Which compiler should you buy? 
Author Message
 Which compiler should you buy?

A question we often hear is "Which compiler should I buy?" The answer
depends on what type of applications you need to create.  The following
information should help you with that decision.

If you have a question that is not answered here, please email our tech

it for you.

powerbasic Compiler for DOS
---------------------------
PB/DOS generates programs that run in the DOS operating system (MS-DOS,
PC-DOS, DR-DOS, Caldera DOS). Because DOS has been around for so long,
there are many emulators available for other operating systems including
Windows 3.1, Windows 95/98, Windows NT, OS/2 Warp, Macintosh, Unix and
Linux. PB/DOS programs can also run in these emulators.

Most computers running DOS today are used for specialized purposes. Data
entry, machine control, inventory, and so on. Their advantage is that
both the DOS operating system and the DOS application can run on older
and very inexpensive computer hardware. Many single-board PC's used in
automated teller machines, gas pumps and vending machines run the DOS
operating system.

PowerBASIC for DOS is 99% compatible with Microsoft BASIC, including
QBASIC, QuickBasic, Professional Development System (PDS), GW-BASIC, and
BASICA. Added to downward compatibility are many revolutionary features
such as Built-in Assembler, Arrays up to 16 megabytes in size, Code and
Data pointers, BCD data type for financial calculations, Extended-
precision data type for calculations requiring very fine accuracy, and
more.

The only real downside is, the DOS operating system itself has many
limitations that are very difficult to overcome, such as memory
limitations and access to the very latest in computer hardware (many
hardware manufacturers no longer create device drivers for the DOS
operating system).

PB/DOS is good for students wishing to learn about BASIC programming,
anyone required to maintain existing DOS computer systems and
applications, and anyone doing development with DOS based single-board
computers. Anyone doing new software development should consider the 32-
bit Windows platform.

PowerBASIC Console Compiler for Windows
---------------------------------------
PB/CC is especially well suited to programmers moving code from the DOS
platform into Windows. Like it's DOS cousin, PB/CC supports a "text mode"
or "console" interface. When executed, a PB/CC program appears to be a
DOS program because it runs inside of a DOS box on the Windows 95/98 and
Windows NT platforms. But don't let that fool you, underneath that
familiar looking blinking cursor is the heart of a lion, running at a
true 32-bits with access to every part of the operating system.

Most DOS applications do not require any graphics abilities, they perform
some type of task on a database or collected scientific data and they
report their findings by PRINTing to the screen. A graphical interface
with buttons and scroll bars just gets in the way. PB/CC is a perfect fit
for this type of task.

Using the familiar PRINT, LOCATE, COLOR, and LINE INPUT statements your
program can keep its existing interface. But when it comes time to start
those calculations and build the database, the true Power of PB/CC shows
itself. As a true 32-bit Windows application, your PB/CC programs can use
up to 2 gigabytes of memory. And because it's a Windows app, it can
access Windows devices like printers, modems, and networks (including the
Internet!)

And unlike programming in Visual Basic, delphi or PowerBuilder, you don't
need to learn about "event driven programming", "callbacks", or other
advanced programming concepts. But just because you don't need to learn
those things, that doesn't mean you can't take advantage of them if you
do.

PowerBASIC is the most sophisticated Basic programming language in the
world. It makes doing most tasks very easy, but doesn't "hide away" the
tools necessary to get yourself dirty inside of the Windows 32-bit
engine. You can use only the features you need to use.

Did we say internet? PB/CC gives you direct access to the internet from
your applications. Use STDIN and STDOUT to write applications for your
web server. Use TCP and UDP to communicate with other computers,
including mail servers, FTP servers, time servers and more!

PB/CC wasn't designed for doing graphics, however. While you can
certainly do graphics by using the Windows API, the SCREEN, PSET, CIRCLE,
LINE and other Basic graphics statements are no supported. For that, and
doing sophisticated "Graphical User Interfaces", use PB/DLL instead.

PowerBASIC DLL Compiler for Windows
-----------------------------------
PB/DLL is actually two compilers in one. As its name implies, it can be
used to create Dynamic Link Libraries, or code modules, that can be used
with other programs and programming languages (like Visual Basic, VBA,
Delphi Visual C++, PowerBuilder, etc.) In particular, by compiling Basic
code into DLLs you can speed up many tasks in Visual Basic programs by as
much as 23 times.

