Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

5,000 PowerBASIC Classes - Free

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

  • Edwin Knoppert
    replied
    Using the mail class would be nice.

    Leave a comment:


  • Mike Trader
    replied
    Forgive me, but can someone make this really simple for me and list 5 of these classes that are unobtainable from PB in any way at present, and might be usefull in a real world application?
    Last edited by Mike Trader; 22 Oct 2007, 12:08 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Mark Strickland
    replied
    Everything (maybe) has it's place

    I do agree that DOT NET has some advantages, such as multi-platform, and Web based code, etc but for me the price is too high in terms of complexity (not to mention $$).

    I normally don't need any more than what PB and a few other tools offer. It is not that I don't write complex applications. My most recent work literally has dozens of tabs and hundreds of controls. It does lots of cool things like remote off site backup of the DB, cool field highlighting for the active field, a little e-mail client functionality, and much more (300k lines of code built with FireFly). Yep --- Won't run on CE or Linux or anything but Windows but the target market does not care or need those features. It will run regardless of the current version of DOT NET and is a "zero configuration" install. Tech support is fairly easy even with a group of “not so tech savvy” users because it just works.

    I have spent literally decades in the industry and there have been a parade of tools and technologies that offered to be "the best ever" and each promised to obsolete all other tools and technologies. Each was “bigger” than the previous one. So far nobody has done it. Now SOA is the "rage" and things like DOT NET will help bring this closer together but my bet is it will never reach it's potential. One of the great "features" of SOA is integration of applications and apparent sharing of data ... I did that in the 1980's and thought that was the way it should be not an exception.

    My bottom line --- simpler is better --- both for programming and for using an application. If you are fluent in DOT NET then use it but for me I like tools like PB because I don't get "tangled up" with the tool. I can use my creativity in delivering an application that meets a business need. A simple plan implemented well beats the ultimate plan never implemented effectively.

    Feature bloat is an issue in the Microsoft world. A friend of mine just moved across country to start a new career. She needed a new computer so she bought Vista and Office 2007. It took her nearly a week to figure how to do things without menus in Office 2007 and she was a daily user of older versions of Office. Her comment --- “I just wanted to type a resume and make a few simple format changes”. Most of the time simpler is better and that is all the user wants.

    It is not about the tools and technology any way ... it is about getting an end result done with the product of those tools ... DOT NET, PB, or whatever.

    Time for me to "shut up" but thanks for listening.

    PS -- Watch out for the dinosaurs and keep "scampering around" under their feet, then one day you will notice, hummmm "where did they go?".

    Leave a comment:


  • Aleksandr Dobrev
    replied
    Originally posted by Michael Mattias View Post
    It's not just source-code compatible across platforms, it's 'tokenized' - compatible, too. (You do need to have the correct runtime installed in the using system).
    Well, yes and no, image of .NET application is 'tokenized'(bytecode (akin to the JVM)), but it's translated to native machine's opcode on load(JIT or just-in-time compilation). Thats why, C# applications start very slow, but after that run at the same speed as C++
    And I'm sure there are other development languages which offer this, too ... most ubiquitous today is probably Java.
    MCM
    Yepp, ubiquitous that's true, and credit to Java - it can run on *nix too.

    [offtop]
    MCM, thanks for the new word "ubiquitous", still continue learn english...
    [/offtop]

    Leave a comment:


  • Michael Mattias
    replied
    By employ .NET you able write application ...not only for Win32/64 but for WinCE(mobile) too, which works on different hardware
    BBx Business BASIC offers that, too. It's not just source-code compatible across platforms, it's 'tokenized' - compatible, too. (You do need to have the correct runtime installed in the using system).

    And I'm sure there are other development languages which offer this, too ... most ubiquitous today is probably Java.

    MCM

    Leave a comment:


  • John Gleason
    replied
    Originally posted by Mark Strickland View Post
    "Once there were dinosaurs..."
    One may also want to note tho, just how much it took to cause their extinction: A hundred million megatons of TNT blast off the coast of the Yucatan peninsula . It made a tsunami so big it left a ten foot thick layer of sand 200 miles inland from the Texas coast.

    Makes me wonder what it'll take to trim that latter day bulk.

    Leave a comment:


  • Aleksandr Dobrev
    replied
    I believe here is some misunderstanding.
    We compare apple and oranges ((c) MCM).
    Advantage of .NET application - it is ability to create MULTI-platform programs.
    That's mean if tomorrow new type of computer appear on a market, then not necessary to rewrite the whole application, just change framework. By employ .NET you able write application for huge market right now, not only for Win32/64 but for WinCE(mobile) too, which works on different hardware.

    Leave a comment:


  • Eddy Van Esch
    replied
    Originally posted by Mark Strickland View Post
    "Once there were dinosaurs. ...Then there were none ... and more adaptable creatures prevailed."
    Good one, Mark ! Nice comparison ..

    Kind regards

    Leave a comment:


  • Mark Strickland
    replied
    My 1.5 cents worth

    And compared to the rest of the world 1.5 cents is probably inflated ...

    I would have expected the results of the little example of the CR to CR/LF replacement but I am still amazed. Not that DOT NET would have those results but that so many people believe DOT NET is "The Only Way".

    For me PB, FireFly, and a few simple add on DLL's is all I need. I simply don't want or need 5,000 new classes. That is not to say I won't use one or two of them someday via PB when I find a specific need.

    Microsoft has built an empire out of "Bigger is Better". Every product just keeps evolving to the point of being a huge monolith that, for me, becomes too big and bulky to use. At that point I just say "Never Mind" and go find a simpler solution.

