Freebasic Bootstrapped?

Philomath · Post by **Philomath** » Feb 01, 2006 4:11

I was just browsing through the source and was very pleased to see that it's not in C.

On a related note (and yes I've read the TODO) where is FB headed? To put it another way, is this a toy language that just kept growing or is there some goal to reach (now that QB compatability seems solid)?

Post by **v1ctor** » Feb 01, 2006 4:28

The initial goal was: to have an open and multi-platform implementation of a compiler based on the MS BASIC's syntax, that could compile itself, with new "features" like pointers, a pre-processor and classes later, that would allow libraries made in n different languages to be used without ugly and bloated wrappers.

I don't consider the work of 4 people during a whole year and over 100k of C and BASIC code a toy, you may think different, many people only take something seriously when they paid for it, even if it's an absolute piece of garbage. There are near 200k downloads in sf.net for the fbc project files, that's the first time that question was asked.

The end goal: who knows, only time will tell. Right now i'm working on the gcc frontend port, what will open the doors for dozen of platforms the gcc backend supports and optimizations no BASIC compiler (commercial or not) ever dreamed about.

Philomath · Post by **Philomath** » Feb 01, 2006 4:51

v1ctor wrote:I don't consider the work of 4 people during a whole year and over 100k of C and BASIC code a toy, you may think different, many people only take something seriously when they paid for it, even if it's an absolute piece of garbage. There are near 200k downloads in sf.net for the fbc project files, that's the first time that question was asked.

Don't get me wrong, I didn't mean any offense by using the term 'toy'. I also meant to imply by "just kept growing" that it is no longer 'just' a 'toy'.

v1ctor wrote:The end goal: who knows, only time will tell. Right now i'm working on the gcc frontend port, what will open the doors for dozen of platforms the gcc backend supports and optimizations no BASIC compiler (commercial or not) ever dreamed about.

The reason I asked is that I've been fascinated by compilers and language creation since I first stumbled across Dr. Crenshaw's articles a few years ago. If I knew where you were heading I'd know where to do my recreational reading so that I might be able to provide some help once I get up to speed with the language.

This is an amazing project and rather than reinvent the wheel and bring competition, I'd much rather help where I can and further this project (once I'm competent that is).

tunginobi · Post by **tunginobi** » Feb 01, 2006 6:33

is this a toy language that just kept growing

We prefer the term "general purpose procedural programming language". It's not clunky parlance, it's just technical. :)

Seriously, the libs are meant to provide the focus to the language. Choose your library, and FB will work in that direction. Maybe FB could come with small starter tutorials for the libs it packages?

@v1c: Keep on truckin' with that gcc backend!

VirusScanner · Post by **VirusScanner** » Feb 02, 2006 3:07

I wouldn't say it's a toy, even if that's what the developers are intending (which they aren't) it still has the functionality of C, soon C++ and with the gcc backend there's no stopping it ;)

Philomath · Post by **Philomath** » Feb 02, 2006 11:24

Technically both Pascal and ML are toy languages and most people consider Basic to be one also (moreso for VB though for some strange reason). Oh yeah, don't forget Ruby and Perl.

That seems to be a pretty distinguished crowd to run with. To make tunginobi happy I'll be sure to refer to FB as a general purpose procedural programming language (although I reserve the right to abbreviate it gp3l if I do persist with this sillyness :)

VirusScanner · Post by **VirusScanner** » Feb 03, 2006 2:51

FB will be object oriented soon, so you don't have to say procedural for long ;)

It really depends on what you use to get a job done. Some people just "play around" with C and do serious programming with BASIC. Just because the majority is the reverse doesn't mean you or anyone else has to be. Just a matter of preference. And until now I don't think there has really been a good BASIC language that will be able to compete with C++ (although using the gcc backend, it won't really be competing, but more of an equal option).

marcov · Post by **marcov** » Feb 10, 2006 22:46

Philomath wrote:Technically both Pascal and ML are toy languages and most people consider Basic to be one also (moreso for VB though for some strange reason). Oh yeah, don't forget Ruby and Perl.

Pascal in the "Delphi" form is still the 2nd most sold IDE after Visual Studio. And Visual Studio's most dominant language is ... Visual Basic.

So the facts make me take that statement with some salt: -=)

It might go for Ruby and Perl (never saw a large program in those anyway), but not for Basic and Pascal.

BastetFurry · Post by **BastetFurry** » Feb 10, 2006 23:30

VirusScanner wrote:FB will be object oriented soon, so you don't have to say procedural for long ;)

As long as i dont have to use OO and can still use my trusted procedural.... ;)

VirusScanner · Post by **VirusScanner** » Feb 11, 2006 5:50

All real OO languages (I don't believe in Java) allow you to use procedural. C++ comes to mind. But it's all optional, unless you're using java or .net which I don't like and anyways there's no converting to OOP because that's how they come.

chris319 · Post by **chris319** » Feb 19, 2006 23:46

Anyone who considers BASIC a "toy" language is out of touch with the current state of the language. BASICA and GWBASIC, with their line numbers and slow interpreters, are things of the past. I like to program in BASIC because its simple syntax allows me to focus on my application code without the complexities of the language getting in the way. Fortunately there are several wonderful implementations of BASIC nowadays, with FreeBASIC being among the best. It fills a niche for a cross-platform compiled BASIC with syntax true to the de-facto standard syntax of QBasic.

One problem facing BASIC is that there are so many different implementations that there is no unified "BASIC community" as there is with Ruby, Perl, Python, PHP and TCL. The "BASIC community" is fragmented among Visual Basic, Power Basic, FreeBasic, PureBasic, ScriptBasic, YABasic, Chipmunk Basic, Gambas, Dark Basic, Liberty Basic and a litany of others. If this fragmentation didn't exist, the BASIC community might seem more unified.