Where PB/DLL really shines, however, is in the ability to create complete
stand-alone Windows applications. PB/DLL does not require any external
run-time libraries (DLLs) or controls (OCXs). That means a typical
application in PowerBASIC can be compiled to around 150k as a single
.EXE.

PowerBASIC does not compile Visual Basic projects. Once you have finished
"dragging & dropping" to your hearts content in Visual Basic, you are
left with a static form. You can't easily add and remove controls as your
program executes. In stark contrast are the Dynamic Dialog Tools in
PowerBASIC. A set of language statements for creating your Graphical User
Interface. More importantly, DDT allows you to easily add, change, or
remove any control while your program is running. Your program can
display hundreds of different "looks" based on events that occur while
your program is running. All without megabytes of required external run-
time DLLs.

Like PB/CC, your PB/DLL code can access up to 2 gigabytes of memory, use
long filenames, and access Windows hardware devices like printers and
modems. Including easy access to the internet for TCP and UDP
communication.

PB/DLL includes two compilers, one for creating 16-bit code and one for
creating 32-bit code. Both compilers are able to produce both DLLs and
EXEs. PB/DLL is also a great complement to PB/CC, as it can compile DLLs
compatible with console applications.



Sun, 02 Jun 2002 03:00:00 GMT  
 Which compiler should you buy?
I will you tell why i develop a own compiler:

I miss the Assembler Output Option from PBDLL or PB at all.
I miss processor type optimation
I miss the support to create device drivers ( VXD, SYS )
I miss a Editor like VB has
I miss a Link Option for LIBS
I miss MultiCPU Support for NT
I miss Debuger Support ( i mean NOT that little )

Thats all in my Compiler includet for FREE
I will not start a war with other comercial Basic Compiler Developers, but i
am a SINGLE Developer, i have fun to develop this.

Best Regards
Michael Neitzel, Windows NT Filesystem Developer

---[ Basic Studio 2000 ]---

www.developerpro.cjb.net

###################################################

Quote:

>A question we often hear is "Which compiler should I buy?" The answer
>depends on what type of applications you need to create.  The following
>information should help you with that decision.

>If you have a question that is not answered here, please email our tech

>it for you.



Mon, 03 Jun 2002 03:00:00 GMT  
 Which compiler should you buy?
Goon on you Michael, you are doing a great job for a single-person
development team!  

That said, I must reply to your posting.  Saying that you "miss"
certain functions in PowerBASIC products that have never been
available gives the impression that the products have been
feature-reduced somehow is misleading at best,  especially when you
follow such statements with an "advert" for your own product.  

We certainly don't want to "start a war" (your words), but we have to
respond... it's only fair.

We still wish you luck and success with your product development!  No
hard feelings.

Quote:

>I miss the Assembler Output Option from PBDLL or PB at all.
>I miss processor type optimation
>I miss the support to create device drivers ( VXD, SYS )
>I miss a Editor like VB has
>I miss a Link Option for LIBS
>I miss MultiCPU Support for NT
>I miss Debuger Support ( i mean NOT that little )
>Thats all in my Compiler includet for FREE
>I will not start a war with other comercial Basic Compiler Developers, but i
>am a SINGLE Developer, i have fun to develop this.
>Best Regards
>Michael Neitzel, Windows NT Filesystem Developer


Lance
PowerBASIC Support

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
PowerBASIC, Inc.      | 800-780-7707 Sales | "We put the Power in Basic!"
316 Mid Valley Center | 831-659-8000 Voice | http://www.powerbasic.com



Tue, 04 Jun 2002 03:00:00 GMT  
 Which compiler should you buy?
Michael;

As far as I can see your Basic 2000 compiler is still just vaporware.

I applaud your efforts, but before you go comparing your compiler to PB, you
ought to have a working program first.

Also, your goals for a compiler sound a bit unrealistic since what you want
to accomplish (VB like visual design, etc.) will require 1000s of manhours
or programming.

At least PB has a working compiler (which works very well) and while you may
suceed in making your more effecient ina  few things, I doubt you will
easily match the overal quality of the PB compiler.

Compared to other compilers (VB, VC) PB is one of the most stable products I
have ever seen.

Quote:

>Goon on you Michael, you are doing a great job for a single-person
>development team!

>That said, I must reply to your posting.  Saying that you "miss"
>certain functions in PowerBASIC products that have never been
>available gives the impression that the products have been
>feature-reduced somehow is misleading at best,  especially when you
>follow such statements with an "advert" for your own product.

