Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
KBasic & successors
118 views
Skip to first unread message
Auric__
Dec 11, 2011, 5:33:30 PM12/11/11
to
So, I happened to be looking at KBasic just now. Meh, never held much
interest for me, rubbed me wrong, etc.
But wait, what's this? "KBasic V2 has a new name: Q7Basic"
Well, now, let's have a look, shall we? Hmm, no links. Ah, Google, your
sweet, sweet evil has once again come to my rescue:
http://www.q7basic.org/
"Q7Basic is KBasic's successor."
Well, well, well, whaddya know? Let's try it out.
First things first: install KBasic so I can compare. Oddly enough, under
WinXP, KBasic wants to install to one of the "Application Data" directories
in my user profile. Odd. Well, changed that to Program Files and "Lead on,
MacDuff!" ...oh yeah, commercial product... trial... hm, okay, there's the
IDE.
Honestly, KBasic is pretty slow on my machine... but I'm willing to ignore
that; it's not a recent machine by any stretch of the imagination. Since
I'm using the trial version, I can't compile, and the interpreter is,
again, somewhat slow here. Shrug. I'm not reporting on KBasic, I'm
reporting on Q7Basic.
Okay, let's get Q7Basic installed! Uh oh, it's BETA. Well, I'll risk it FOR
SCIENCE!!! Or my own amusement, whatever. (I'm installing "Q7Basic for
Windows® 7/Vista/XP" marked "BETA 22-June-2011".)
The #1 requirement for Q7Basic is "Qt® SDK 2010.05 for Windows®". Luckily,
there's a link to download it right next to the Q7Basic download.
Unluckily, it's 322MB. Hope you're not on dial-up.
Once all that is installed, you have to point the IDE at the Qt install.
Not smart enough to dig the proper values out of the registry? Shrug. There
it is, let's go! (Interestingly, if you *don't* have the Qt SDK installed,
you get no form designer in the Q7Basic IDE.)
Oh, look, a MinGW backend! Well, it works for QB64, right? Sigh.
Beyond installing Q7Basic... well, I wish I could report success, I really
wish I could, because I've invested so much time, bandwidth, and disk
space... but I can't figure the damn language out. According to the docs,
the simple programs I tried *should* have worked. They certainly compiled,
but when I tried running them... nothing. They load, they unload, the end.
Even "Hello, world!" fails. Maybe the problem is with Q7Basic, maybe it's
the less-than-optimal docs, maybe it's somewhere in the *1.56GB* Qt
directory. (I *did* mention the enormous Qt download, right? Installed,
it's nearly 5x as big as the installer. My poor little Windows
partition...!)
If anyone else can get Q7Basic programs working, I'd be interesting in
hearing about it (specifically, how?), and opinions about the language,
compiler, etc.
A bit more poking around also reveals this:
http://www.objective-basic.com/
"Objective-Basic is a powerful BASIC programming language for Mac, which
is simple, intuitive and very easy to learn. It is similar to Visual
Basic® and Objective-C®."
"KBasic Software started development on Objective-Basic in 2006."
I must regretfully recommend *NOT* using the free version of Objective-
Basic, due to this peculiar licensing restriction:
"You get the product for free, but if you develop products using
Objective-Basic you must release them free of charge and under the GPL
Version 3 license as published by the Free Software Foundation."
...what? Am I really seeing a compiler that tells me what license MY OWN
SOURCE CODE *must* be licensed under, and how much I'm *allowed* to charge
for it? They can go to hell. The paid-for version *probably* doesn't have
that requirement, but really, the fact that it is ANYWHERE makes me
veeeeeeeeery unlikely to use it for *anything*. (Of course, the fact that I
don't own a modern Mac also has something to do with that...) Hell, even
GCC specifically says that you can license your programs however you
choose, and it's from the Free Software Foundation, THE CREATORS OF THE
GPL!
(I typically use either GPLv2-or-newer-at-your-option or Public Domain, and
I have yet to charge for a program I've written, but that's *my* choice,
dammit!)
