To Fred and Timo: Can we have a discussion about the future?

Everything else that doesn't fall into one of the other PB categories.
Mistrel
Addict
Addict
Posts: 3415
Joined: Sat Jun 30, 2007 8:04 pm

Re: To Fred and Timo: Can we have a discussion about the fut

Post by Mistrel »

Marc56us wrote:We should do a survey, but how?
That's not important right now. First we would need to know if Fred and Timo are willing to have a dialog with us and whether they would even accept any proposals. This is ultimately up to them.
wilbert
PureBasic Expert
PureBasic Expert
Posts: 3870
Joined: Sun Aug 08, 2004 5:21 am
Location: Netherlands

Re: To Fred and Timo: Can we have a discussion about the fut

Post by wilbert »

Mistrel wrote:First we would need to know if Fred and Timo are willing to have a dialog with us and whether they would even accept any proposals. This is ultimately up to them.
Fred has mentioned several times that you can contact him and pay him for specific things to be added / fixed.
Maybe some kind of collective fund raising for specific features could be an idea ?
Windows (x64)
Raspberry Pi OS (Arm64)
Fred
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 16681
Joined: Fri May 17, 2002 4:39 pm
Location: France
Contact:

Re: To Fred and Timo: Can we have a discussion about the fut

Post by Fred »

We are reading all ideas/suggestions and pick from them for future features. That said, if you use PB as a living and want a specific feature implemented quickly, the bounty system could work for us. For example, you could submit your idea, and how much you want to put in it (others could add as well), and Timo, Comtois/Guillot (for 3D), or I could then pick it, do the dev and get the bounty. I dunno if Timo and others are interested in it, they will probably tell :). That said, the idea has to be accepted, we won't put in PB anything irrelevant, it has to be useful for as many people as possible.
Mistrel
Addict
Addict
Posts: 3415
Joined: Sat Jun 30, 2007 8:04 pm

Re: To Fred and Timo: Can we have a discussion about the fut

Post by Mistrel »

I think a bounty on suggestions is a fantastic idea. I'll have to do some research on what options might be available for such a thing.

I know that I would personally be more than happy to vote with my money for the future of PureBasic. And I'm certain that many others feel that way as well. :)
srod
PureBasic Expert
PureBasic Expert
Posts: 10589
Joined: Wed Oct 29, 2003 4:35 pm
Location: Beyond the pale...

Re: To Fred and Timo: Can we have a discussion about the fut

Post by srod »

Mistrel wrote:I think a bounty on suggestions is a fantastic idea. I'll have to do some research on what options might be available for such a thing.

I know that I would personally be more than happy to vote with my money for the future of PureBasic. And I'm certain that many others feel that way as well. :)
+1.
I may look like a mule, but I'm not a complete ass.
Cyllceaux
Enthusiast
Enthusiast
Posts: 464
Joined: Mon Jun 23, 2014 1:18 pm
Contact:

Re: To Fred and Timo: Can we have a discussion about the fut

Post by Cyllceaux »

Mistrel wrote:I think a bounty on suggestions is a fantastic idea. I'll have to do some research on what options might be available for such a thing.

I know that I would personally be more than happy to vote with my money for the future of PureBasic. And I'm certain that many others feel that way as well. :)
+1

I have my own company and use PB to write in-house and customer-software. But I'm restricted in mostly "small" things. So I like the idea of the bounty system.
User avatar
mk-soft
Always Here
Always Here
Posts: 5398
Joined: Fri May 12, 2006 6:51 pm
Location: Germany

Re: To Fred and Timo: Can we have a discussion about the fut

Post by mk-soft »

I don't have there against having a version v5.x3 or v5.x7, so that sometimes the small minibugs are cleaned up.

The little OOP with interfaces is also sufficient and does not have to be extended at all.
It is sufficient to create the necessary own interfaces required by other programs.

For example the Shutdown Interface for OPC (Automation) which you have to provide when writing an OPC client.

Or if you want to provide some DLL functions for VB-Script, which I had to.
This used to be very easy with VB6, in which you created an OCX.


Translated with http://www.DeepL.com/Translator
Last edited by mk-soft on Tue Jul 17, 2018 6:20 pm, edited 1 time in total.
My Projects ThreadToGUI / OOP-BaseClass / EventDesigner V3
PB v3.30 / v5.75 - OS Mac Mini OSX 10.xx - VM Window Pro / Linux Ubuntu
Downloads on my Webspace / OneDrive
User avatar
skywalk
Addict
Addict
Posts: 3997
Joined: Wed Dec 23, 2009 10:14 pm
Location: Boston, MA

Re: To Fred and Timo: Can we have a discussion about the fut

Post by skywalk »

Great, how do we get started?
Where is the bounty system captured?
In the forum or another web page?
The nice thing about standards is there are so many to choose from. ~ Andrew Tanenbaum
User_Russian
Addict
Addict
Posts: 1443
Joined: Wed Nov 12, 2008 5:01 pm
Location: Russia

Re: To Fred and Timo: Can we have a discussion about the fut

Post by User_Russian »

Fred wrote:Indeed current compiler can still be improved here and here, and it will be done when I can squeeze back some more time to focus on it.

