BASIC's Comparison Matrix: ideas for content?

[CharlieJV]

If GW-BASIC is the target goal, for me what would kick ass would be for your BAM to be able to run Akalabeth, graphics and all!

Play the Apple II version at archive.org.

The GW-BASIC port by Oscar Toledog:  https://nanochess.org/akalabeth.html

BAM version, tweaked just enough to get (seemingly) working:

• view the source code
  
• run the program
  

I might create a version tweaked to my liking.  At least visual cues on the screen to know what key presses do what.

[madscijr]

If GW-BASIC is the target goal, for me what would kick ass would be for your BAM to be able to run Akalabeth, graphics and all!

Play the Apple II version at archive.org.

The GW-BASIC port by Oscar Toledog:  https://nanochess.org/akalabeth.html

BAM version, tweaked just enough to get (seemingly) working:

• view the source code
  
• run the program
  

I might create a version tweaked to my liking.  At least visual cues on the screen to know what key presses do what.

As is, Akalabeth does run under QB64... I was going to eventually tweak it to replace the graphics with tile graphics taken from Ultima 1, and tweak the controls to match the standard keys the Ultima games used. Another project for the backburner! 

Speaking of TiddlyWiki and its features, running BASIC code on the Web, and using it to script TiddlyWiki, here is a thread where we were discussing adding tagging to these forums. I was musing how adding TiddlyWiki-like features and the ability to program custom plugins in BASIC to these forums could make them all that more useful... 

• https://qb64phoenix.com/forum/showthread...36#pid2536
  

[CharlieJV]

If GW-BASIC is the target goal, for me what would kick ass would be for your BAM to be able to run Akalabeth, graphics and all!

Play the Apple II version at archive.org.

The GW-BASIC port by Oscar Toledog:  https://nanochess.org/akalabeth.html

BAM version, tweaked just enough to get (seemingly) working:

• view the source code
  
• run the program
  

I might create a version tweaked to my liking.  At least visual cues on the screen to know what key presses do what.

As is, Akalabeth does run under QB64... I was going to eventually tweak it to replace the graphics with tile graphics taken from Ultima 1, and tweak the controls to match the standard keys the Ultima games used. Another project for the backburner! 

Speaking of TiddlyWiki and its features, running BASIC code on the Web, and using it to script TiddlyWiki, here is a thread where we were discussing adding tagging to these forums. I was musing how adding TiddlyWiki-like features and the ability to program custom plugins in BASIC to these forums could make them all that more useful... 

• https://qb64phoenix.com/forum/showthread...36#pid2536
  

Not saying it can't be done, but BASIC as an alternative to javascript (or other) for scripting on the web, I'm not sure how feasible that is.

The farthest I've taken BASIC scripting for TiddlyWiki:  TiddlyWiki put something in browser local/session storage;  BASIC program running in iframe acts on whatever TiddlyWiki put in local/session storage; BASIC program puts results in local/session storage; TiddlyWiki gets whatever BASIC program put in local/session storage.

That works great, but isn't the traditional kind of client-side scripting we find in web pages.

Then there's the kind of scripting that happens (CGI-scripting) on the web server side.  That is way out of my pay band.

[madscijr]

Not saying it can't be done, but BASIC as an alternative to javascript (or other) for scripting on the web, I'm not sure how feasible that is.

I think where it breaks down is that the DOM is an object model, and QB64 ain't OO.
Apart from that one giant disconnect, the difference between BASIC and JavaScript is mainly syntax.

The farthest I've taken BASIC scripting for TiddlyWiki: 
TiddlyWiki put something in browser local/session storage; 
BASIC program running in iframe acts on whatever TiddlyWiki put in local/session storage;
BASIC program puts results in local/session storage;
TiddlyWiki gets whatever BASIC program put in local/session storage.
That works great, but isn't the traditional kind of client-side scripting we find in web pages.

So you're saying that BASIC is limited in outputting results to TiddlyWiki via session storage?
I'm not sure I see an issue there. As long as BASIC can create & read tiddlers, draw stuff to the screen,
and accept I/O from a keyboard/mouse, it's good to go.
Unless you're talking about enabling it to communicate over the network via sockets?

Then there's the kind of scripting that happens (CGI-scripting) on the web server side.  That is way out of my pay band.

Well, if the QB64PE team adds commands for HTTP(S), the server-side CGI scripting could be done by desktop QB64...

[mnrvovrfc]

I added a few extra BASIC dialects, added an "Advanced Features" grouping of categories, and some (see attachment) cosmetic changes.

