|
TheBigBasicQ
|
 |
« Reply #31 on: February 15, 2005, 04:34:16 AM » |
|
Stop flaming poor PB? If its better than FB then it will survive...
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
BastetFurry
|
 |
« Reply #33 on: February 15, 2005, 06:05:52 AM » |
|
...for bloated apps you have VB... I should smack you around a few times for that unbased comment. :evil: Ok, i can have a based comment here. Executable disblaying a Form with a Label and a Button will create a ~500 kb binary. But thats not enough, you need to ship fscking vbrun wich is in its modernest incarnation ~500 kb in size. And the best: VisualBASIC does not call normal GDI routines for making up the forms and handling the buttons, it uses its own slow routines that need to be shipped inside vbrun. Besides that, only the enterprise edition "tryes" to create assembler, all the others just create dumb bytecode that still is interpreted. Now tell me why VB shouldnt be bloated? :evil: So Long, The Werelion!
|
|
|
Logged
|
color=red]Look at you, Hacker. A pathetic creature of meat and bone, panting and sweating as you run through my corridors. How can you challenge a perfect, immortal machine?" - Shodan, AI at Citadel Station orbiting Earth[/color]
|
|
|
na_th_an
|
 |
« Reply #34 on: February 15, 2005, 06:17:30 AM » |
|
Tested, a window with a button is 27 Kb in VB6.
The built in functions are slow, yeah. But nothing stops you from using raw API calls. At least VB has built-in functions, unlike PBWin.
And the runtime... Well, that sucks, but note that you just need it once.
VB is the way to go for GUI coding.
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Antoni Gual
|
 |
« Reply #35 on: February 15, 2005, 06:44:31 AM » |
|
And the runtime... Well, that sucks, but note that you just need it once.
Yes, one runtime for every VB version. If you get programs from diferent sources you end up with a runtime for VB3, two for VB 4, one for VB 5, one for VB6, then net framework 1.0 then another net framework 1.1 and net framework 1.2 is coming ... Well, it's all hidden in system32 folder, normal user does'nt dare to look there.... Yesterday I received a very simple VB comms monitor program. Just a dialog with many boxes and the comms routine. Using the API It would have required 70 Kb of code, Delphi 5 would make a 350K standalone executable. This is what the installation cab file contained.... 08/03/1999 00:00 147.728 ASYCFILT.DLL 01/06/1998 00:00 22.288 COMCAT.DLL 19/07/2002 08:34 557.328 dao360.dll 15/02/2005 10:41 0 dir.txt 06/07/2004 12:40 454.656 EntrenadorIII.exe 19/07/2002 08:34 380.688 expsrv.dll 01/06/1999 00:00 924.432 MFC40.DLL 16/12/1999 00:00 44.032 mfc40loc.dll 28/07/1998 00:00 14.336 MSCOMES.DLL 24/06/1998 00:00 103.744 MSCOMM32.OCX 19/07/2002 08:34 1.503.504 msjet40.dll 19/07/2002 08:34 180.496 msjint40.dll 19/07/2002 08:34 53.520 msjter40.dll 19/07/2002 08:34 241.936 msjtes40.dll 19/07/2002 08:34 422.160 msrd2x40.dll 19/07/2002 08:34 315.664 msrd3x40.dll 19/07/2002 08:34 553.232 msrepl40.dll 21/08/2000 00:00 1.388.544 msvbvm60.dll 01/06/1999 00:00 326.656 MSVCRT40.DLL 19/07/2002 08:34 831.760 mswdat10.dll 06/12/2000 00:00 109.248 MSWINSCK.OCX 19/07/2002 08:34 614.672 mswstr10.dll 12/04/2000 00:00 598.288 OLEAUT32.DLL 08/03/1999 00:00 164.112 OLEPRO32.DLL 06/07/2004 11:28 5 opcionesEntrenador.txt 15/07/2000 00:00 253.952 SETUP1.EXE 15/07/2000 00:00 74.240 ST6UNST.EXE 03/06/1999 00:00 17.920 STDOLE2.TLB 07/08/1998 14:48 205.848 threed32.ocx 18/06/1998 00:00 89.360 VB5DB.DLL 02/10/2000 00:00 119.568 VB6ES.DLL 15/07/2000 00:00 101.888 VB6STKIT.DLL 19/07/2002 08:34 30.992 vbajet32.dll 28/07/1998 00:00 15.360 WINSKES.DLL 34 archivos 10.862.157 bytes 2 dirs 58.815.692.800 bytes libres
And you say VB is not bloated... The full installation of PB , dialog creator, help, debugger, ide, headers and examples is smaller....
|
|
|
Logged
|
Antoni
|
|
|
BastetFurry
|
 |
« Reply #36 on: February 15, 2005, 06:44:51 AM » |
|
Tested, a window with a button is 27 Kb in VB6.
