QB64-PE v3.14.1 is now released

[RhoSigma]

Due to a serious bug in _SNDOPEN (reported here) we once again decided to release a quick bugfix version, rather than letting this bug lurking around for another 2-3 month until our next regular release.
Visit GitHub for download.

Enhancements

• #531, #532 - Extended `ON ERROR GOTO` syntax - @RhoSigma-QB64
    - _NEWHANDLER and _LASTHANDLER keywords allow for easy overriding and restoring of error handlers
  

Bug Fixes

• #529 - Fixed file extension filters for kdialog (_OPEN/_SAVEFILEDIALOG) - @flukiluke
  
• #531 - Fixed auto-generated help pages (F1) for user functions which use arrays as arguments - @RhoSigma-QB64
    - reported here https://discord.com/channels/97538191235...9387418676
  
• #533 - Fixed a serious bug in _SNDOPEN when used with the "memory" load feature - @a740g
    - reported here https://qb64phoenix.com/forum/showthread.php?tid=2982
  

Full Changelog: https://github.com/QB64-Phoenix-Edition/......v3.14.1

Developer Notice
We are probably going to deprecate the $NOPREFIX feature sooner or later in the future. Nothing is finally decided yet, but as we have more and more efforts to keep new things compatible with $NOPREFIX it's a decision we've to make. Especially CONST and the pre-compiler metacommands show bad interactions with $NOPREFIX over and over again and make implementations overcomplicated.

With this notice we wish to get your attention for the issue and recommend to adapt your coding habits to no longer rely on $NOPREFIX right now, so it becomes an easy transition when we finally drop it.

[Kernelpanic]

I'm always amazed by this enthusiasm... it shows what people can do when they're convinced of something.

I don't know much about the formats for sounds and the like, but why aren't mpp4 and flv supported? Is that particularly complicated?

[zaadstra]

Thank you for this quick fix!

Luckily I did not run into one of the bugs yet.

[a740g]

I'm always amazed by this enthusiasm... it shows what people can do when they're convinced of something.

I don't know much about the formats for sounds and the like, but why aren't mpp4 and flv supported? Is that particularly complicated?

Thanks! 

mp4 is not an open format. It is covered by various patents. flv is a Flash Video container format. But we do not support video formats yet.

Probably we can re-visit MP4 when the patents expire.

[BDS107]

Thanks for this quick fix!!! 

Hopefully we can read and use PSF fonts in a next update (see here).

[Kernelpanic]

mp4 is not an open format. It is covered by various patents. flv is a Flash Video container format. But we do not support video formats yet.

Probably we can re-visit MP4 when the patents expire.

Thanks for the tip. Do you have any more detailed information about the license fees for MP4?

I searched the internet for information about license fees for the MPEG-4 (MP4) format, and in my opinion, non-commercial use is free, especially since the Fraunhofer Institute for Telecommunications was involved in the development. Non-commercial applies to the QB64 project. The use of MP4 would made available only.

I found the following License fees:
In order to be able to use and distribute H.264, browser and operating system providers, hardware manufacturers and anyone who charges money for content on the web already have to pay license fees. For operators of non-commercial websites, the MPEG Licensing Association, which represents 26 companies with over 1000 patents relating to H.264, extended the rights to free use until 2015 in February last year. In August, the rights administrator then promised not to charge any fees for private use after that.

This also assumes commercial use:
How do you calculate the license fee?
License fee = payment to licensor/product sales price. The following applies: ROS = license fee on the sales price. LSEP = licensor's share of the company's profits.

And what about the open source implementation of the H.264 (MPEG-4 AVC) codec?

Where End User pays for MPEG-4 Video

H.264/MPEG-4 AVC

[bplus]

Better late than never, I have 3.14.1 working on my system today and notice allot of changes in Dialogs.

One thing new I don't like is not being able to click a highlighted file to open it. Apparently it needs to have a very fast double click ie in no time the 2nd click is made.

The same goes for paths, you can't click a highlited path to start down it.

I don't see any advantage to this change?

[RhoSigma]

Better late than never, I have 3.14.1 working on my system today and notice allot of changes in Dialogs.

One thing new I don't like is not being able to click a highlighted file to open it. Apparently it needs to have a very fast double click ie in no time the 2nd click is made.

The same goes for paths, you can't click a highlited path to start down it.

I don't see any advantage to this change?

Sorry to hear of your problems, most of the Dialog changes were made in v3.14.0 already. However, the changes only took place in the Options Dialogs. The Open/Save Dialogs (both, the legacy and the GUI ones) haven't been touched in any way.

I can also not see any misbehavior here on my system, the Dialogs work just as normal as they always did for me. I'm also not sure if it was ever possible to open a highlighted file with just one more click. With an <Enter> press yes, but not with a single click, but maybe I got your describtion wrong here.

That said, I'm sorry I can't be more helpful here, but as mentioned the Open/Save dialog are unchanged and I also see no difference in its behavior.

[Cobalt]

I'm not experiencing this either. No issue with clicking highlighted objects. and no problem with the speed of double clicking. there might be a slight difference between the legacy dialog and GUI dialogs but, it is negligible.

[bplus]

No it's not in the Dialogs for coding it's the IDE File Open... Menu.

Click a file or a path, it's highlighted. Click again the highlighted item, nutt'n! It use to act the same as double clicking.