Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
QB successors
I'm interested to know what are (or people think) are the closet successors to QB. Obviously Visual Basic (VB) is the natural extension of it by Microsoft, and FreeBASIC (FB) started as one but there are others and I'm interested to know of people's experiences with them. I've used both VB and FB but neither have felt as comfortable as QB, I think I miss QB's IDE the most.
I would suggest you to make a Poll of this post.
MY QBASIC'S PAGE                                                  I ONLY USE WINDOWS 98SE
THere's alot of good stuff in the QB IDE it'self yes, the way it finishes and corrects some of the common mistakes for one thing, how it adds all the declares needed.  Really great stuff.  I don't know if there's a successor to that kind of environment yet. 

AT that point, an IDE made to work the QB's IDE did (or vb-dos's IDE too, I think would be a good thing.  I mean whether it's a text based interface or GUI based, if it helps the language syntax complete itself like the QB ide's did, that's good no matter how different a language might be. ;-).  Ass far as language goes, I would dare to say that FreeBasic (with the -lang qb option) and Power Basic (console compiler) would be better qb like languages than VB itself. as far as syntax goes, but they're there not 100% perfect (they can't be because of too much 16bit based dependencies of QB), just closer to QB than VB.

Now, a QB or VB-DOS like IDE for FB that works with FB  like QB and VB-DOS IDE's work with their language respective languages, I think, would be a great help and a great boost.  And could probably even compensate for some of the discrepencies between the languages.  Because QB is not"just"  about the language (sure it's most important but not the only reason people chose the language), it's about the environment too and how both of them help you make a program. 

IF it was just about the language,  PowerBasic offered more data types, pointers, inline assembly, and many other features that would have made it more popular than QB as far as the language goes (back in the DOS versions of PB). But the PB IDE just doesn't do what QB's IDE does with the language.  And that cost it it's popularity.

But PB is a compiled language, not pseudo compiled / interpreted like QB's language is, so it wasn't that obvious to make as good an IDE as QB.  Same thing for freebasic.  You'd almost have ot write a freebasic interpreter and that interpreter would have to follow FB's syntax closely on every release of Freebasic.  So to make that interpreter, might be a good idea to wait until the language is stable enough  (as in doesn't get changed anymore from a language perspective) then it might be possible to make an IDE that can work with the language atleast some. 
hen they say it can't be done, THAT's when they call me ;-).

[Image: kaffee.gif]
[Image: mystikshadows.png]

need hosting:
All about ASCII:
I don't  have the concept "QB successors", but that's another subject.

As re: Visual Basic. I like and use that very often, but not as a successor to QB but another language to attack a different problem.

In QB, the problem is how to write neat programs that overcome the limitations and thus exercise your brain. In VB, the problem is to make some application you need with the minimum brain-strain. Ideally there would be an API for all possible contingencies. BORING, but necessary.

But the real reason I butted in here is to report that VB of old is being replaced by VB-Net (if M$ has their way) and NOTHING IS COMPATIBLE. So forget everything you ever knew about VB. Sad

I've never used an IDE more comfortable than QuickBasics. It helped me write programs faster.

A new FREE basic compiler came out, called Emergence Basic, which I'm going to try when I can.

I agree 100% with wildcard, it's all about the IDE.  No language has ever felt as comfortable or easy as QBasic, because their IDEs are not as simple, functional and polished.  The same goes for the structure and formatting of QBasic commands -- arguably, the simplest and most straightforward of any dialect of BASIC.  QB uses simple, real world language, and it's much easier to learn and understand QB code than just about any follow-up language.

This topic would actually make a really good QB Express article.  Anyone interested in writing up something on the subject?
Pete's QB Site:
Mac: Pete and Dav understand what I mean, when I said QB successor. I've not had as much fun messing around in any programming language/environment as I've had with QB. I think the combination of the IDE and the easy access of the language really made it for me.

I think interpreters/compilers for BASIC really need an easy language set up and importantly a good IDE. I know just writing an interpreter/compiler or IDE is difficult but when two good ones come together it really makes something special happen, well at least in my eyes.
hmm, not to be a noncomformist but I think language has nothing to do with the IDE. I never used qbasics IDE except for the compile function and anything necessary to access all my subs and stuff. I would just as soon code in notepad if the tabs would be persistent. The real important thing is the logic, and for that matter any language with significant features and optimization and intuitive enough syntax is good enough for me. I don't think your abstract mind should be so tied to the ide and language you are using...
[Image: freebasic.png]
I found the QB IDE had a load of excellent features, partly being interpreted. Like instant watch on variables, excellent help file integration. The immeditate section was always useful as from a basic calculator to testing short bits of code. Also the way it handled functions and subs was really good. I've not used many other compilers or environments but QB and its IDE is still the most fun for me for the above reasons and more.
I'm currently using Blitzplus for the very reason wildcard and others loved the qbide so much.  It's just really easy and straight forward to use and it has one of the best help setups I can think of.  The language is also very streamlined and has everything needed to make 2d games and small gui apps.  I had stuff bouncing around on the screen minutes.  Programming has actually become fun for a change  :o .

I also took quick look at emergence basic Dav mentioned.  It's built on NASM (netwide assembler) and looks really good.  I'm actually pretty amazed with it, because it blows most of the pay basics out there out of the water.  It has built in DX, Gui, sound and joystick functions, and a lot of c type stuff such as pointers and classes as well.  The IDE is really clean and supports modules.  It's also loaded with help files and documentation (a big round of applause to the developers for that).  This is defiantly one to look out for.  It might even be a better free basic than freebasic!
Formerly C of

Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)