been rewritten from scratch in the past two years, AFAIK the powerbasic compiler is written in 16 bits Intel assembler (Win 32 version too).
This makes it lightning fast but too makes it impossible to port and depends on support of legacy 16 bits code in Intel processors and Windows.
Please update me if my information is outdated.

EDITED 2009/07/11: I downloaded an "educational" copy of PB 9.0 and i can confirm the compiler is a Win32 app.
Last edited by Antoni on Jul 11, 2009 11:18, edited 1 time in total.
jcfuller
Posts: 324
Joined: Sep 03, 2007 18:40

Postby jcfuller » Jul 03, 2009 9:42

Antoni wrote:Unless PB has been rewritten from scratch in the past two years, AFAIK the powerbasic compiler is written in 16 bits Intel assembler (Win 32 version too).
This makes it lightning fast but too makes it impossible to port and depends on support of legacy 16 bits code in Intel processors and Windows.
Please update me if my information is outdated.


It has been 32bit since 8.04 I believe.

James
jcfuller
Posts: 324
Joined: Sep 03, 2007 18:40

Postby jcfuller » Jul 03, 2009 10:01

angros47 wrote:PowerBasic
-Expensive
-No source code available
-One basic dialect, with some options (macro, preprocessing) to customize it
-Available to Windows and Dos 16
-MSVCRT not required
-Manual in PDF, reference guide in Windows Help
-IDE (a bit old style) included
-No support, under Windows, for basic graphic commands.
-No OOP

Obiviously you have no idea what you are talking about.

Expensive? Maybe to third world hobby programmers but to normal casual and especially professional programmers it's dirt cheap.
Show me one commercial ($) application written in FreeBasic. How many FreeBasic programmers make a living programming in Fb.

Manual in PDF, reference guide in Windows Help
Not True: http://www.powerbasic.com/support/help/pbwin/index.htm

-No OOP: See above.

Don't get me wrong I really like FreeBasic, but for contract ($) programming I'll stick with PowerBASIC. The support is rock solid and and it's still in development with new features added every realease.

James
counting_pine
Site Admin
Posts: 6225
Joined: Jul 05, 2005 17:32
Location: Manchester, Lancs

Postby counting_pine » Jul 04, 2009 6:05

FreeBASIC is better ;)

Moving to Community Discussion...
TheMG
Posts: 376
Joined: Feb 08, 2006 16:58

Postby TheMG » Jul 04, 2009 12:34

Show me one commercial ($) application written in FreeBasic. How many FreeBasic programmers make a living programming in Fb.


We're not talking about the productivity of the userbase, we're talking about the quality of the compiler. Plus, most FB programs are open source.

------

From what I can tell of that link, PB only has support for C style Structs and not anywhere near a class.
jcfuller
Posts: 324
Joined: Sep 03, 2007 18:40

Postby jcfuller » Jul 04, 2009 13:17

TheMG wrote:
Show me one commercial ($) application written in FreeBasic. How many FreeBasic programmers make a living programming in Fb.


We're not talking about the productivity of the userbase, we're talking about the quality of the compiler. Plus, most FB programs are open source.

------

From what I can tell of that link, PB only has support for C style Structs and not anywhere near a class.


Productivity of the user base? Open source only?

Commercial Basic programmers choose PowerBASIC. There are (who knows hundreds,thousands) of contract and in-house programmers using PowerBASIC. I have yet to find just one FreeBasic programmer making a living using Fb. Why is this if Fb is so superior?

Also your browser navigation is lacking if you could not find CLASS / END CLASS on the above site. It first appears it's COM only but it gives much the same functionality as the standard C++ class.

James
Ryan
Posts: 695
Joined: Jun 10, 2005 2:13
Location: Louisville, KY
Contact:

Postby Ryan » Jul 04, 2009 14:26

So, jcfuller thinks PowerBASIC is better. Others disagree. Guess that answers the original post. :-/
jcfuller
Posts: 324
Joined: Sep 03, 2007 18:40

Postby jcfuller » Jul 04, 2009 15:27

Ryan wrote:So, jcfuller thinks PowerBASIC is better. Others disagree. Guess that answers the original post. :-/


Ryan,
What would you expect on a FreeBasic forum :)

The problem is I am probably the only one responding that has the qualifications to give an honest opinion. I have programmed in basic since the mid 70's.

I have used PowerBASIC products since PBDOS 3.0.

I have earned money doing contract programming using PowerBASIC.

I discovered FreeBasic a few years ago and have written a considerable amount of FreeBasic code.

I do like FreeBasic.
I write code in FreeBasic. I do like the concept of free software, to a point. I also like making money from programming and that will not be done using FreeBasic. Sorry

You will always have your "FREE" zealots who believe all software should be free and will always knock commercial offerings.

While I applaud the former developers and the lone current one, counting_pine, it appears FreeBasic is a bit dormant. This is one of the biggest problems with OpenSource. When the leads move on it is very difficult to find developers with the passion and credentials of the original ones.

The original poster asked which was better? Better for what purpose?

James
marcov
Posts: 3012
Joined: Jun 16, 2005 9:45
Location: Eindhoven, NL
Contact:

Postby marcov » Jul 04, 2009 16:14

jcfuller wrote:While I applaud the former developers and the lone current one, counting_pine, it appears FreeBasic is a bit dormant. This is one of the biggest problems with OpenSource. When the leads move on it is very difficult to find developers with the passion and credentials of the original ones.


I'll not dabble in the FB vs PB, but the above is a bit to strong, and not a problem unique to Open Source as stated.

8 years back, exactly the same arguments were made for VP (a small, then still commercial Pascal compiler) vs FPC. See where VP is now.

Commercial projects tend to crash hard when the business case suddenly doesn't hold any longer. Restarting as open source is rarely effective, (if it is done, which more often isn't) simply because community must be rebuilt, commercial tools used must be eradicated etc. Even if it succeeds there is a big gap in time and development.

Another possibility is that a direction change leaves you out in the cold. (I got pretty scared when Borland flirted with .NET a few years back. That doesn't feel good if you use it for pseudo realtime tasks)

I'm not a zealot, but I've dealt with small software tools vendors for 15 years now, and I'd put my money on a (living) open source project any day, if it is an substitute (*)

(*) and substitute is determined by suitability for my immediate purpose, not by comparing each project's feature bullet lists.
Last edited by marcov on Jul 06, 2009 12:57, edited 1 time in total.

Return to “Community Discussion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests