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.Marc56us wrote:We should do a survey, but how?
To Fred and Timo: Can we have a discussion about the future?
Re: To Fred and Timo: Can we have a discussion about the fut
Re: To Fred and Timo: Can we have a discussion about the fut
Fred has mentioned several times that you can contact him and pay him for specific things to be added / fixed.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.
Maybe some kind of collective fund raising for specific features could be an idea ?
Windows (x64)
Raspberry Pi OS (Arm64)
Raspberry Pi OS (Arm64)
Re: To Fred and Timo: Can we have a discussion about the fut
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.
Re: To Fred and Timo: Can we have a discussion about the fut
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.
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.
Re: To Fred and Timo: Can we have a discussion about the fut
+1.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.
I may look like a mule, but I'm not a complete ass.
Re: To Fred and Timo: Can we have a discussion about the fut
+1Mistrel 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.
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.
Re: To Fred and Timo: Can we have a discussion about the fut
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
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
PB v3.30 / v5.75 - OS Mac Mini OSX 10.xx - VM Window Pro / Linux Ubuntu
Downloads on my Webspace / OneDrive
Re: To Fred and Timo: Can we have a discussion about the fut
Great, how do we get started?
Where is the bounty system captured?
In the forum or another web page?
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
-
- 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
There are many ideas for the perfecting of the compiler and libraries.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.
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.
Last edited by User_Russian on Tue Jul 17, 2018 6:40 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Re: To Fred and Timo: Can we have a discussion about the fut
+1 (great idea imho)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.
ps: maybe research these
- the.weavster
- 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
OK, I'll get the ball rolling (and I hope others will offer to contribute too if they'd also like these features prioritized):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.
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.
Re: To Fred and Timo: Can we have a discussion about the fut
Ditto!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.
-
- 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
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.the.weavster wrote:SetMailBodyText() / SetMailBodyHTML()
Re: To Fred and Timo: Can we have a discussion about the fut
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!
If now anyone throws in his own wishes, this whole thread will turn into a mess and we will win nothing!
{Home}.:|:.{Dialog Design0R}.:|:.{Codes}.:|:.{Downloads}.:|:.{History Viewer Online}
Re: To Fred and Timo: Can we have a discussion about the fut
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€
- ...