Compiler vs Interpreter 
Author Message
 Compiler vs Interpreter

Hi All
All of my experience with BASIC has been with MS and their interpreter which
has worked for me in most cases and when not I use C/C++. A friend recently
asked me why I don't use a compiler instead.  I did not know there was a
BASIC compiler.......is there one and who makes it? And how does it compare
to the MS QB?

--
Bob Ashby
"Walk in peace fore they shall know us
 only by the tracks we leave"
http://www.*-*-*.com/ `bashby



Tue, 20 Jun 2000 03:00:00 GMT  
 Compiler vs Interpreter

Quote:

> All of my experience with BASIC has been with MS and their interpreter
> which has worked for me in most cases and when not I use C/C++. A friend
> recently asked me why I don't use a compiler instead.  I did not know
> there was a BASIC compiler.......is there one and who makes it? And how
> does it compare to the MS QB?

Microsoft QB (QuickBasic) IS a compiler.  You must be referring to QBasic
which comes with MS-DOS 5.x, 6.x and Win95.

Microsoft QuickBasic 4.5 ($110.95 from www.provantage.com) comes with the
command line compiler BC.EXE and the interactive development environment
(IDE) QB.EXE.  QB.EXE works very similarly to QBasic, though it has more
options and is faster.  It has an option to create an EXE file, or you can
use BC to compile from the command line.  Syntax for QuickBasic is virtually
identical to QBasic, except that QuickBasic has features QBasic doesn't.
--
Judson McClendon          This is a faithful saying and worthy of all
Sun Valley Systems        acceptance, that Christ Jesus came into the

(please remove zzz from email id to respond)



Tue, 20 Jun 2000 03:00:00 GMT  
 Compiler vs Interpreter


Quote:
> Hi All
> All of my experience with BASIC has been with MS and their interpreter
which
> has worked for me in most cases and when not I use C/C++. A friend
recently
> asked me why I don't use a compiler instead.  I did not know there was a
> BASIC compiler.......is there one and who makes it? And how does it

compare

Gee, Bob . . . where have you been all these years?  There've been
Basic compilers of all kinds and descriptions since about 1981 or 82.

Besides Quick Basic, there's Power Basic, True Basic, and a number
of shareware compilers such as ASIC, Liberty Basic, and so on.  I
would recommend Power Basic over Quick Basic for you, since you
are a C/C++ programmer.

jdm



Tue, 20 Jun 2000 03:00:00 GMT  
 Compiler vs Interpreter

Microsoft has gotten out of the business of Basic compilers for DOS.

Quick Basic (QB) 4.5 is the compiler that Qbasic (your interpreter)
came from.  Qbasic is based on a stripped down version of QB 4.5 .

They also made Quick Basic Extended, Professional Development System
which added features for really large programs (I have a QB 4.5
program which compiles to about 250K).

The last incarnation was Visual Basic for DOS which added tools for
generating user interfaces that look like the QB/Qbasic environment.
There is a regular and a professional version (with a number of new
features) of VB-DOS.

Microsoft's current Basic compiler is Visual Basic (for Windows).
You design the Windows screens and menus, then attach the Basic
code to the interface items that they belong to.

Quote:

>Hi All
>All of my experience with BASIC has been with MS and their
interpreter which
>has worked for me in most cases and when not I use C/C++. A friend
recently
>asked me why I don't use a compiler instead.  I did not know there
was a
>BASIC compiler.......is there one and who makes it? And how does it
compare
>to the MS QB?

>--
>Bob Ashby
>"Walk in peace fore they shall know us
> only by the tracks we leave"
>http://www.seanet.com/`bashby



Tue, 20 Jun 2000 03:00:00 GMT  
 Compiler vs Interpreter

Yea there are quite a few compilers for BASIC...the best I think is FirstBasic
or powerbasic...it's just like QBasic but it works a lot faster... you can
download it at  http://www.powerbasic.com

Kevin

Quote:

> Hi All
> All of my experience with BASIC has been with MS and their interpreter which
> has worked for me in most cases and when not I use C/C++. A friend recently
> asked me why I don't use a compiler instead.  I did not know there was a
> BASIC compiler.......is there one and who makes it? And how does it compare
> to the MS QB?

> --
> Bob Ashby
> "Walk in peace fore they shall know us
>  only by the tracks we leave"
> http://www.seanet.com/`bashby



Tue, 20 Jun 2000 03:00:00 GMT  
 Compiler vs Interpreter

Quote:


>>Hi All
>>All of my experience with BASIC has been with MS and their interpreter which
>>has worked for me in most cases and when not I use C/C++. A friend recently
>>asked me why I don't use a compiler instead.  I did not know there was a
>>BASIC compiler.......is there one and who makes it? And how does it compare
>>to the MS QB?
>Hi,
>  M$ stopped making BASIC for DOS some years ago and, concequently have lost
>the edge. If you're happy wiht C then you might want to have a long look at
>PowerBASIC v3.5. There are more variable types (including unsigned BYTE, WORD,
>and DWORD) than QB, 32 Bit pointers, inline ASM, member arrays in TYPE
>structure, etc.
>  PB v3.5 goes for about $150 but you can get all the info you need at
>www.powerbasic.com.

