InterviewSolution
Saved Bookmarks
InterviewSolution
| 1. |
Solve : GW-Basic without 60k memory restriction? |
|
Answer» Anyone know of an alternative to GW-Basic (Line Number Programming) that is not restricted to maximum program memory size of 60k, that is still same language with line numbers used? The QuickBasic Interpreter allows for progs up to 160k before the need to use other commands which can increase that considerably. QuickBasic 4.5 is reckoned to be the best release, it's also the last release. QuickBasic Professional Development System 7.1 was actually the last release, and IMO was the best, simply because it's so much more powerful then QB 4.5. In fact, it's the same as Visual Basic for DOS, without the ability to create forms. QBASIC however would be an excellent alternative.I like QB 4.5 and still use it. Here is a site that claisms to have both versions BC mentions. http://www.qbcafe.net/qbc/english/download/compiler/qbasic_compiler.shtml I have not tried that site. If it works for you, please lets us know.Quote from: BC_P QuickBasic Professional Development System 7.1 was actually the last release Basic PDS 7.1 is not Quickbasic, despite some sites claiming to have QuickBasic 7.1 for download, or is it? Even the prestigious QuickBasic Cafe site (here) mentions QuickBasic Compilers then goes on to specify QBasic 4.5 and QBasic 7.1. One redeeming factor is that their download files are named QB45.zip and PDS71.exe... Why do I believe everything I read on the Net? Quote Microsoft QuickBASIC (also QB or incorrectly, "QBasic", which is a different system)..... The last version of QuickBASIC was version 4.5 (1988), although development of the Microsoft BASIC Professional Development System (PDS) continued until its last release of version 7.1 in October 1990from Wiki Other refs here.. Basic PDS 7.x was also known as QuickBasic Extended (QBX) but never, to my knowledge, QuickBasic 7.x. Yes. it is Quickbasic. It says so right in the help files. In the topic, "QBX Memory and Capacity": QBX Memory and Capacity This section explains the FACTORS that affect and control memory management in the quickBASIC Extended (QBX) environment: ... It also mentions it during a brief overview of command shortcuts, it compares shortcuts as used in "QuickBASIC" to those used in epsilon and brief. I also find it strange that, if it really was a separate product, how it managed to get to version 7.1, not to mention the naming of the executable, qbx.exe. I might also add that the naming of the ZIP's themselves are irrelevant. the distribution media was floppy, not ZIP, so any naming convention established for the ZIP files was done purely at the whim of the person who created the zip file. Additionally, and as an interesting note at least, is that the differences between QBX and QB45, while useful and quite dramatic, are nothing compared to the difference between QuickBasic 4.5 and it's previous version, 3.0; the syntax- even the very core of the language- the identifiers, were completely changed. However QB 2.0 and 3.0 were very... odd... in that they required quite an amount of odd constructs. In that sense does this not make QuickBasic 4.5 Not actually quickbasic but rather a deviant that was mislabelled with the same name? Is QB4.5 REALLY "BASIC PDS" version 4.5? Another interesting note is that QBX is written from the same codebase, which means that, regardless of the label given by it's creators, it's still a version of QuickBASIC, much in the same way you can paint a rock, but it's still a rock. What is the version number of the run time library? That should give a clue. Anyway, any version of the Microsoft QB from 4.0 on is a good choice for anybody who wants a replacement for GW-Basic. If you only want the interpreter., use the QBASIC from windowds 98. hmm, OK, how about this. being pedantic, it is only colloquially known as QuickBASIC... however, the QB in QBX.EXE really must stand for something, and of course the version number states 7.1, which in this case implies there are previous versions. I might CONCEDE in the case where the QBX environment was a blatant departure from QB4.5, however- it contains all the same features of QB4.5 with added features, it can reference the same libraries, etc. Additionally, any QB 4.5 program can run in QBX- this is more then can be said even of the so called "Visual Basic" that is called "Visual Basic .NET" which even with the assistance of the migration wizard can barely manage to get even trivial VB6 applications running in the .NET environment.... However that is a completely different blathering! Quote can barely manage to get even trivial VB6 applications running in the .NET environment.... However that is a completely different blathering! TongueYes... Le's not go there! He wants a replacement for GW-BASIC that can use more memory. Most of the early versions of QB or QBASIC or whatever the called it would do. I would not recommend a newer version that has been extended. Just something simple can can run the GW BASIC programs.Quote from: Geek-9pm on October 05, 2009, 10:43:02 AM Yes... Le's not go there! He wants a replacement for GW-BASIC that can use more memory. Most of the early versions of QB or QBASIC or whatever the called it would do. Additionally, downloading either QB 4.5 OR QBX is pirating. QBASIC, however, is free.Quote from: BC_Programmer on October 05, 2009, 10:49:09 AM Additionally, downloading either QB 4.5 OR QBX is pirating. And VB for DOS too... even though these are often called "abandonware", they are Microsoft copyright material and as BC says, sites hosting it are committing piracy. FreeBasic is very QB COMPATIBLE, and as the name implies, free... http://www.freebasic.net/ Turbo Pascal is genuinely "abandoned", in that Borland have made versions 1.0, 3.02 and 5.5 for MS-DOS free and legal to download and distribute. http://downloads.ziddu.com/downloadfile/1549475/tp55.zip.html I don't know about the TP IDE but the QB ones have a well known horrendous drawback in NT family OSs - Windows NT4, 2000 and later, which is that as soon as you start the IDE your cpu usage will shoot up to 100% due to the way MS-DOS programs wait for a keypress. You can control it with a (payware) util called Tame, but it is a big nuisance. On my Shuttle P4 the cpu temp would RISE and cause the fan speed to noisily ramp up to max rpm, so I would prefer FreeBasic for that type of |
|