Author Topic: Future of powerbasic  (Read 213874 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Frederick J. Harris

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 914
  • User-Rate: +16/-0
    • Frederick J. Harris
Re: Future of powerbasic
« Reply #330 on: January 22, 2015, 12:30:10 AM »
By the way Hutch, I downloaded your MASM package the other day and installed it.  Nice!!!  I do hope I can find the time to get back into asm.  I did a lot of it many years ago but that DOS stuff is ancient history.  I'd really like to try to translate that C code above into masm and see how it runs.  I just need to pry myself away from some other stuff I'm working on that likely could wait!

Offline Patrice Terrier

  • ROMs
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 936
  • User-Rate: +62/-1
    • www.zapsolution.com
Re: Future of powerbasic
« Reply #331 on: January 22, 2015, 10:14:45 AM »
Since one of the programming language i am using has been translated to Mandarin, i have no other choice than using UNICODE. And also because it is a mandatory to use with GDIPLUS.

Now that i am able to offer both 32-bit and 64-bit solutions, i do not say anymore NO to my users, and they can select the version that fulfil their requirements.

The lack of a 64-bit version of PowerBASIC, plus the fact that it is frozen in time, is the reason why i added the C++ to my tool box.

Pragmatism is my moto.

...

 
« Last Edit: January 22, 2015, 10:16:53 AM by Patrice Terrier »
Patrice Terrier
GDImage (advanced graphic addon)
http://www.zapsolution.com

Offline Steve Hutchesson

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 83
  • User-Rate: +6/-5
    • The MASM Forum
Re: Future of powerbasic
« Reply #332 on: January 23, 2015, 06:44:18 AM »
Currently playing with my VC 64 bit setup, absolutely refuse to use that terrible IDE and all of the claptrap that goes with it. Got all of the vc2010 libraries and the matching SDK libraries, include files for both and have the basic templates up and going. Mainly my C is very rusty, been writing MASM for too long but it comes back pretty quick so its no big deal. Typical Microsoft installation was the usual mess, the binaries worked except for cvtres.exe which was broken so I had to go hunt for it. Found a reference on the net to it being in a deep subdirectory of Windows. I could use Pelle's linker but was trying to get the full Microsoft version up and going.

Have got the base windows up for 8.5k with an icon, menu, manifest "amd64" and version control block. If I remove the MSVCRT support it jumps to about 90k. The real win apart from being able to hammer out some utilities in the future is the ASM output which at last gives me a decent look at what 64 bit ASM looks like from a compiler.

Its a shame Bob passed away before he could finish the 64 bit version, most knew that he was working on it but as usual he kept it close to his chest.  I guess no-one elects the time they pass away and with the disarray that followed it appears that it was not expected. I can live with the current 32 bit versions as they do a lot of things well, most of it was ignored by the "Mickey Mouse Club" but I knew that Bob did not half kill himself getting the extra capacity up and going for it to be ignored.

Offline James C. Fuller

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 595
  • User-Rate: +11/-8
Re: Future of powerbasic
« Reply #333 on: January 23, 2015, 11:12:28 AM »
Steve,
  Why not try the new Visual Studio 2013 Community for your c++ experiments?
I do not use the ide and compile using a batch file which I attach for any lurkers.

It will compile 32/64 exe [con gui],dll or obj from xxx.c or xxx.cpp files

VS12.BAT filename.[c|cpp] [-m32|m64] [con|gui|dll|obj] extra files

I also include VS12MFC.BAT for use with the now included support for Microsoft Foundation Class library
See the batch file for it's use.

James

Offline Frederick J. Harris

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 914
  • User-Rate: +16/-0
    • Frederick J. Harris
Re: Future of powerbasic
« Reply #334 on: January 23, 2015, 07:31:04 PM »
Quote
Typical Microsoft installation was the usual mess, the binaries worked except for cvtres.exe which was broken....

It makes me happy to know I'm not the only one uses stuff like that! :)

The last version of MS Visual Studio I bought was 2008.  I spent gads of time trying to figure out where everything was at, that is, the various build binaries, and finally about gave up and just used their vcvars.bat file for doing command line work.  It was the 64 bit issue that confused things, of course. 

Offline Steve Hutchesson

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 83
  • User-Rate: +6/-5
    • The MASM Forum
Re: Future of powerbasic
« Reply #335 on: January 23, 2015, 08:29:06 PM »
Fred,

What I have tended to do is lay out a directory structure (bin include lib help) then copy the files from the Microsoft installation into that directory structure so you end up with a self contained system that does not depend on things splattered all over the place. I keep VC2003 as it builds almost all standard C code that I have used over time including the old SDK utilities, any version of JWASM etc .... You need both the VC version and the compatible SDK, combine them and you can build most API and ANSI C based code.

Sad to say I have had my share of broken MS installs, back in the early win 3 days I paid too much for Microsoft C Version 7 and it was badly broken for its target of API Windows code. They did not fix it until VC version 1. They generally make good C compilers/linkers etc ... but their libraries tend to be very uneven and their installations unreliable.

James,

Thanks for the offer but its the absolutely wrong end of what I am after, I would not touch MFC or C++ with a barge pole, I am mainly interested in the ASM dump that CL produces. Starting on another version is more work for no gain. As far as a C++ community, I have rarely every seen much else than infantile nonsense and people juggling their pecking order. If I get the time I will have a look at your batch file as it may contain something I can use.

Offline Frederick J. Harris

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 914
  • User-Rate: +16/-0
    • Frederick J. Harris
Re: Future of powerbasic
« Reply #336 on: January 23, 2015, 09:09:00 PM »
Quote
What I have tended to do is lay out a directory structure (bin include lib help) then copy the files from the Microsoft installation into that directory structure so you end up with a self contained system that does not depend on things splattered all over the place.

That's an interesting idea and I hadn't thought of it.  Might give it a try someday.  What I found out though was that their shortcuts to an x86 command prompt and an x64 command prompt for the respective compiler worked OK, and that's all I really wanted, bottom line.  Doing what you did though would provide a greater sense of satisfaction though! :)

Offline Theo Gottwald

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 923
  • User-Rate: +30/-4
    • it-berater
Re: Future of powerbasic
« Reply #337 on: March 05, 2015, 07:03:16 AM »
Funny, the PB-Site ist still up ....
http://www.powerbasic.com/

Offline James Klutho

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 35
  • User-Rate: +9/-5
Re: Future of powerbasic
« Reply #338 on: March 05, 2015, 07:27:41 PM »
Notice that the foot traffic on the PowerBasic forum is an order of magnitude above PureBasic or FreeBasic.  I can't see Fred spending much time on PureBasic in the future since I figure he has to have a day job.  The PureBasic average traffic is not that much different than this site plus it's sister language (Blitzbasic) is now defunct so the family that shares the quirky syntax is a lot smaller.  PowerBasic is heads and shoulders above the other offerings in my opinion.  Too bad it is frozen in time.
« Last Edit: March 05, 2015, 08:41:59 PM by James Klutho »