    With all of that said here is something to think about ---

    "Once there were dinosaurs. They grew to huge proportions and many could crush just about anything in their environment by just walking around. Then there were none and the smaller, quicker, and more adaptable creatures prevailed. It's a natural law ... just like gravity."

    Leave a comment:


  • José Roca
    replied
    http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/lib...05(VS.71).aspx

    Leave a comment:


  • Mike Trader
    replied
    Is there a replacement link for this:

    ''can i interest you in 5000 classes?'' http://msdn.microsoft.com/vbrun/vbfu...s/default.aspx

    It no worky no more....

    Leave a comment:


  • Michael Mattias
    replied
    >Plus, I only have 500MB ram.

    Well, if you have at least 1.5 Gb free disk, your application still has 2 Gb virtual memory available to it....and that doesn't include what you can 'borrow' from Windows by using memory-mapped file objects. ( I think you can use that in addition to your own regular 2 Gb... I'll have to devise some kind of test for that).


    Leave a comment:


  • Edwin Knoppert
    replied
    This topic describes you can use ASP.NET files (or other) without using a webserver(!)

    If you write a comwrapper, you can reach for this object and interact from within any app to this object.
    For example a PB app having a web control or so.
    http://msdn.microsoft.com/msdnmag/is...e/default.aspx

    This could also mean you could prepare aspx files and never show these files but might simply return desired data.
    in fact anything is possible.


    ------------------
    http://www.hellobasic.com

    Leave a comment:


  • Edwin Knoppert
    replied
    Finally made some time to actually test this example

    Now i know how it works... well i assumed the system object would be available but that was wishful thinking.

    The steps are:
    1) Create some VB.NET (or other supported language) code.
    2) Publish desired methods (export)
    3) Compile the VB.NET code to an assembly (special dll created via VBC)
    4) Register the assembly (gacutil)
    5) Write a TLB file (done for you: regasm /tlb...)

    This will be valid to open with the PBCom browser.

    I'm not sure if it's a strategic thing to do.
    You'll have a lot of new dotnet features but you'll need to register the dll on the end-users computer.
    Otherwise you can not reach it via com.

    My conclusion:
    1) Would be better if could run the assembly in a more direct way.
    2) Able to use dotnet without wrapper libraries would be even better.



    ------------------
    http://www.hellobasic.com

    Leave a comment:


  • Paul Dwyer
    replied
    Which is worse?

    MS.NET or
    PB.COM

    If there was a normal dll to use then great but .net via PB's COM implemenation? (Shudder) have fun!

    ------------------
    Paul Dwyer
    Network Engineer
    Aussie in Tokyo

    Leave a comment:


  • Keith Waters
    replied
    Stan

    I think you have done us a great service here by demonstrating that .NET can be accessed from (non-OOP) PB. I hope we remember this when we (again) talk of .NET and OOP.

    Many, many thanks
    Keith


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

    Leave a comment:


  • Marco Pontello
    replied
    There is a string buffer class which is supposed to be fast on strings.
    I suppose you are referring to System.Text.StringBuilder.
    Yes, but, that also deal with strings of UTF-16 chars.

    But still 691MB?
    I don't see that, neither.

    Anyway, .NET give many different choice on doing things, and probably none (or very few) are 1:1 comparable to PB.
    Doing the chars replacement on the entire file buffer in memory could be a good approach in PB, but not in .NET. That won't necessary mean that you can't obtain the same result with similar efficency, maybe in a totally different way.

    Bye!

    ------------------
    Try Online TrID file identifier! Recognize over 1.500 filetypes and counting...
    Give a powerfull scriptable Lua interface to your application with PowerBLua
    PBTracer - Tracer / Profiler for PowerBASIC (soon!) - Cell news links

    [This message has been edited by Marco Pontello (edited April 15, 2005).]

    Leave a comment:


  • Stan Durham
    replied
    >I think that isn't a good comparision

    True!
    There is a string buffer class which is supposed to be fast on strings.
    Plus, I only have 500MB ram.

    But still 691MB?

    NET is good stuff.
    It's here to stay.
    It's kind of like a Hemmer - it can go a lot of places - makes a big footprint - need to feed it a lot of fule.


    For what I need to do - PB & SQL Tools works best.


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

    Leave a comment:


  • Marco Pontello
    replied
    I have code in PB and NET to convert a file from Unix to DOS file format.

    Both codes just read the file into a string and replace the linefeeds.
    Stan, I think that isn't a good comparision.
    Strings on PB and .NET are two very different things, as the latter is a sequence of UTF-16 chars.
    If you need to work with a buffer, you should use a ByteArray.

    BTW, if I time an about 60MB file CR to CR+LF conversion like the one you proposed, the .NET ver take exactly double the time of the PB one on my PC, witch seems in line with the above mentioned difference.

    Bye!

    ------------------
    Try Online TrID file identifier! Recognize over 1.500 filetypes and counting...
    Give a powerfull scriptable Lua interface to your application with PowerBLua
    PBTracer - Tracer / Profiler for PowerBASIC (soon!) - Cell news links

    Leave a comment:


  • Stan Durham
    replied
    got it working with powerbasic!

    here is the working sample. http://www.powerbasic.com/support/pb...ad.php?t=24560

    note: it won't work unless you download the code from microsoft.com
    and build the tlb file.

    in theory - you can now access anything in the net framework from pb.
    ( you would have to have vb.net or c# to build the class interfaces )


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

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X