Author Topic: Has anyone tried True Basic compiler ?  (Read 621 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Chris Chancellor

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 148
Has anyone tried True Basic compiler ?
« on: July 15, 2018, 10:25:34 PM »
Hello

Has anyone tried the True Basic compiler?

i wonder how good it is ? 

Its link is as below


https://www.truebasic.com/

Offline Pierre Bellisle

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 86
Re: Has anyone tried True Basic compiler ?
« Reply #1 on: July 28, 2018, 07:10:30 PM »
I did have a quick look long time ago. If I remember well it was too limited. Bad quality/price ratio.
There is demo to download. Depending of your context, maybe it will fit the bill for your need.

Another alternative for you might be PureBASIC
There is also a demo to download.

Offline Chris Chancellor

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 148
Re: Has anyone tried True Basic compiler ?
« Reply #2 on: July 28, 2018, 07:49:10 PM »
Thanxx Pierre

their sales department  didn't even reply my email  -- i believe that it is dead already

it looks outdated and lots of stuff are missing and i'm not going to use it.

   i will go along with FB and O2 to convert PB programs to 64bits

Purebasic has a funny syntax expecially the   for  loop    and do not really looks like basic.

Offline Raúl Ortega

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 5
Re: Has anyone tried True Basic compiler ?
« Reply #3 on: October 09, 2018, 07:20:03 PM »
As an anegdota:

By 1985, I used TrueBasic. It was a bit better than GWBASIC, it already had structured programming, but it still did not have an editor yet it was not a full-text editor. Instead of strings he managed vectors. And in general it was fun, but it did not generate EXEs. The compiled code had to be run from TrueBasic.
At that time the programmers had switched to TurboPascal and C. And in general, the BASIC image had been degraded.
The two authors authors of TrueBasic wrote the first structured BASIC, and published a book with an offensive introduction to the manufacturers of other BASICs. They did not like the way the strings were being handled. They said they were the inventors of BASIC.
Neither Microsoft, nor IBM, nor RadioShack nor Apel, responded to this. But, Bob Zale in the PowerBASIC manual, said that the BASIC like the strawberry jam, and I think also the foot ball, were invented in a state 'whose name I do not remember' so the invention was attributable to many people, although the BASIC had been developed mainly in a certain university.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/True_BASIC

When IBM-PCs appeared, they came with GWBASIC, which handled string arrays, still used numbered lines and a palette editor. Then appeared BASCOM of Microsoft and BASCOM of IBM that produced EXEs of 64K. But, Bob Zale's ZBASIC was at least 1000 times faster, although it only produced 32K COMs. Text editors appear with QickBasic, and with Borland's: TurboPascal, TurboC, TurboBASIC. At two or three years old, Borland returns to Bob Zale his TurboBASIC, without giving any explanation. Microsoft withdraws its compiler from Pascal and stops competing. What gives the idea that they agreed, and Borland continues with Pascal and MS with BASIC.

Later I lost the track to TurboBASIC. TB had already been left without anyone protecting their copyrights, so in Germany they circulated a lot.

It was very nice for me to find the author of the compiler that I used, to know that his name was Bob Zale, which was published from Spectra and was called PowerBASIC.

The Borland and MS compilers took the lead, and apparently did not share the information to make compilers for Windows, so the first compiler of PB for Windows required an additional file to the EXE that it produced.

There were many years in which PB was a little behind, but finally reached them, and I think, I, who exceeded them. I think this is a good story of one man against the world. And somehow we have been expectators and part of all this.

I hope, we do not need a new compiler for many years.

Greetings to all.

P.S.
I wrote it in Spanish and translated it with google.


Offline Chris Chancellor

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 148
Re: Has anyone tried True Basic compiler ?
« Reply #4 on: October 10, 2018, 04:24:19 AM »
Thanxx Raul for the info

looks like there is no support for this language and its website has no activity!

i was just searching for a replacement language for PB in order to do 64bits programming.

