Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

wishlist for PBDOS.PBCC. PBDLL

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    Hutch,

    I totally agree with your comments.

    To Bob Zale:

    I think the time has come to create a new forum whereby USERS of
    PowerBASIC can express their wishes about product improvements with a limit of one thread (editable of course) on the forum and make it a log in type requiring a valid PB serial number. This would limit the jargon on this forum and limit requests to bonafide users of PB. Any posts not related would be FILE13'ed. End of story.

    Cherrs,
    Cecil

    ------------------

    Leave a comment:


  • Steve Hutchesson
    replied
    I have a sneaking suspicion that Stephane does not read the responses to
    his many posts saying the same thing over and over again. A number of
    people have already explained the mistakes that he keeps making about the
    capacity of PowerBASIC yet he keeps posting the same things over and over
    again.

    Now I am not sure if Stephane reads English all that well so it may be
    useful if one of the members who speaks the dialect where Stephane is from
    to try and explain to him that repeating the same mistakes over and over
    again offends other members.

    While many of the members defend the right to have an opinion about the
    dialects of PowerBASIC, repetition in error simply irritates the many
    programmers who are members here who know better than to keep making the
    same mistake.

    When you can easily see that there are programmers who come to this forum
    who write in assembler, basic, C, C++, Pascal and I suspect a reasonable
    number who are experienced in Fortran, cobol and specialised languages like
    Forth as well, hacking through the same list in what appears to be a method
    of sounding off with terminology that is not properly understood is a
    formula to keep offending many people.

    This is finally a moderated forum and if you do not respect the other
    members by repeatedly spamming the forum with the same incorrect set of
    assertions, the moderators may have to remove your postings from the forum.

    The ball is in your court Stephane, it would be fair to others if you
    actually read the many postings that members have made in response to your
    repeated spamming of the forum. We have in fact all heard of OOP style
    programming and many who write in PowerBASIC do so to avoid that style of
    code where the performance is not good enough.

    Regards and please read what other people post as a response to your many
    postings.

    [email protected]


    ------------------

    Leave a comment:


  • Patrice Terrier
    replied
    Stéphane,

    Pour ton information, Dave Navarro ne travaille plus pour PowerBASIC.
    Adresses tes messages à Lance ou Tom.

    For your information, Dave Navarro doesn't work anymore for PowerBASIC.
    Send either your messages to Lance or Tom.


    ------------------
    Patrice Terrier
    mailto[email protected][email protected]</A>

    Leave a comment:


  • Phil Tippit
    replied
    Stephane,

    See my new thread, PowerBasic is Great!!!

    Phil

    ------------------

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest started a topic wishlist for PBDOS.PBCC. PBDLL

    wishlist for PBDOS.PBCC. PBDLL

    Dear Dave

    I’ d love to see come corrections and more advanced possibilities.

    v corrected and advanced formatted input and output for the keyboard and screen
    v Local record types to use in functions and sub
    v more stringfunctions as: STRCOMP, STRCOPY, STRINSERT
    v Datatypes SHORT and ENUM
    v Const as % because that’s confusing (Const ESC = 27)
    v The local use of constants
    v pré-installations of variables, arrays, records
    v use of statement $INLINE
    v use datapointers in arguments in functions and subs as function values as passing data pointers.
    v the use of PUBLIC, RIVATE, EXTERN in units
    v implement the use of units in the PBCC/PBDLL versions, because it gives a safty and your code is compiled (static linking)
    v more graphic PBU’s or PBL’s in PBDOS
    v add more standard DLL’s with the standard routines, that is many used.
    v I shall not name OOP anymore because you know that already

    I’d love it that you will built in OOP in your compiler, because you see that it will become more importment when they shall create bigger applications and they are gone be more difficult and the classes will be absent. It’s a good move.

    I’d love to have that you will name this possibilities to teach it to your developer team and Research.

    Yours sincerely
    Stephane
Working...
X