FreeBASIC Dialect / Version Comparison
FreeBASIC Dialect / Version Comparison
FreeBASIC Dialect / Version Comparison
I generated these tables to help with identifying pages in the manual that may need updating. I thought to post them here though in case they might be useful to users wanting to upgrade their old sources to a more recent version of FreeBASIC.
fbc ver 1.06.0 (GIT as of 2017.12.28) - comparison of dialects
Features
Keywords
fbc ver 1.00.0 through 1.06.0 comparisons for single dialect
-lang fb
-lang fblite
-lang qb
-lang deprecated
More comparisons available here:
http://www.execulink.com/~coder/freebasic/compare.html
The "keywords" tables are pretty good size, so they may take a bit to load depending on your net connection.
I generated these tables to help with identifying pages in the manual that may need updating. I thought to post them here though in case they might be useful to users wanting to upgrade their old sources to a more recent version of FreeBASIC.
fbc ver 1.06.0 (GIT as of 2017.12.28) - comparison of dialects
Features
Keywords
fbc ver 1.00.0 through 1.06.0 comparisons for single dialect
-lang fb
-lang fblite
-lang qb
-lang deprecated
More comparisons available here:
http://www.execulink.com/~coder/freebasic/compare.html
The "keywords" tables are pretty good size, so they may take a bit to load depending on your net connection.
Last edited by coderJeff on Aug 22, 2008 12:39, edited 2 times in total.
-
- Site Admin
- Posts: 6323
- Joined: Jul 05, 2005 17:32
- Location: Manchester, Lancs
Yeah, I toggled that by mistake. I guess I could have an indicator for partial support, or maybe put features in sub-groups, like for classes there would be access control, member procs, etc.VonGodric wrote:18.4 - fb. Classes???
counting_pine, I have no idea about the DATA difficulties. But it would appear that -lang qb is now same as QB(tm), where DATA was only allowed at module level.
great
Nice charts. Helpful Info. Good job!
These comparisons are great. I wasn't aware of these when I tried a similar thing for a post elsewhere in the forum.
IMO they are so clear they deserve an important place in the Manual, close to the Table of Contents.
Also IMO the manual does not highlight sufficiently the different dialects of the compiler and their different aims. It highlights QB compatibility and FB comes out mainly as an extension of QB. For example, probably few, among the users of FB, are interested in "Differences from QB" (on the other hand the users of QB are surely interested in that).
Two (mutally exclusive) ideas:
1) The Alphabetical list form the ToC be replaced by the Keyword comparison.
2) Have different sections in the Manual for the different dialects: ie. in the ToC have three big links (QB , FBLITE, FB) each of them bringing to a page with the "mission" of the dialect and its own Alphabetical list (the three lists would point to the same keyword explanations). The FB page would obviously be the most comprehensive and actively developed.
Just an idea for discussion.
Regards,
fabrizio
IMO they are so clear they deserve an important place in the Manual, close to the Table of Contents.
Also IMO the manual does not highlight sufficiently the different dialects of the compiler and their different aims. It highlights QB compatibility and FB comes out mainly as an extension of QB. For example, probably few, among the users of FB, are interested in "Differences from QB" (on the other hand the users of QB are surely interested in that).
Two (mutally exclusive) ideas:
1) The Alphabetical list form the ToC be replaced by the Keyword comparison.
2) Have different sections in the Manual for the different dialects: ie. in the ToC have three big links (QB , FBLITE, FB) each of them bringing to a page with the "mission" of the dialect and its own Alphabetical list (the three lists would point to the same keyword explanations). The FB page would obviously be the most comprehensive and actively developed.
Just an idea for discussion.
Regards,
fabrizio
Updated the first post to include a comparison for the fblite dialect and up to version 0.21.0(SVN).
I also created a page with more information about these comparison tables here:
http://www.execulink.com/~coder/freebasic/compare.html
fabrizio, yes, some day I would like to add the dialect comparison (but not the version comparison) to the manual but I think it might be too much trouble to maintain directly - though I could export the data to the format used by the wiki and upload it. Also, if it were to go in the manual, I would like to put the test procedures (for generating the data) in SVN first so that others could generate the table for themselves should the need arise.
One problem is that the wiki doesn't support links in tables so at the moment it would have to be a plain table with no links, or use your #2 idea that you posted.
I also created a page with more information about these comparison tables here:
http://www.execulink.com/~coder/freebasic/compare.html
fabrizio, yes, some day I would like to add the dialect comparison (but not the version comparison) to the manual but I think it might be too much trouble to maintain directly - though I could export the data to the format used by the wiki and upload it. Also, if it were to go in the manual, I would like to put the test procedures (for generating the data) in SVN first so that others could generate the table for themselves should the need arise.
One problem is that the wiki doesn't support links in tables so at the moment it would have to be a plain table with no links, or use your #2 idea that you posted.
I agree with you on automating the update process.
May I express a dream? I also wish someday Documentation Dept. will be ahead of Programming Dept.
Also judging from some recent threads elsewhere in the forum, I suppose this would do good to FB, having an already planned direction.
Not being a contributor myself, I hesitated before posting this, because it looks like asking yet another thing to the Devs. Well no. Just a thought.
May I express a dream? I also wish someday Documentation Dept. will be ahead of Programming Dept.
Also judging from some recent threads elsewhere in the forum, I suppose this would do good to FB, having an already planned direction.
Not being a contributor myself, I hesitated before posting this, because it looks like asking yet another thing to the Devs. Well no. Just a thought.
Keep on dreaming. :)fabrizio wrote:May I express a dream? I also wish someday Documentation Dept. will be ahead of Programming Dept.
Also judging from some recent threads elsewhere in the forum, I suppose this would do good to FB, having an already planned direction.
Probably good practice in theory, but reality is that it is very unlikely that anything would actually get documented before it is implemented, has some testing, etc. However, it has been a common request that we (devs) produce some kind of road map for FB's future development. I think we have that in our minds always, but yet have to write up something formal.
And there's nothing wrong with asking for anything, as long as there is the understanding that there is a long list of stuff to keep devs busy.
Re:
present coderjeff regrets that coderjeff did not leave any instructions for future coderjeff!coderJeff wrote:However, it has been a common request that we (devs) produce some kind of road map for FB's future development. I think we have that in our minds always, but yet have to write up something formal.
Re: FreeBASIC Dialect / Version Comparison
FYI, updated the top post to include updated comparisons. Was a good way to find some stuff that got added to fbc and never knew about.
If anyone gets a chance, it would be helpful if anyone notices something important missed and I will add it. I know it's a long list; the feature list is shorter than the keyword list if that helps get you motivated. :)
If anyone gets a chance, it would be helpful if anyone notices something important missed and I will add it. I know it's a long list; the feature list is shorter than the keyword list if that helps get you motivated. :)