]]>
Statistics: Posted by Dr_D — Mon Oct 08, 2007 9:40 pm
]]>
i gradually moved to xblite, vb.net, freepascal, or any other useful pascal/basic programming languages out there.
Statistics: Posted by shootman — Mon Oct 08, 2007 9:20 pm
]]>
]]>
Regarding FB...
D.S., you can try with my latest tutorial from QB #23: http://www.petesqbsite.com/sections/exp ... tml#angles
You can also try with this example game I coded (heavily commented): http://lachie.phatcode.net/Downloads/mi ... _FB017.zip
Unfortunately it's from a series of tutorials that got outdated due FB version changes (I plan to rewrite them soon), but this is a revised example game that works in the latest FB versions. Just read the source.
Anyway, WIKI is a good all-purpose start: http://www.freebasic.net/wiki/wikka.php?wakka=FBWiki
Don't forget to download one of the IDEs:
http://fbide.freebasic.net/ (not updated anymore but simpler)
http://fbedit.freebasic.net/ (newer and more advanced)
Statistics: Posted by Lachie Dazdarian — Fri Sep 28, 2007 5:05 pm
]]>
Check the Questions page, i know there have been a lot of topics about compiling lately.
Statistics: Posted by Raspberrypicker — Fri Sep 28, 2007 2:51 pm
]]>
]]>
Out of all of these languages, the one I like using the most is FB. It gives me ease of use, and looking at the code doesn't make my eyes bleed.
The C\C++ style syntax, however, is very ugly from my point of view. It my be more consistant, but that doesn't mean that it looks GOOD. Just Consistant.
Statistics: Posted by Imortis — Wed Sep 26, 2007 9:23 pm
]]>
NaTeDoGG, could please explain how you find Java syntax far simpler than QB?
Java is more "C-like" in that it uses curly braces for scope blocks, parenthesis for method calls, etc. Many other languages such as Javascript, PHP, etc use similar syntax so once you learn it, you can apply it across many languages.QB has things like the use of $ and % after variable names, the lack of parenthesis for function calls, the use of parenthesis for array indexing, DEF SEG, VARSEG, goto statements. IMO these things are weird and/or horrible and shouldn't be taught to new programmers.
I guess I mispoke by saying Java syntax is simpler. I'll reword that to say Java syntax is more widely applicable, and of course the language and tools (IDEs, third party libraries) are far more powerful. What I was really getting at was that teaching new programmers a legacy programming language isn't as good as teaching them something more modern.
Statistics: Posted by NaTeDoGG — Tue Sep 25, 2007 9:59 pm
]]>
It's been about 4 months since I took a formal programming class. BUT this time I will be learning Java.
So I we'll see if qb is really dead just yet...but i'm pretty sure qb is here to stay.
Statistics: Posted by Raspberrypicker — Tue Sep 25, 2007 4:16 pm
]]>
I feel that QB programmers should stick with QB if they are getting somewhere with it and enjoy using it. But they should move on if they're only sticking with QB to be "loyal" and acknoledge the fact that there are many Windows BASIC dialects similar to QB out there.
Statistics: Posted by k7 — Tue Sep 25, 2007 1:40 am
]]>
Because in FB when compiled with -lang fb you need to declare all variables and with their type. You can't do DIM X because like the error report says, FB does not support default types (which is INTEGER in QB) or suffixes as QB does (but like I said, you can compile with -lang qb if you want).
What DIM X, Y AS INTEGER does is:
Code:
DIM XDIM Y AS INTEGERIn FB (I'm not sure if in QB too) the correct way would be:
Code:
DIM AS INTEGER X, YStatistics: Posted by Lachie Dazdarian — Mon Sep 24, 2007 4:47 pm
]]>
-lang qb is something I dont know. What is it?
It's a compile time option for FreeBASIC to make it so your program that was in QB has a much better chance of compiling, but you also have most (if not all) the old restrictions that QB had. In my opinion, this is one of the best things I have seen for FreeBASIC, as it can increase compatibility with older QBASIC programs while also not losing the compatibility with newer FreeBASIC programs. Also, some of the stupid bugs that used to be around to make sure that it was compatible with QB can be isolated and fixed now 
Statistics: Posted by Patz QuickBASIC Creations — Mon Sep 24, 2007 3:37 pm
]]>
Codemss, DIM variable AS INTEGER does not report an error. You are probably doing something else with your code that causes an error. Also, tried to compile your code with -lang qb command line?
Perhaps you should actually choose to want to use FB, instead of finding false reasons not to use it. Not a good way to approach a new compiler.
Hehe Perhaps you should actually choose to want to use FB, instead of finding false reasons not to use it. Not a good way to approach a new compiler.
. DIM variable AS INTEGER actually gets me an error. It says: "Default types or suffixes are only valid in -lang deprecated or qb, found ',' in 'DIM X, Y AS INTEGER'".-lang qb is something I dont know. What is it?
Statistics: Posted by Codemss — Mon Sep 24, 2007 1:01 pm
]]>
It work, but its slow and that combination wont give me nearly anything possibilities to use resources of linux. With FB, i get heck of a more support and linux compatible compiler, so it's nearly allways FB instead of QB.
But its not dead. Users of qb are decreasing naturally, but there is allways peoples who likes to play with it, maybe not with too serious proijects, but for fun. And as long as qb gives fun even for 1 person, its alive.
Statistics: Posted by bungytheworm — Mon Sep 24, 2007 12:17 pm
]]>