Offline Raúl Ortega

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 5
Re: Has anyone tried True Basic compiler ?
« Reply #5 on: October 11, 2018, 03:42:33 AM »
Hello Chris.

I've been watching Free BASIC, but it's extremely slow for string handling.

I would like to investigate: Open Watcon and Xamarin.

In the channel of this video you can find good programming tutorials.
C ++ Programming
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rub-JsjMhWY&feature=youtu.be

Regards

Offline José Roca

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2471
    • José Roca Software
Re: Has anyone tried True Basic compiler ?
« Reply #6 on: October 11, 2018, 04:29:40 AM »
Extremely slow? What have been you doing to test it?

Offline Chris Chancellor

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 148
Re: Has anyone tried True Basic compiler ?
« Reply #7 on: October 11, 2018, 02:32:00 PM »
Thanxx Raul

 Open Watcom looks good except no development since 3 years ago, i will take a spin at it

while Xamarin i won't want to go into it as it belongs to MS, as MS killed many products it took over

Offline Raúl Ortega

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 5
Re: Has anyone tried True Basic compiler ?
« Reply #8 on: October 15, 2018, 12:38:23 AM »
Hello Jose,

Maybe I'm wrong.

123456789 * 123456789 * 123456789 * 123456789 * 123456789 * 123456789 * 123456789 * 123456789 * 123456789 * 123456789 *

If I repeat this string 100 times, I have a text with 10,000 characters. if I change the * by 0. 1000 changes are made.

In PB and in SED this is instantaneous.

In CSED_FB and CSED it takes 7 seconds with a Core I3 computer. I assumed that these two editors are compiled with FB.

Also, I read a comment of yours, in which you mention that, in FB, the string part is written in C. But, this does not affect you, since you do not use many strings.

Please, tell me if I'm wrong.

Regards
Raúl

Offline José Roca

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2471
    • José Roca Software
Re: Has anyone tried True Basic compiler ?
« Reply #9 on: October 15, 2018, 01:17:26 AM »
> I assumed that these two editors are compiled with FB.

Wrong assumption. They're written in PowerBasic. Your "test" isn't even useful to test PB strings speed because the replacement is being done calling a procedure of the Scintilla control, not using PB's strings. If you want to test FB string speed then use the FB compiler and write a test using FB code.

The truth is that FB strings are faster than PB strings.
« Last Edit: October 15, 2018, 01:57:05 AM by José Roca »

Offline Raúl Ortega

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 5
Re: Has anyone tried True Basic compiler ?
« Reply #10 on: October 15, 2018, 06:13:47 AM »
Thank you very much.

The world of computing advances very quickly, and it is difficult to change to a different language. However PB programmers will one day have to look for other alternatives. I thank you for clarifying this aspect of FreeBASIC. I will take it into account once more.

regards

Offline José Roca

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2471
    • José Roca Software
Re: Has anyone tried True Basic compiler ?
« Reply #11 on: October 15, 2018, 08:44:56 AM »
BTW I have tried your test with CSED in my computer and the replacements are instantaneous.

Offline Raúl Ortega

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 5
Re: Has anyone tried True Basic compiler ?
« Reply #12 on: October 20, 2018, 11:44:32 PM »
Text Editors SED, CSED and CSED_FB I like them a lot, and I congratulate you for them.
But, you will have noticed that when changing many characters the line "File Edit Search .." blinks a lot.
In a file built with 1212121212. In an HP folio core I5 with Windows 8.1, ten thousand changes with CSED takes 1 min 5 sec, while a million changes with PB are done in 7.8 sec. With SED, when trying a million changes, it stops after 64,564 changes in 4.8 seconds.

Regards

Offline José Roca

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2471
    • José Roca Software
Re: Has anyone tried True Basic compiler ?
« Reply #13 on: Today at 05:18:29 AM »
> blinks a lot.

This could be avoided by disabling menu redrawing while doing the replacements.