posted February 01, 2005 04:59 PM            

Has anyone tried this Basic compiler yet?

posted February 01, 2005 05:46 PM            

If you build a product around a compiler like this, or any of the other freeware toolkits I've seen, you'll always be wondering if it really is working right, reliably, every time. It's worth the price to buy PowerBASIC for the system manual alone, let alone the compiler, and the community of people who "go the distance" to help each other.

posted February 01, 2005 06:00 PM            

"case-insensitive, scalar variables don't need to be dimensioned, supports line numbers, no MAIN functions and so on..

please note that compatibility doesn't mean you can compile a source-code made for QuickBASIC and hope it will run fine (it may compile fine!)

FB: No kind of RESUME is supported, nor ON ERROR GOTO 0

Fixed-len strings: FB: Real length is the given len plus one (null-char), even on TYPE fields Strings are filled with nulls (char 0), so strings can't contain chr$(0) chars ... QB: Strings are filled with white spaces (char 32) (RTRIM$ must always be used get the real content)"

----------

It may compile fine...

Some of us write software that drives medical equipment. Others program sophisticated accounting programs and financial forcasting software that flexes the compiler's feature set to the max... we can't be worried about stuff like that.

------------------

posted February 01, 2005 06:15 PM            

Some BASIC compilers bring something to the table. FreeBasic appears to be "just another BASIC". I didn't think its feature set was that impressive to be honest (not knocking it, it just doesn't seem to be as mature as other compilers that have been around longer).

It depends on what type of programs you are looking to create, but in general I would recommend PowerBASIC. It has been around for years, and is tried, true, and tested. The price is more than reasonable, and the stability it provides is priceless.

It is interesting that FreeBasic is open source. If you are interested in writing a compiler, or curious as to how one works, it might be worth checking out and dissecting. In terms of development, I would recommend a more robust package.

Just my $0.02... feel free to ignore.

Thanks,
Flick

posted February 01, 2005 09:47 PM            

quote:

---

FB: No kind of RESUME is supported, nor ON ERROR GOTO 0

---

''
'' compile as: fbc onerror.bas -ex
''

'':::::
function hFileExists( filename as string ) as integer static
    dim f as integer
	hFileExists = 0
	
	on local error goto exitfunction
	
	f = freefile
	open filename for input as #f
	
	close #f
	hFileExists = -1
exitfunction:
    exit function
end function

	print "File exists (0=false): "; hFileExists( command$ )
	
	on error goto errhandler	
	error 1234
	print "back from resume next"
	end 0
	
errhandler:	
	print "error number: "; err
	resume next

posted February 01, 2005 10:07 PM            

So, which came first, FreeBASIC or the Compiler?

Might be fun to convert the compiler to PB.

Would that make it an open source PowerBASIC compiler?

Make sure you download the IDE for FreeBASIC. Select your own themes
and has collapsible sub/function view control.

posted February 02, 2005 01:42 AM            

thanks for the link. Very interesting !!!

Added: which is the command line compile and run gfx examples?

------------------
eros.olmi@autoapfp.com
www.autoapfp.com

posted February 02, 2005 03:05 AM            

Also ran into a RapidQ compatible call HotBASIC.
http://www.angelfire.com/space/netcensus/hotbasic.html

In the last few days, I have found a half dozen Basic compilers/interpreters
that are promising. I hope Bob & Company take this as a wakeup call as the
competition is hot on their tail. IBasic now has 2.0 out which is a true compiler.

I really like PowerBASIC and have used it for years. At the moment it seems frozen
in time. I hope something wonderful is in the oven and it's just taking Bob a bit
longer than normal to get it released.

posted February 02, 2005 03:30 AM            

I'm not sure if anything is happening with linux though.

posted February 02, 2005 07:58 AM            

quote:

---

In the last few days, I have found a half dozen Basic compilers/interpreters
that are promising.

---

I've researched different BASIC compilers a lot lately too (only because I'm interested in a Linux solution). At first glance, some of them look promising, but I always end up disappointed for some reason. *None* of them come close to the PowerBASIC compilers and this community, IMHO. I'm still waiting for PB/Linux.

quote:

---

PowerViv is back so I'm sure things are happening.

---

Yeah, c'mon Viv, it's been 2 weeks since you were moved to the top of the homepage. Spill the beans already!

Scott

------------------
Scott Wolfington
http://www.boogietools.com

posted February 02, 2005 05:43 PM            

Definitely worth the $69 USD I paid for it. The author is a very friendly and
helpful guy that I think you will like working with.

posted February 03, 2005 07:44 AM            

quote:

---

I cannot imagine someone's hobby project being even a shadow of the nigh perfection

---

O Ye of Little Faith!

I believe hobbyists often produce the best quality items, since their love is for their work itself rather than the money it might generate.

posted February 03, 2005 08:38 AM            

I have no benchmarks so I can't tell how
fast the application is.