Looking for former QBasic people to visit the qb64.net site.

Cyperium · Post by **Cyperium** » May 02, 2011 12:13

Appearently QB64 (linux version) has been able to run on Android:

QB64 + Google Android = Success

As for the other points made about the insufficiences of QB64, I agree! It does have two editors though (one that is embedded with the compiler and one that I made myself) so there's options. There's not yet a Windows editor for QB64 though but it isn't impossible to make (I've been researching in making one in VB, it doesn't necessarily have to be made using QB64 after all).

Also; Qb64 is much more beginner friendly if you haven't programmed before, it may teach you some bad habits (not necessarily, you can make it as strict as you want - depends on how you teach it) but it has a easier learning curve and perhaps it would be optimal to start with QB64 and then go on to FreeBasic?, or just stick with it since it will continue to expand. Also, in documentation and in all aspects of QB64 we always have the beginner in mind. EVERY example that comes with FreeBasic uses .bi files which essentially hides the code for the user. What I would like to see as a beginner is plain FreeBasic code, not a bunch of libraries.

angros47 · Post by **angros47** » May 02, 2011 12:25

Cyperium wrote:EVERY example that comes with FreeBasic uses .bi files which essentially hides the code for the user. What I would like to see as a beginner is plain FreeBasic code, not a bunch of libraries.

Examples included with freebasic are not aimed to teach freebasic to beginners, they are aimed to illustrate compiler features.

Libraries are not beginner-unfriendly; in fact, even graphic commands belong to a library (otherwise, if you had to use system API, it would be really difficult)

marcov · Post by **marcov** » May 02, 2011 14:24

Cyperium wrote:
Also; Qb64 is much more beginner friendly if you haven't programmed before, it may teach you some bad habits (not necessarily, you can make it as strict as you want - depends on how you teach it) but it has a easier learning curve and perhaps it would be optimal to start with QB64 and then go on to FreeBasic?,

On what basis do you assume that QB64 is more friendly? Nowadays you have to explain most newbies what a commandline is.

QB64 might be perfectly suited for beginners from early nineties, but for current ones? I don't see it

or just stick with it since it will continue to expand. Also, in documentation and in all aspects of QB64 we always have the beginner in mind. EVERY example that comes with FreeBasic uses .bi files which essentially hides the code for the user. What I would like to see as a beginner is plain FreeBasic code, not a bunch of libraries.

I don't see a difference between including a .bi header, and SDL being integrated into the system.

659richard · Post by **659richard** » May 02, 2011 14:44

@cyperium

I use always Pspad editor for writing programs in Qb64.
And they are also others ediors like geany etc...we can use with Qb64.
Things who are missing in QB64 is the ability to create windows,buttons
editBox etc...

kiyotewolf · Post by **kiyotewolf** » May 02, 2011 17:15

I like the fact that the COPY PASTE commands work in QB64 in the IDE.

~Kiyote!

anonymous1337 · Post by **anonymous1337** » May 02, 2011 18:18

Old-style BASIC was (and continues to be) a "sinking ship", but then v1ctor released FreeBASIC and we were glad. QBasicNews had just about as many active members when FreeBASIC was released. And it was a more active and immersive forum than the one we have now.

Tbh, I think the real intent of FreeBASIC has been to give us something to be happy with, but we wanted it to be a big tool in common use, so we changed our tone to be more acceptable to the broader open-source software community. Both good and bad have come from this.

I'm not going to call the kettle black.

Post by **fxm** » May 02, 2011 18:50

Another good point for QB64 with its IDE:
- There is no problem to deal with characters above 127.
- The IDE, the screen output and the keyboard input are full compatible.
- Otherwise, it's a problem mainly for languages using accented characters like French to me.

With FreeBasic (and its ANSI editors), it is necessary to transcode these characters, both to the screen output and from the keyboard input:
- One way (under Windows) is to use the Windows API 'CharToOem'/'CharToOemBuff'
or 'OemToChar'/'OemToCharBuff' depending on the direction (output or input), or otherwise personal functions.
(Remark : for screen output, the function 'WStr' also works, but only in text mode and not in graphic mode)

roook_ph · Post by **roook_ph** » May 02, 2011 22:24

Things who are missing in QB64 is the ability to create windows,buttons
editBox etc...

There is a gui program that good in fb? Tell me!

Cyperium · Post by **Cyperium** » May 02, 2011 23:44

Things who are missing in QB64 is the ability to create windows,buttons
editBox etc...