>We certainly don't want to "start a war" (your words), but we have to
>respond... it's only fair.

>We still wish you luck and success with your product development!  No
>hard feelings.


>>I miss the Assembler Output Option from PBDLL or PB at all.
>>I miss processor type optimation
>>I miss the support to create device drivers ( VXD, SYS )
>>I miss a Editor like VB has
>>I miss a Link Option for LIBS
>>I miss MultiCPU Support for NT
>>I miss Debuger Support ( i mean NOT that little )
>>Thats all in my Compiler includet for FREE
>>I will not start a war with other comercial Basic Compiler Developers, but
i
>>am a SINGLE Developer, i have fun to develop this.
>>Best Regards
>>Michael Neitzel, Windows NT Filesystem Developer

>Lance
>PowerBASIC Support

>-------------------------------------------------------------------------
>PowerBASIC, Inc.      | 800-780-7707 Sales | "We put the Power in Basic!"
>316 Mid Valley Center | 831-659-8000 Voice | http://www.powerbasic.com




Tue, 04 Jun 2002 03:00:00 GMT  
 Which compiler should you buy?

You mistake size for ability.  I have seen some truly fine software that was
developed by one or two people in a short amount of time. And that was long
prior to the conveniences of modern compilers and environments and the
availability of commercial libraries.  Michael may well achieve his goal.
However, lest he become another in a long string of vaporware vendors, he
might do as you suggest and not advertise until he can produce a product to
back up the words.

Scott


Quote:
> Michael;

> As far as I can see your Basic 2000 compiler is still just vaporware.

> I applaud your efforts, but before you go comparing your compiler to PB,
you
> ought to have a working program first.

> Also, your goals for a compiler sound a bit unrealistic since what you
want
> to accomplish (VB like visual design, etc.) will require 1000s of manhours
> or programming.

> At least PB has a working compiler (which works very well) and while you
may
> suceed in making your more effecient ina  few things, I doubt you will
> easily match the overal quality of the PB compiler.

> Compared to other compilers (VB, VC) PB is one of the most stable products
I
> have ever seen.


> >Goon on you Michael, you are doing a great job for a single-person
> >development team!

> >That said, I must reply to your posting.  Saying that you "miss"
> >certain functions in PowerBASIC products that have never been
> >available gives the impression that the products have been
> >feature-reduced somehow is misleading at best,  especially when you
> >follow such statements with an "advert" for your own product.

> >We certainly don't want to "start a war" (your words), but we have to
> >respond... it's only fair.

> >We still wish you luck and success with your product development!  No
> >hard feelings.


> >>I miss the Assembler Output Option from PBDLL or PB at all.
> >>I miss processor type optimation
> >>I miss the support to create device drivers ( VXD, SYS )
> >>I miss a Editor like VB has
> >>I miss a Link Option for LIBS
> >>I miss MultiCPU Support for NT
> >>I miss Debuger Support ( i mean NOT that little )
> >>Thats all in my Compiler includet for FREE
> >>I will not start a war with other comercial Basic Compiler Developers,
but
> i
> >>am a SINGLE Developer, i have fun to develop this.
> >>Best Regards
> >>Michael Neitzel, Windows NT Filesystem Developer

> >Lance
> >PowerBASIC Support

> >-------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >PowerBASIC, Inc.      | 800-780-7707 Sales | "We put the Power in Basic!"
> >316 Mid Valley Center | 831-659-8000 Voice | http://www.powerbasic.com




Tue, 04 Jun 2002 03:00:00 GMT  
 Which compiler should you buy?
I am a Compiler Developer since 18 years now.
One of my first ( good ) Projects was a Basic Compiler for the Amiga ( FBC
FastBasicCompiler )
For the PC i have written a C++ Compiler with FlowCharter, integrated
Assembler, Linker and IDE even this compiler can import and compile QBASIC
Source into Assembler. The Name is WARP C++. For 10 Years i had not Internet
Access or something, so only few people using this compiler, but a german
magazine wrote that Warp C is the best Freeware Dos Compiler available. This
was for 10 years. i have improved in programming, but my work ( Filesystem
Developing - Redirectors, Filter Drivers and so on ) still hard so i have
not each day time to programm the Basic Compiler now.