   The PB website also offers a shareware version of something called
"firstbasic", which is a very early version (2.1?) of the powerbasic
compiler. The unregistered shareware version is functional, but
slightly crippled. Registration is around $25. This may be just the
package for someone looking to test the waters.

   Just for the heck of it, I'd also like to direct the original
poster to
                  http://www.mixsoftware.com  
It's not uncommon for BASIC programmers to eventually add C to their
language skills, and I think that Mix Software's Power C compiler is a
lot of fun. And Mix has got a shitload of software built around Power
C as well. Some nice stuff. Check it out.

Definitely biased,
John G.



Tue, 20 Jun 2000 03:00:00 GMT  
 Compiler vs Interpreter

Quote:

>Hi All
>All of my experience with BASIC has been with MS and their interpreter which
>has worked for me in most cases and when not I use C/C++. A friend recently
>asked me why I don't use a compiler instead.  I did not know there was a
>BASIC compiler.......is there one and who makes it? And how does it compare
>to the MS QB?

Hi,

  M$ stopped making BASIC for DOS some years ago and, concequently have lost
the edge. If you're happy wiht C then you might want to have a long look at
PowerBASIC v3.5. There are more variable types (including unsigned BYTE, WORD,
and DWORD) than QB, 32 Bit pointers, inline ASM, member arrays in TYPE
structure, etc.

  PB v3.5 goes for about $150 but you can get all the info you need at
www.powerbasic.com.

Here's a bit of code (untested) to demonstrate what I'm talking about...

DIM A     AS STRING
DIM B     AS STRING
DIM I_ptr AS BYTE PTR
DIM O_ptr AS BYTE PTR
DIM X     AS BYTE

A = "HELLO WORLD"
B = STRING$(11,32)
I_ptr = STRPTR32(A)
O_ptr = STRPTR32(B)

FOR X = 0 TO 10


  INCR O_ptr
NEXT
B = RTRIM$( B )
PRINT B

C'ya,

  ____    _    ____      ____  _____
 |  _ \  / \  / ___) __ | ___)(_   _)
 | |_)  / _ \ \____\/  \|  _)   | |
 |____//_/ \_\(____/\__/|_|     |_|

     www.basicguru.com/schullian



Thu, 22 Jun 2000 03:00:00 GMT  
 Compiler vs Interpreter

On 2 Jan 1998 16:06:36 GMT, "jdm"

Quote:


>> Hi All
>> All of my experience with BASIC has been with MS and their interpreter
>>which
>> has worked for me in most cases and when not I use C/C++. A friend
>>recently
>> asked me why I don't use a compiler instead.  I did not know there was a
>> BASIC compiler.......is there one and who makes it? And how does it
>>compare
>Gee, Bob . . . where have you been all these years?  There've been
>Basic compilers of all kinds and descriptions since about 1981 or 82.

Minor correction here - the oldest copyright date that I've seen on a
Basic Compiler was 1976.

In plain english Basic Compilers predate C Compilers.

Wayne



Sat, 24 Jun 2000 03:00:00 GMT  
 Compiler vs Interpreter

There are other BASIC compilers. The three by MS that I know
of are QuickBasic 4.5, VBasic for DOS, and I heard of another
that I think is called ExtendedBasic (which came before VB for Dos but is
compatable with VB).  None of these programs are legaly available for free.
All of these programs are very simular but they are hard to get except through
the internet. What you might want to get is PowerBasic(which I've heard is
pretty good)
or a shareware compiler.



Sat, 15 Jul 2000 03:00:00 GMT  
 Compiler vs Interpreter

Quote:

> There are other BASIC compilers. The three by MS that I know
> of are QuickBasic 4.5, VBasic for DOS, and I heard of another
> that I think is called ExtendedBasic (which came before VB for Dos but is
> compatable with VB).  None of these programs are legaly available for free.
> All of these programs are very simular but they are hard to get except
> through the internet. What you might want to get is PowerBasic(which I've
> heard is pretty good) or a shareware compiler.

New copies of QuickBasic 4.5 are available from at least three places I know
of: Provantage, CDW and Old Tools Exchange.  The first two have 800 numbers
and are reputable mail-order houses.  The cheapest of the three for new
copies is Provantage ($110.95 + shipping), but Old Tools Exchange also has
used copies for about $90.  I don't know if OTE accepts phone orders.
--
Judson McClendon          This is a faithful saying and worthy of all
Sun Valley Systems        acceptance, that Christ Jesus came into the

(please remove zzz from email id to respond)


Mon, 17 Jul 2000 03:00:00 GMT  
 
 [ 10 post ] 

 Relevant Pages 

1. BASIC interpreter/compiler for unix

2. Compilers and interpreters

3. COMAL compiler/interpreter

4. Shareware and freeware compilers and interpreters

5. free compilers and interpreters !

6. Freeware and shareware compilers and interpreters here !

7. Source for Basic interpreter/compiler

8. Source Needed: Interpreter or Compiler

9. QB/VBDOS - compiler or interpreter?

10. Embeded Compiler/ Interpreter in my own app

11. VBA compiler VS VB5 compiler?

12. VB4 vs. VB3 Help Compiler

 

 
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software