--
A dark black past is my most valued possession.
interest for me, rubbed me wrong, etc.
But wait, what's this? "KBasic V2 has a new name: Q7Basic"
Well, now, let's have a look, shall we? Hmm, no links. Ah, Google, your
sweet, sweet evil has once again come to my rescue:
http://www.q7basic.org/
"Q7Basic is KBasic's successor."
Well, well, well, whaddya know? Let's try it out.
First things first: install KBasic so I can compare. Oddly enough, under
WinXP, KBasic wants to install to one of the "Application Data" directories
in my user profile. Odd. Well, changed that to Program Files and "Lead on,
MacDuff!" ...oh yeah, commercial product... trial... hm, okay, there's the
IDE.
Honestly, KBasic is pretty slow on my machine... but I'm willing to ignore
that; it's not a recent machine by any stretch of the imagination. Since
I'm using the trial version, I can't compile, and the interpreter is,
again, somewhat slow here. Shrug. I'm not reporting on KBasic, I'm
reporting on Q7Basic.
Okay, let's get Q7Basic installed! Uh oh, it's BETA. Well, I'll risk it FOR
SCIENCE!!! Or my own amusement, whatever. (I'm installing "Q7Basic for
Windows® 7/Vista/XP" marked "BETA 22-June-2011".)
The #1 requirement for Q7Basic is "Qt® SDK 2010.05 for Windows®". Luckily,
there's a link to download it right next to the Q7Basic download.
Unluckily, it's 322MB. Hope you're not on dial-up.
Once all that is installed, you have to point the IDE at the Qt install.
Not smart enough to dig the proper values out of the registry? Shrug. There
it is, let's go! (Interestingly, if you *don't* have the Qt SDK installed,
you get no form designer in the Q7Basic IDE.)
Oh, look, a MinGW backend! Well, it works for QB64, right? Sigh.
Beyond installing Q7Basic... well, I wish I could report success, I really
wish I could, because I've invested so much time, bandwidth, and disk
space... but I can't figure the damn language out. According to the docs,
the simple programs I tried *should* have worked. They certainly compiled,
but when I tried running them... nothing. They load, they unload, the end.
Even "Hello, world!" fails. Maybe the problem is with Q7Basic, maybe it's
the less-than-optimal docs, maybe it's somewhere in the *1.56GB* Qt
directory. (I *did* mention the enormous Qt download, right? Installed,
it's nearly 5x as big as the installer. My poor little Windows
partition...!)
If anyone else can get Q7Basic programs working, I'd be interesting in
hearing about it (specifically, how?), and opinions about the language,
compiler, etc.
A bit more poking around also reveals this:
http://www.objective-basic.com/
"Objective-Basic is a powerful BASIC programming language for Mac, which
is simple, intuitive and very easy to learn. It is similar to Visual
Basic® and Objective-C®."
"KBasic Software started development on Objective-Basic in 2006."
I must regretfully recommend *NOT* using the free version of Objective-
Basic, due to this peculiar licensing restriction:
"You get the product for free, but if you develop products using
Objective-Basic you must release them free of charge and under the GPL
Version 3 license as published by the Free Software Foundation."
...what? Am I really seeing a compiler that tells me what license MY OWN
SOURCE CODE *must* be licensed under, and how much I'm *allowed* to charge
for it? They can go to hell. The paid-for version *probably* doesn't have
that requirement, but really, the fact that it is ANYWHERE makes me
veeeeeeeeery unlikely to use it for *anything*. (Of course, the fact that I
don't own a modern Mac also has something to do with that...) Hell, even
GCC specifically says that you can license your programs however you
choose, and it's from the Free Software Foundation, THE CREATORS OF THE
GPL!
(I typically use either GPLv2-or-newer-at-your-option or Public Domain, and
I have yet to charge for a program I've written, but that's *my* choice,
dammit!)
--
A dark black past is my most valued possession.
steve
Dec 12, 2011, 3:54:16 PM12/12/11
to
Most interesting.
I must concur with your overall opinion.
I must concur with your overall opinion.
0 new messages