September 23, 2017, 05:23:36 PM

Author Topic: PureBasic anyone?  (Read 415 times)

Offline dawlane

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 67
Re: PureBasic anyone?
« Reply #15 on: September 13, 2017, 09:23:56 AM »
At the moment there is no perfect cross-platform solution out there. The best you'll get is possibly Qt, but you have to do everything the Qt way. That includes working with the licence restrictions and choose either using C++ or go Python.

When it comes to Lazarus and OS X. I've found that using the Qt version from fink appears to be the best option and if I remember you can compile 64bit GUI's with it.

Online MikeHart

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 283
  • Jack of all trades
    • Whiteskygames
Re: PureBasic anyone?
« Reply #16 on: September 13, 2017, 09:26:49 AM »
When it comes to Lazarus and OS X. I've found that using the Qt version from fink appears to be the best option and if I remember you can compile 64bit GUI's with it.
The other day I installed 1.8 on Windows. Checkmarked the QT gui set for a project. Guess what, it tells me to build a qt related dll first. NOPE! They could have shipped it with it already.
Current game in development: Card Rogues
Also maintaining: Cerberus X
My Twitter account: http://www.twitter.com/mhartlef

Offline dawlane

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 67
Re: PureBasic anyone?
« Reply #17 on: September 13, 2017, 10:16:50 AM »
Yes, when it comes to Lazarus you do have to build a number of things if you want to use them and clear cut documentation is rare; makes BRL's docs look professional.
I most cases you just need to install the lpk, compile then install which I believe you have to do with QtPas4/5. I've got 1.8.0 RC4 installed so I will have a go at getting Qt5 up and working with it.


Lazarus Qt on Linux has two issues:
  • Qt4 has a rendering problem with Combo box.
  • You cannot have the required Qt5.6 on any release below Ububtu 16.10
So you have to use the GTK+2 version. GTK+3 is nowhere near ready.


Think I should start another topic for Lazarus.

Offline Hotshot

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 5
Re: PureBasic anyone?
« Reply #18 on: September 13, 2017, 10:38:58 AM »
I used it sometime but I hate start and stop drawing commands thought!

Offline Qube

  • Administrator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 300
Re: PureBasic anyone?
« Reply #19 on: September 19, 2017, 07:01:13 AM »
I purchased PureBasic about 8 hours ago and have had a quick play...

Am I missing something or does it actually spit out super speedy code and performance?. From the quick play about I've done so far it seems bloomin fast. From pure logic to 3D and pushing 1000's of 2D sprites around it all appears to run at crazy speeds.

For those more familiar with PureBasic, what am I missing? as from early tests it appears pretty decent.
Until the next time...

Online MikeHart

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 283
  • Jack of all trades
    • Whiteskygames
Re: PureBasic anyone?
« Reply #20 on: September 19, 2017, 07:57:26 AM »
I am only touching the gui stuff to write a code editor. It suits that job pretty well. Game wise i would say the biggest lack is a decent sized game related community. For the 3d part it utilizes the Ogre 3D engine.


Updates are rather rare. But it seems to be supported. Why did you got it? What made you curious?
Current game in development: Card Rogues
Also maintaining: Cerberus X
My Twitter account: http://www.twitter.com/mhartlef

Online Steve Elliott

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 386
Re: PureBasic anyone?
« Reply #21 on: September 19, 2017, 08:59:42 AM »
Yes Pure BASIC is very fast.

The syntax, lack of OOP features and the community aren't really interested in games put me off.

Offline dawlane

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 67
Re: PureBasic anyone?
« Reply #22 on: September 19, 2017, 09:11:41 AM »
Quote
Am I missing something or does it actually spit out super speedy code and performance?.
At a guess the super speedy code and performance would be down to using pre-compiled, optimised libraries and output to fasm assembly.

Purebasic's community game wise isn't that big and for a cross platform tool, the members are more obsessed with posting topics/examples on Windows than any of the other target operating systems.

Offline sphinx

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 120
    • Ancientsoft
Re: PureBasic anyone?
« Reply #23 on: September 19, 2017, 10:39:51 AM »
PureBasic is great, at least the developer is enhancing since it was ever released!
Kind regards,
Maher F. Farag
www.ancientsoft.com
www.osakit.com

Offline Qube

  • Administrator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 300
Re: PureBasic anyone?
« Reply #24 on: September 19, 2017, 06:22:38 PM »
Quote
Game wise i would say the biggest lack is a decent sized game related community.
I noticed that the community is more towards apps but I'm not too worried about that.

Quote
Updates are rather rare. But it seems to be supported. Why did you got it? What made you curious?
I've been curious about it for years but I think years and years ago that the 2D side was not great and pretty slow ( I seem to remember that ).

I started looking at it again about two weeks ago and bought a license yesterday. First play about shows it's very fast but I was wondering if there was some massive gotcha in regards to it's gaming abilities ( I know it does not support mobile ). I also like that is has cross platform for GUI apps.
Until the next time...

Offline sphinx

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 120
    • Ancientsoft
Re: PureBasic anyone?
« Reply #25 on: September 19, 2017, 07:11:13 PM »
It has some good GUI builder tools but it could be even better it it has Firefly Visual Designer as PowerBasic and FreeBasic have!

It is one of the best GUI I've ever seen that's similar to Visual Basic for Event Driven Programming model.
Kind regards,
Maher F. Farag
www.ancientsoft.com
www.osakit.com