The built in functions are slow, yeah. But nothing stops you from using raw API calls. At least VB has built-in functions, unlike PBWin.
And the runtime... Well, that sucks, but note that you just need it once.
VB is the way to go for GUI coding. Ok, i had VB5 standart for testing and that created such huge thingys. The other thing i dont like is the three class society that MICROS~1 i is making there. Standard, Profesional and Enterprise. > But nothing stops you from using raw API calls.Yeah, but that destroys the idea behind the FormCreator. Why cant the Formcreator just create code that makes direct calls to gdi32? >VB is the way to go for GUI coding.Seriously not, when it comes to GUI ill stick with BCX unless FreeBASIC get some EZ-GUI Commands(Wich are just wrappers to GDI Api and not some obscure libary). Typical BCX Programm: GUI "Test",PIXELS
DIM Form1 AS CONTROL DIM Btn1 AS CONTROL CONST ID_Btn1 = 101
SUB FormLoad Form1 = BCX_FORM("Hallo Welt!!!",0,0,640,480) Btn1 = BCX_BUTTON("KLICK MICH!",Form1,ID_Btn1,10,10,80,30)
Center(Form1) Show(Form1) END SUB
BEGIN EVENTS SELECT CASE cbmsg CASE WM_CLOSE PostQuitMessage(0) CASE WM_COMMAND IF cbctl = ID_Btn1 THEN MsgBox "Ueberraschung!!!" END SELECT END EVENTS
And you cant tell me that a Formeditor can not create something like this... BTW: This is, for example BCX_Form: HWND BCX_Form (char *Caption, int X, int Y, int W, int H, int Style, int Exstyle) { HWND A; if(!Style) { Style= WS_MINIMIZEBOX | WS_SIZEBOX | WS_CAPTION | WS_MAXIMIZEBOX | WS_POPUP | WS_SYSMENU; } A = CreateWindowEx(Exstyle,BCX_ClassName,Caption, Style, X*BCX_ScaleX, Y*BCX_ScaleY, (4+W)*BCX_ScaleX, (12+H)*BCX_ScaleY, NULL,(HMENU)NULL,BCX_hInstance,NULL); SendMessage(A,(UINT)WM_SETFONT,(WPARAM)GetStockObject (DEFAULT_GUI_FONT),(LPARAM)MAKELPARAM(FALSE,0)); return A; }
As i said, just a wrap to the normal GDI routine. So Long, The Werelion!
|
|
|
Logged
|
color=red]Look at you, Hacker. A pathetic creature of meat and bone, panting and sweating as you run through my corridors. How can you challenge a perfect, immortal machine?" - Shodan, AI at Citadel Station orbiting Earth[/color]
|
|
|
na_th_an
|
 |
« Reply #37 on: February 15, 2005, 09:07:47 AM » |
|
In VB is just simpler than all that. No message loops, no nothing.
And I was not talking about calls to user32 to do the UI, but calls to GDI32 to draw lines instead of using Picture1.LINE, for example.
You don't like VB6, but it doesn't mean that it is bad. At all.
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
relsoft
|
 |
« Reply #38 on: February 15, 2005, 09:27:02 AM » |
|
Brad: Inline ASM? FB supports it w/o side effects. :*) http://rel.betterwebber.com/junk.php?id=29I have made a few PB progs, Mostly GFX demos. I kinda like how BASIC's in particular are slowly progressing. I some of us can also code in ASM, C++/C, Pascal, BASIC and Java. :*) So this forum is not just a basic(pardon the pun) forum.
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Brad
New Member
Posts: 12
|
 |
« Reply #39 on: February 15, 2005, 10:18:49 AM » |
|
Genso,
looked at your site!! pretty good stuff!! I really liked your 3dTest!!
hmmm, also, what do you mean by side affects?...
are you saying that FB is a pure assembler?....
Brad
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
dilettante
Forum Regular
 
Posts: 115
|
 |
« Reply #40 on: February 15, 2005, 11:18:37 AM » |
|
The remarks against VB are hilarious, as always. I don't think I know anyone who ever said it was the greatest thing since sliced bread, but at least it isn't as hobbled as QB - which definately has its niche for some classes of problems too.
It is amazing though that the anti-VB crowd always sounds just like the anti-MS crowd. Maybe it's just part of the human condition to demonize.
That said, I'm not a .Net fan myself. If you think VB6 is "bloated," etc. you need to spend some time dealing with .Net application deployment. This will give you a whole new appreciation for VB6.
Last time I looked we were 5 years into the 21st century. 1985 called, and it wants its idea of "bloated" back. :wink:
BTW, AFAIK hardly anybody writes or maintains VB4 anymore. It was good in its day, but it had too many crudenesses. VB5 fixed many of these, and VB6 dealt with many other deficiencies. VB5 is basically extinct too except for those using VB5CCE (free) or needing better multithreading support (some of which VB6 "broke" - apparently on purpose).