Oh noes you added Purebasic. I actually bought that, while it was about v4.30, and it was very buggy. Could never use it except to do pretty Windows GUI's. For games, graphics and sound QB64 was always my friend. I just downloaded Purebasic v6.00 because I could but I just don't have an use for that trash any longer. Comes "ready to use" on Windows but cannot even use it on Linux because it requires too many third-party and not enough "libre" dependencies, for its high price tag it's not worth it, on Slackware, Ubuntu or anything else. At v4.6 and Windows10 (should have been for Vista and later) it sucked I couldn't use the IDE debugger at all; when a program was compiled with debug information and run, the system invoked the standalone debugger as well. I had enough using it at v5.21 LTS (in 2014) on an old Toshiba laptop with 32-bit WindowsXP and the stupid IDE text editor, not even slicker than QB64 kept suddenly crashing so I lost my work.

[CharlieJV]

I added a few extra BASIC dialects, added an "Advanced Features" grouping of categories, and some (see attachment) cosmetic changes.

Oh noes you added Purebasic. I actually bought that, while it was about v4.30, and it was very buggy. Could never use it except to do pretty Windows GUI's. For games, graphics and sound QB64 was always my friend. I just downloaded Purebasic v6.00 because I could but I just don't have an use for that trash any longer. Comes "ready to use" on Windows but cannot even use it on Linux because it requires too many third-party and not enough "libre" dependencies, for its high price tag it's not worth it, on Slackware, Ubuntu or anything else. At v4.6 and Windows10 (should have been for Vista and later) it sucked I couldn't use the IDE debugger at all; when a program was compiled with debug information and run, the system invoked the standalone debugger as well. I had enough using it at v5.21 LTS (in 2014) on an old Toshiba laptop with 32-bit WindowsXP and the stupid IDE text editor, not even slicker than QB64 kept suddenly crashing so I lost my work.

I really don't want to get into discussions about non-QB64PE BASIC implementations here on the QB64 website.

The little bit of discussion about my own implementation, I didn't mind too much because I would like it to be, eventually, a little semi-compatible sidekick for QB64PE (as a portable source code repository for small snippets of code that can be programmed/tested.)

That Comparison Matrix is for all BASIC implementations, regardless of popularity and somewhat flexible on "purity", because "purity" is subjective.  However folk feel about any BASIC implementation, I won't be putting that in the matrix.

All of that aside, I did post about the Comparison Matrix here with the goal of getting any kind of accurate information from members that does QB64PE full justice.

[vividpixel]

[...]I just downloaded Purebasic v6.00 because I could but I just don't have an use for that trash any longer. [...]cannot even use it on Linux because it requires too many third-party and not enough "libre" dependencies, for its high price tag it's not worth it, on Slackware, Ubuntu or anything else.[...]I had enough using it at v5.21 LTS (in 2014) on an old Toshiba laptop with 32-bit WindowsXP[...]kept suddenly crashing so I lost my work.

I agree that the PureBasic installation on Linux should be simplified with a script like QB64(PE) uses, but with a few copy-paste commands it's not tough to install the dependencies and be ready to code. As for the crashing, no issues on Ubuntu nor OS X for me, but I never used PBasic prior to v6. In fairness, a lot will change in 8 years with any technology, and I'm sure QB64 has also come a long way in that time. The affordability part is subjective, but there's no argument that anything at a cost will never be cheaper than free, so there's a win for QB64(PE). I think the paid cross-platform competitor would be Xojo, which costs $399 USD for 12 months of updates to run on Win+Mac+Linux. PBasic's perpetual license then makes a lot more sense: $84 USD for all 3 major platforms plus Linux ARM, along with updates for life. My only disappointment is for Android, iOS, and browser support, you then need SpiderBasic, which uses the same subscription model as Xojo though at a much lower cost.

I think this is a really cool comparison table you've created, @CharlieJV! In the never-ending quest to find the best language for XYZ purpose, I'm sure many will appreciate it. I've been playing with my TheC64 recently, so perhaps BASIC 2.0 / C64 BASIC has a place on the list?

[mnrvovrfc]

^
|
Welcome to the forums.

[CharlieJV]

I think this is a really cool comparison table you've created, @CharlieJV! In the never-ending quest to find the best language for XYZ purpose, I'm sure many will appreciate it. I've been playing with my TheC64 recently, so perhaps BASIC 2.0 / C64 BASIC has a place on the list?

Thanks!  That's a great idea.  There's a device we can buy today with BASIC from yesteryear.

Funny, I've been debating about getting a C64-Mini for the last week or so.  (Seemingly impossible to get TheC64 in Canada.)