Here for all interested in the stats of Basic Compiler 2000:
* Editor ( VB-Like ) 100 procent done ( with syntax highlight, Resource +
Menu Editor + FlowCharter ) Downloadabe: YES
    ( VC 6)
* Runtime (RTL32.LIB) 100 procent done ( means all Asm-Functions of Basic
Functions for Win32 )     Downloadable: YES
    (VC 6)
* De{*filter*} 100 procent done ( you can create release and debug versions from
Basic Studio 2000 )       Downloadable: YES
    (VC 6)
* Compiler 85 procent done   ( Driver support for creating Device Drivers in
progress WITHOUT DDK !!!)
    ( PBDLL 5) yes... !
* Preprocessor nearly done, some bugs i will fix it next week
    ( PBDLL 5)
* Assembler, hm i must admit a clone of NASM not the same but i have taken
NASM Source to helping...
    ( C + Asm )
* Linker 100 procent done
    ( C + Asm )
* MMLIB in work ( MultiMedia Lib ) not realy necesarry, b/c Basic Studio
2000 can use OCX
    ( VC 6 )

AND THE BIGEST PROBLEM IS FIXED: i get in 2 weeks a own Server so ALL
DOWNLOADS will be available.

Best Regards
Michael Neitzel



Quote:

> You mistake size for ability.  I have seen some truly fine software that
was
> developed by one or two people in a short amount of time. And that was
long
> prior to the conveniences of modern compilers and environments and the
> availability of commercial libraries.  Michael may well achieve his goal.
> However, lest he become another in a long string of vaporware vendors, he
> might do as you suggest and not advertise until he can produce a product
to
> back up the words.

> Scott



> > Michael;

> > As far as I can see your Basic 2000 compiler is still just vaporware.

> > I applaud your efforts, but before you go comparing your compiler to PB,
> you
> > ought to have a working program first.

> > Also, your goals for a compiler sound a bit unrealistic since what you
> want
> > to accomplish (VB like visual design, etc.) will require 1000s of
manhours
> > or programming.

> > At least PB has a working compiler (which works very well) and while you
> may
> > suceed in making your more effecient ina  few things, I doubt you will
> > easily match the overal quality of the PB compiler.

> > Compared to other compilers (VB, VC) PB is one of the most stable
products
> I
> > have ever seen.


> > >Goon on you Michael, you are doing a great job for a single-person
> > >development team!

> > >That said, I must reply to your posting.  Saying that you "miss"
> > >certain functions in PowerBASIC products that have never been
> > >available gives the impression that the products have been
> > >feature-reduced somehow is misleading at best,  especially when you
> > >follow such statements with an "advert" for your own product.

> > >We certainly don't want to "start a war" (your words), but we have to
> > >respond... it's only fair.

> > >We still wish you luck and success with your product development!  No
> > >hard feelings.


> > >>I miss the Assembler Output Option from PBDLL or PB at all.
> > >>I miss processor type optimation
> > >>I miss the support to create device drivers ( VXD, SYS )
> > >>I miss a Editor like VB has
> > >>I miss a Link Option for LIBS
> > >>I miss MultiCPU Support for NT
> > >>I miss Debuger Support ( i mean NOT that little )
> > >>Thats all in my Compiler includet for FREE
> > >>I will not start a war with other comercial Basic Compiler Developers,
> but
> > i
> > >>am a SINGLE Developer, i have fun to develop this.
> > >>Best Regards
> > >>Michael Neitzel, Windows NT Filesystem Developer

> > >Lance
> > >PowerBASIC Support

>-------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > >PowerBASIC, Inc.      | 800-780-7707 Sales | "We put the Power in
Basic!"
> > >316 Mid Valley Center | 831-659-8000 Voice | http://www.*-*-*.com/




Wed, 05 Jun 2002 03:00:00 GMT  
 
 [ 6 post ] 

 Relevant Pages 

1. which compiler would you buy ?

2. Which PC compiler should I buy?

3. Which 32-bit compiler should I buy for my 486 ?

4. Urgent to buy S'87 compiler

5. I WANT TO BUY EIFFEL COMPILER FOR MsWindows

6. Old Clipper compilers bought/sold

7. Microfocus Cobol compiler for OS/2 wanted FAST (Buying)

8. Where to buy compiler

9. Which Compiler to buy

10. Buy C++ compiler, fly to Pluto

11. Buy Inexpensive PC (DOS or windows) cobol compiler

12. Should I buy a compiler?

 

 
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software