FBC 1.00.0

[marpon]

Thanks for that huge work, it is a very impressive job.

just a comment, when I tried to compile existing code working for 0.24 up to .91,
i've found an issue : the linker was having problems with New/Delete functions ...

after checking it was functions used on 1 C++ lib
and in fact the linker found errors because the libsupc++.a was not on the command line as it was until now

So if others have the same problem, is just as easy as doing

Code: Select all

#INCLIB "supc++" 'for c++  or #INCLIB "stdc++" for c++  libstdc++) neeeded with fbc 1.00

and it works!

why not putting that lib as before ?


another comment : the size of the exe's are increasing for each version
on 1.00 + 40k on 160k exe comparing to 0.24 !!

marpon

[Galeon]

Wow, it's been 3 years since the last time I used this account, and a year since I used my new one (kyoushuu). And I saw in the News category.

I started programming in FreeBASIC, which is around 6 years ago. I've been waiting for version 1.0 to be released but eventually I moved to other programming languages and contributed to open-source projects. I no longer program in FreeBASIC, but maybe in the future, I might come back ;). I've started my career in programming with the help of FreeBASIC, so I'm really happy when I learned that it has now reached version 1.0.

Thank you, and congratulations to the developers who did their best so that FreeBASIC would reach version 1.0!

[Dr_D]

Yeah! Way to go guys! We need to celebrate by making something coolio, baby! :)

[TJF]

Yeah! Way to go guys! We need to celebrate by making something coolio, baby! :)

What about coolio header translations, to make the 64 bit version usable?

[Dr_D]

Yeah! Way to go guys! We need to celebrate by making something coolio, baby! :)

What about coolio header translations, to make the 64 bit version usable?

Well, I realize we need to do that and every little bit helps. If I ever have enough time to work on my projects and translate some headers I will. I feel guilty for it sometimes... using the compiler for so much and not contributing much. I've tried to help where I can be useful... sharing knowledge I've picked up and stuff. ;)

[agamemnus]

The dynamic arrays in UDTs thing is incredible.

*bows at feet of dkl and others...*

[anonymous1337]

sharing knowledge I've picked up and stuff. ;)

You better put that knowledge back where you found it, mister.

That's not sharing. It's stealing.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6EfhAFA2yFE

[relsoft]

Wow! Has it been 10 years?!

Congratulations to all devs and contributors both old and new!

I am so proud to be part of this movement. Been using it even before it was released to the public and still use it for quick prototypes.

Awesome release! Just downloaded it and will install later.

[dodicat]

My computer has broken down-- blue screening.
Now I am back on this old pentium 3 box with Win XP and Win 98 dual booted.

I notice that FreeBASIC 1.00 does not work with Win 98.
FreeBASIC 1.00 for dos is OK though.

If I pre-compile a file with XP and fb 1.00 then try to run it in Win 98 I get a crash.

If I try to use fb 1.00 directly within Win 98 then it just doesn't work at all.

I popped a start_shell.exe alongside fbc.exe, running fbc at the command prompt, nothing happens, ZILCH.
I wonder why??

[dkl]

Does it just crash (segmentation violation), or is there an error message?

It sounds similar to this issue: NT3.51 and Win95 InterlockedCompareExchange
which I thought was fixed though.

[MrSwiss]

I notice that FreeBASIC 1.00 does not work with Win 98.

Well FB is at least 32bit, whereas Win98 is still 16 bit. Only the DOS Ver.
may be working on its own (else code in LANG = QBasic, maybe?).

[fxm]

I though Windows 95 was the first 32-bits!

[MrSwiss]

Unification occured with Y2K, aka Win 2000 (which is also known as NT5).

Up to and including WIN-ME they where 16 bits (except the earlier NT's of course).
In other words: still DOS based ...

[dodicat]

Previous freebasic versions worked well with Win 98.
At least up to version 21. I have not tested versions between 21 and 1.00

In fact, Win 98 has much faster graphics than the NT windows versions, that is Win 2000/XP.

I cannot trap specific errors given by freebasic.
Here is the console output for Win 98 (fb 1.00):

Microsoft(R) Windows 98
(C)Copyright Microsoft Corp 1981-1999.

C:\WINDOWS\Desktop\FB1.00\FreeBASIC-1.00.0-win32>fbc

C:\WINDOWS\Desktop\FB1.00\FreeBASIC-1.00.0-win32>

In other words nothing happens.

I get a system crash if I use fbc (1.00) in fbide and Win 98.
This crash gives me some details from Win 98.

Direct compiling from a shell :
fbc something.bas
produces nothing.

[Quark]

.
@All

I'd like to add my appreciation of the upgrade to FB. I use it constantly, and all is well so far on my aging Vista machine. I do hope that when I have to get a new Windows computer, it will not be too wretched, and I am able to carry on.

Anyway, I know it is a big deal to try to stay up with technological changes, and we BASIC users have seen a lot of that over the years.

@Dodicat

Commiserations about your computer dying -- it isn't much like some ordinary piece of machinery failing, losing a computer, more personal than that. Good you had a fallback machine, I don't.

You mentioned a dual-boot: is the XP working OK for coding?
.