PureBasic 6.0

Everything else that doesn't fall into one of the other PB categories.
akee
Enthusiast
Enthusiast
Posts: 448
Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2004 9:52 am
Location: Penang, Malaysia
Contact:

PureBasic 6.0

Post by akee »

Are there any plans for the community to see a version of PB 6.0?
User avatar
IceSoft
Addict
Addict
Posts: 1514
Joined: Thu Jun 24, 2004 8:51 am
Location: Germany

Re: PureBasic 6.0

Post by IceSoft »

akee wrote:Are there any plans for the community to see a version of PB 6.0?
You belive the version number is the cool stuff?
Belive!
<Wrapper>4PB, PB<game>, =QONK=, PetriDish, Movie2Image, PictureManager,...
User avatar
Saki
Addict
Addict
Posts: 830
Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2020 11:28 am
Location: Pandora

Re: PureBasic 6.0

Post by Saki »

Don't be petty, there is only 0.27 missing :shock:
地球上の平和
plouf
Enthusiast
Enthusiast
Posts: 189
Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2003 6:35 pm
Location: Athens,Greece

Re: PureBasic 6.0

Post by plouf »

A new major version indicates core changes and functionality in the core language (not just some function in libs) (except if you are chrome developer where version system exist like a calendar to you ;))

a new major version (6 ?) would indicate, for example, the anticipated linux ARM support, and many more.

Given the opportunity would like to suggest a change i was thinking of and i believe it would the ,still small, PB team.
Combining two more "discussions" taken place.
"PB long term cost" and "PB lack of frequent updates"

I Suggest to change structure of compiler and REMOVE a lot of functions and maybe entire libraries from core distribution transform them to "dll's" or "modules" of "pb dynamic linked libs" etc
The idea behind this is that libraries has expanded too much and need verification and improvement to every release.

AS we all know a dll is loaded and executed no matter the compiler version and or compiler itself (gcc / PB /Visual C, all "execute" stdcall dll's)
so moving "less important" libs to modules it require less work in updates but will KEEP the work already done creating these libs and adding useful functionality to PB, to future version with little or no "cost".

ADDITIONAL some new or more complicated libs maybe have some cost.

to name a few libs that will have practically no impact to change to "dll" are
AudioCD
Cipher
Mail
FTP

A few "future" libs that MAYBE have cost could possible be, for example, "ffmpeg player/decoder" etc

Note that my suggestion is NOT about removing function, i like functions and is one of the main reason PB has the power it has.
Just looking ways to remove overwhelm to Team.
Christos
User avatar
skywalk
Addict
Addict
Posts: 3544
Joined: Wed Dec 23, 2009 10:14 pm
Location: Boston, MA

Re: PureBasic 6.0

Post by skywalk »

I prefer those libs stay within the current automated testing so they are vetted with each compiler update.
Are you suggesting instead that calls to those libs will be changed to calls to frozen dll's within the automated tests?
That seems like a LOT of extra work. :shock:
The nice thing about standards is there are so many to choose from. ~ Andrew Tanenbaum
plouf
Enthusiast
Enthusiast
Posts: 189
Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2003 6:35 pm
Location: Athens,Greece

Re: PureBasic 6.0

Post by plouf »

as long as a "module" / "plugin" method is created will need no check, since a working module will be working ..
if you change the "dll" will need to check dll

this plugins/extension method exist in many languages for that exact reason

it will need some work once to change compiler structure to accept modular/extension system.
After this significant work will reduced, otherwise the working volume will continue to increase forever, while the team is not increased linear to that...
Christos
akee
Enthusiast
Enthusiast
Posts: 448
Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2004 9:52 am
Location: Penang, Malaysia
Contact:

Re: PureBasic 6.0

Post by akee »

icesoft & saki: don't people have the right to ask to see what is new?
User avatar
Saki
Addict
Addict
Posts: 830
Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2020 11:28 am
Location: Pandora

Re: PureBasic 6.0

Post by Saki »

Sure you can ask.
But a look into the crystal ball or asking the oracle of Delphi is not very helpful.

They say : "Never do the bill without asking the cook"
地球上の平和
BarryG
Addict
Addict
Posts: 1628
Joined: Thu Apr 18, 2019 8:17 am

Re: PureBasic 6.0

Post by BarryG »

akee wrote:Are there any plans for the community to see a version of PB 6.0?
New versions are not discussed publically. So, no.
Rinzwind
Enthusiast
Enthusiast
Posts: 395
Joined: Wed Mar 11, 2009 4:06 pm
Location: NL

Re: PureBasic 6.0

Post by Rinzwind »

Ive never seen any road map. Things happen or dont happen. Dev speed did slow down last years. Maybe its going up again. Lets hope and lets also hope fo some long due syntax additions. Lalala ;
User avatar
Josh
Addict
Addict
Posts: 1184
Joined: Sat Feb 13, 2010 3:45 pm

Re: PureBasic 6.0

Post by Josh »

plouf wrote:A new major version indicates core changes and functionality in the core language ...
A good option for 6.0 was version 5.5, where the Ascii support for Pb was removed. But whatever, there are more important things than the version number.
sorry for my bad english
akee
Enthusiast
Enthusiast
Posts: 448
Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2004 9:52 am
Location: Penang, Malaysia
Contact:

Re: PureBasic 6.0

Post by akee »

Saki wrote:Sure you can ask.
But a look into the crystal ball or asking the oracle of Delphi is not very helpful.

They say : "Never do the bill without asking the cook"
Well then just follow simple forum rules. If you have nothing contributing or positive to say then just shut up... No need to call me petty.
User avatar
TI-994A
Addict
Addict
Posts: 2490
Joined: Sat Feb 19, 2011 3:47 am
Location: Singapore

Re: PureBasic 6.0

Post by TI-994A »

akee wrote:Are there any plans for the community to see a version of PB 6.0?
If the pandemic doesn't wipe us all out! :lol:
Texas Instruments TI-99/4A Home Computer: the first home computer with a 16bit processor, crammed into an 8bit architecture. Great hardware - Poor design - Wonderful BASIC engine. And it could talk too!
Post Reply