December 04, 2020, 02:48:35 PM

Author Topic: Next version number  (Read 706 times)

Offline chrisws

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 61
    • SmallBASIC
Next version number
« on: June 14, 2020, 11:54:47 AM »
One of the many podcasts I like to listen to is "This Week in Linux".

https://tuxdigital.com/thisweekinlinux/

In the past couple of episodes, he mentions long term projects that are stuck with a 0.n.n version number.

So instead of calling the next version of SmallBASIC 0.12.19, I'm considering making the first digit > 0.

Calling it 1.0 doesn't seem right. But then I thought, how about 20.0, is that too pretentious? The project has been around for about that many years.

What do you think?

Offline bplus

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 147
Re: Next version number
« Reply #1 on: June 14, 2020, 05:08:26 PM »
? "SmallBASIC " + (right("0.12.19", 5))

i.e. just drop the "0.", that will keep continuity with the older versions.

Offline chrisws

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 61
    • SmallBASIC
Re: Next version number
« Reply #2 on: June 16, 2020, 09:24:41 AM »
? "SmallBASIC " + (right("0.12.19", 5))

i.e. just drop the "0.", that will keep continuity with the older versions.

I like :)

I've been (very) slowly working from this list: https://github.com/smallbasic/SmallBASIC/issues

Hopefully I've captured everything that's been discussed in this forum.

Cheers,
Chris

Offline bplus

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 147
Re: Next version number
« Reply #3 on: June 16, 2020, 03:41:41 PM »
@chisws

Man, If you can get 64 bit working through the Tabbed Editor...  :)

(Here I just vent, if you don't need that don't worry about it, but it is feedback from one user / fan)
Very frustrating for me personally is the complete closing of SmallBASIC when I hit the top right X box.
I am in habit of writing a line testing editing or writing the next. In QB64, I have to close the Run \ "Output window" before (well not actually, it's just that I don't need 10 different versions running at same time...) before going back to editor. I know the way back for SB is just a right mouse click and then another (with built in editor), it's just not habit. It is handy to have output window there while making edits. What makes it super frustrating is when I accidentally X out of a run the code hasn't been saved, sometimes I might get a warning about save but I have lost so much that I have to go back and write again ugggh. Do that twice in a row and well... it's not fun! Sure it's my problem, it's also my choice which Basic I pick to work and thank goodness there are still good choices one can make, none are perfect. When I first started SB you had tabbed file editor and I dropped my search for better Basic but I wonder if I encountered SB later with the built-in editor? Would I even be here now? probably not.

Offline Aurel

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 191
    • AurelSoft
Re: Next version number
« Reply #4 on: June 16, 2020, 09:23:03 PM »
Very frustrating for me personally
oh no  ;D

Offline chrisws

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 61
    • SmallBASIC
Re: Next version number
« Reply #5 on: June 17, 2020, 10:32:42 AM »
@chisws

Man, If you can get 64 bit working through the Tabbed Editor...  :)

(Here I just vent, if you don't need that don't worry about it, but it is feedback from one user / fan)
Very frustrating for me personally is the complete closing of SmallBASIC when I hit the top right X box.
I am in habit of writing a line testing editing or writing the next. In QB64, I have to close the Run \ "Output window" before (well not actually, it's just that I don't need 10 different versions running at same time...) before going back to editor. I know the way back for SB is just a right mouse click and then another (with built in editor), it's just not habit. It is handy to have output window there while making edits. What makes it super frustrating is when I accidentally X out of a run the code hasn't been saved, sometimes I might get a warning about save but I have lost so much that I have to go back and write again ugggh. Do that twice in a row and well... it's not fun! Sure it's my problem, it's also my choice which Basic I pick to work and thank goodness there are still good choices one can make, none are perfect. When I first started SB you had tabbed file editor and I dropped my search for better Basic but I wonder if I encountered SB later with the built-in editor? Would I even be here now? probably not.

Are you talking about the fltk version or the sdl version?

In the sdl version clicking [X] does function the same as typing Control + b

I'll try to include a 64 bit build of the fltk version in the next release.

Cheers,
Chris


Offline bplus

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 147
Re: Next version number
« Reply #6 on: June 17, 2020, 04:47:28 PM »
Quote
Are you talking about the fltk version or the sdl version?

I am really talking about editors.
I was talking favorably for/about the FLTK version editor from 2014 when I first discovered SB, with the tabbed editor that you have brought back and whining about the built-in editor with Sdl? of later year. Sdl probably had many graphics advantages and the built-in editor was certainly an interesting novelty but... ;)

A 64 bit version would mean not only a return but an advancement from FLTK of 2014. With that, you could edit and run by tabbing the window along with tabbing to help, it was/is again nice! One less hurdle for newbies as well.

Yeah, sorta see myself as defender of newbies, seems to me as a programming language that it is Basic's niche, after all the B in Basic does stand for Beginner's. Add all the bells and whistles you like in your Basic but keep it easy for Beginners to Edit and Run their novice programs. That is where, IMO, JB/LB blew it with beginners, there is steep learning curve to just setup a graphics Window or eventually understand all nuances or options made with Template setup for graphics window and syntax for those graphics windows isn't as easy as QB was/is and SB was/is. With JB/LB without window setup, you can only run a B&W very long scrolling "console" screen called mainwin but no color, lines, boxes or circles and no INKEY$ (but you can run multiple windows in one program, I think that was the trade off decision Carl made long ago with his Basic branch). Does Python (a supposedly beginner's PL) have that? no, another hurdle to setup graphics.

 

SimplePortal 2.3.6 © 2008-2014, SimplePortal