Think of VB5 (VB97) as a major "service pack" to VB4 (VB96), and VB6 (VB98) as the next big service pack. Nobody should be using VB4/VB5 anymore (with the exceptions noted above).
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
aetherfox
|
 |
« Reply #41 on: February 15, 2005, 12:26:02 PM » |
|
Firstly, those dll's are something you could never avoid. While I am not too knowledgeable in raw win32 programming, even a c program would have to include those dlls that antoni showed, right?
Secondly, the idea behind VB is it's SIMPLICITY. Someone with a little English and a little BASIC knowledge can create win32 programs easily without messing about with message loops and handles. But, for the advanced user, that stuff is right there. That's the beauty of VB.
I think the absolute power and functionality that VB demonstrates is worth 25kb for a basic win/button program. I don't think many languages could ouput a smaller file.
And the 3 threads of VB is a good way for cheap/poor people to get a reach on professional software.
And the VB runtime DLL with people have always bitched about has been shipped with every single computer that I've ever used in my life after 1999 (thats about 250 since I've used pretty much every single school computer). Thats a stupid excuse to knock VB, and to be honest Antoni, I thought you would be able to see past that.
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
BastetFurry
|
 |
« Reply #42 on: February 15, 2005, 12:59:21 PM » |
|
Firstly, those dll's are something you could never avoid. While I am not too knowledgeable in raw win32 programming, even a c program would have to include those dlls that antoni showed, right? No, i can compile you a programm, written in Basic and one in c, that does not need these pesky dlls. It needs stock win32 dlls, nothing more. You could even go and make your programms in ASM without any special dlls  Secondly, the idea behind VB is it's SIMPLICITY. Someone with a little English and a little BASIC knowledge can create win32 programs easily without messing about with message loops and handles. But, for the advanced user, that stuff is right there. That's the beauty of VB. Ok, point, but i like to do it myself and dont do "Click and Code" (ajar to Click and Play) I think the absolute power and functionality that VB demonstrates is worth 25kb for a basic win/button program. I don't think many languages could ouput a smaller file.
Hmm... BCX, Dev-Cpp, FB, .... And the 3 threads of VB is a good way for cheap/poor people to get a reach on professional software.
Why didnt they just sell the programm without any support at 50 Euro and for those who realy need support... they pay extra. And the VB runtime DLL with people have always bitched about has been shipped with every single computer that I've ever used in my life after 1999 (thats about 250 since I've used pretty much every single school computer). Thats a stupid excuse to knock VB, and to be honest Antoni, I thought you would be able to see past that. I had a programm that uses VBRUN3*, a map viewer for fate - gates of dawn, and it was not in system32 of windows xp. If this dll where not needed, then nobody would complain on the user side, but it is needed and it is anoying that you have to keep track of them. So Long, The Werelion!
|
|
|
Logged
|
color=red]Look at you, Hacker. A pathetic creature of meat and bone, panting and sweating as you run through my corridors. How can you challenge a perfect, immortal machine?" - Shodan, AI at Citadel Station orbiting Earth[/color]
|
|
|
VonGodric
|
 |
« Reply #43 on: February 15, 2005, 02:31:17 PM » |
|
I think some of us overreact...
I tried PP console compiler, while I'm most definately sure I won't use it, to be true, there isn't nothing bad I could say about it.
PP (window, console) have it's place. And if someone is willing to pay for it -it's his/her choice.
|
|
|
Logged
|
url]http://fbide.sourceforge.net/[/url]
|
|
|
na_th_an
|
 |
« Reply #44 on: February 15, 2005, 02:49:07 PM » |
|
I had a programm that uses VBRUN3*, a map viewer for fate - gates of dawn, and it was not in system32 of windows xp. If this dll where not needed, then nobody would complain on the user side, but it is needed and it is anoying that you have to keep track of them. That's the runtime needed for Visual Basic 3 programs. VB3 was for Windows 3.1, so it's normal that you don't have the dll in your system. As explained, the dlls are in there 'cause they contain everything that's done for you. It was just an option M$ took: whether they link the runtime parts needed to each program you compile, or they stuff all of them together in a single file. That saves space, in the same way that having the BRUN45.EXE file instead of statically linking the needed runtime functions did in QB45. You just need the file to be present once, and all your exes are way smaller. As I said before, something is not bad 'cause you don't like it. For example, I don't like BCX, as it is just a translator and the language is very C-ish. To code in C, I code in C. But that doesn't mean that BCX is bad. Also, most people needs to develop fast. They need GUI applications fast. Not everyone (including me) has the will to go and code a message loop. VB is for us. If it is already done, I prefer using VB rather than having to do a nice session of CTRL+C/CTRL+V. Plus all the nice things such as working directly with access databases, having ODBC support or great interface with Winsock.
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|