Yes, it isn't object oriented, but you could create them using the Windows API, QB64 supports DLLs. The library functionality of QB64 is still very young so not too many concrete examples have been made yet, but you can do just about anything that C++ can do by loading libraries.

On what basis do you assume that QB64 is more friendly? Nowadays you have to explain most newbies what a commandline is.

QB64 might be perfectly suited for beginners from early nineties, but for current ones? I don't see it

I can tell you that beginners from the early nineties (lol, I always want to write nintendo when I write nineties) are much the same as beginners from any era. They want results, and they want them fast. It doesn't matter much if it is a "hello world" printed on the screen as long as they feel that they can handle the language fast. Beginners that expect to write a new OS or a chat system will have plenty of time to learn in either language.

I've been a beginner in the 90's and I've been a beginner in 2000 and I've been a beginner in 2010, I know what it is like to be a beginner. It's not that I haven't tried other languages than QB 4.5 and QB64.

I don't see a difference between including a .bi header, and SDL being integrated into the system.

I see the difference though, the .bi header is designed (as far as I know) to hide parts of the language from the user, where all parts of the language is shown to the user in plain sight. There's no black box that need to be learned and you don't have to worry about which headers to include or leave out (that is something that can be really frustrating to beginners).

There was a point earlier in the thread that I missed to address; that SDL would be incompatible with other libraries, can you extend on that? I haven't seen any incompatibility with other libraries because of SDL.

Plasma; QB64 is 64-bit, at least on Windows and Linux. It was named QB32 before the intention to make it 64-bit.

Richard · Post by **Richard** » May 03, 2011 0:03

@ cyperium.

It is counter productive to discuss QB64 on this FB site as it will reinforce the natural aversion of FB users to a different version of BASIC. Likewise, discussion of FB on the QB64 site will generate hostility to FB. It is unnecessary to provoke criticism of either dialect so why place QB64 discussion where it will certainly be much criticised.

Each word posted about QB64 on this FB site tends to detract from QB64, each word you post on the QB64 site should raise QB64. You could better invest your time on the QB64 site to attract new members and get your community together, rather than uniting FB users through their criticism of QB64.

East is East, and West is West, and never the twain shall meet,

Cyperium · Post by **Cyperium** » May 03, 2011 0:07

Richard wrote:@ cyperium.

It is counter productive to discuss QB64 on this FB site as it will reinforce the natural aversion of FB users to a different version of BASIC. Likewise, discussion of FB on the QB64 site will generate hostility to FB. It is unnecessary to provoke criticism of either dialect so why place QB64 discussion where it will certainly be much criticised.

Each word posted about QB64 on this FB site tends to detract from QB64, each word you post on the QB64 site should raise QB64. You could better invest your time on the QB64 site to attract new members and get your community together, rather than uniting FB users through their criticism of QB64.

East is East, and West is West, and never the twain shall meet,

I don't mind uniting FB users, there is a similar discussion going on at qb64.net too that we can feel united by. I do think it's a good thing that it gets discussed though. We can both benefit from knowing about each others languages. I don't think this is a East and West thing, I think the twain should meet!

In fact, I'm making a thread right now on qb45.com (neutral ground) where we can discuss both our languages!

Here it is:

FreeBasic AND QB64

Plasma · Post by **Plasma** » May 03, 2011 1:09

Cyperium wrote:Plasma; QB64 is 64-bit, at least on Windows and Linux. It was named QB32 before the intention to make it 64-bit.

I don't know about Linux, but the Windows version certainly isn't 64-bit.

I just downloaded the latest version and ran it. Note the highlighted qb64.exe process. The *32 next to it indicates that it is a 32-bit process. Also note the 3dballs.exe process at the top. This is one of the QB64 samples compiled and running. It is also 32-bit.

anonymous1337 · Post by **anonymous1337** » May 03, 2011 1:18

What in the world are you doing in FireFox that requires 630 MB of RAM?

Plasma · Post by **Plasma** » May 03, 2011 2:35

Hatching an evil plot to take over the world. While watching Netflix.

TJF · Post by **TJF** » May 03, 2011 6:19

roook_ph wrote:
Things who are missing in QB64 is the ability to create windows,buttons
editBox etc...
There is a gui program that good in fb? Tell me!

Sorry?

There are lots of cross-platform GUI apps in FB using GTK.

Looking for former QBasic people to visit the qb64.net site.

Qb64 editor