That's also why we are focusing on libraries, it's easier to jump on and off, and makes some valuable progress for everyone.
There are many ideas for the perfecting of the compiler and libraries.
Some of them.
Fast string
Code optimization (The solution was suggested, but it does not work in PB 5.30 and newer).
logical shift
Function Unsigned. (A simple solution for unsigned variables).
CatchPreferences
Converting variable types
A pointer to a constant (This is added in PB 5.50, but has not yet been implemented).
Pseudotype in procedure (Useful for ProcedureDLL).
Tips for procedures

And it would be nice if, worked the choice of the type of assembler instructions.
Image
Last edited by User_Russian on Tue Jul 17, 2018 6:40 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Bitblazer
Enthusiast
Enthusiast
Posts: 736
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2017 6:17 pm
Location: Germany
Contact:

Re: To Fred and Timo: Can we have a discussion about the fut

Post by Bitblazer »

Mistrel wrote:I think a bounty on suggestions is a fantastic idea. I'll have to do some research on what options might be available for such a thing.

I know that I would personally be more than happy to vote with my money for the future of PureBasic. And I'm certain that many others feel that way as well. :)
+1 (great idea imho)

ps: maybe research these
User avatar
the.weavster
Addict
Addict
Posts: 1537
Joined: Thu Jul 03, 2003 6:53 pm
Location: England

Re: To Fred and Timo: Can we have a discussion about the fut

Post by the.weavster »

Fred wrote:For example, you could submit your idea, and how much you want to put in it (others could add as well), and Timo, Comtois/Guillot (for 3D), or I could then pick it, do the dev and get the bounty.
OK, I'll get the ball rolling (and I hope others will offer to contribute too if they'd also like these features prioritized):
These are features I will donate a new single user license fee (EUR 79) for if they're in the next release of PB:

Native support for MariaDB

SetMailBodyText() / SetMailBodyHTML()

HTTPRequest() (as implemented in SpiderBasic)

These offers aren't dependent on each other, I will honour each one individually.
User avatar
bbanelli
Enthusiast
Enthusiast
Posts: 543
Joined: Tue May 28, 2013 10:51 pm
Location: Europe
Contact:

Re: To Fred and Timo: Can we have a discussion about the fut

Post by bbanelli »

the.weavster wrote:These are features I will donate a new single user license fee (EUR 79) for if they're in the next release of PB:

Native support for MariaDB

SetMailBodyText() / SetMailBodyHTML()

HTTPRequest() (as implemented in SpiderBasic)

These offers aren't dependent on each other, I will honour each one individually.
Ditto!
"If you lie to the compiler, it will get its revenge."
Henry Spencer
https://www.pci-z.com/
Little John
Addict
Addict
Posts: 4527
Joined: Thu Jun 07, 2007 3:25 pm
Location: Berlin, Germany

Re: To Fred and Timo: Can we have a discussion about the fut

Post by Little John »

the.weavster wrote:SetMailBodyText() / SetMailBodyHTML()
The mail library is currently just a toy. In order to change it into a tool, more improvements are needed. Creating a mail and sending it are completely different things, which should be clearly separated. We should have e.g. the choice to save a created mail to disk and to load an existing mail from disk.
User avatar
HeX0R
Addict
Addict
Posts: 992
Joined: Mon Sep 20, 2004 7:12 am
Location: Hell

Re: To Fred and Timo: Can we have a discussion about the fut

Post by HeX0R »

I really love this idea and would be happy to spend my money to evolve PB, but we need some structured way to do so.
If now anyone throws in his own wishes, this whole thread will turn into a mess and we will win nothing!
Cyllceaux
Enthusiast
Enthusiast
Posts: 464
Joined: Mon Jun 23, 2014 1:18 pm
Contact:

Re: To Fred and Timo: Can we have a discussion about the fut

Post by Cyllceaux »

How about founding/donations something like this:
  • FastString = 500€
  • DateQ = 500€
  • Faster ListIconView = 1.000€
  • Multicolumn TreeView = 1.000€
  • PB on Raspberry PI = 10.000€
  • Structure Pointer as Return Parameter= 10.000€
  • RTF in EditorGadget = 1.000€
  • WebKit for Windows = 1.000€
  • ...
This is what I would pay and I think there are a lot of mor people who would join that
Post Reply