Power Basic Releases Version 10 of PB for Windows

[Patrice Terrier]

Dead-code-removal will be done at compile time of the SLL, not at link time of the final EXE.
This means you could still have unused code into the final EXE, if your are not using heavy SLL granularity.

...

[José Roca]

The number that counts is the number of PBer's that will buy such compiler and I think that it is still small, since most seem to be using XP. I myself, I'm using Windows 7 32-bit.

[Patrice Terrier]

Kind of rethoric, i have experienced myself that some power of two numbers could be a very sensitive subject 

...

[Paul Breen]

PowerBasic is trying to keep up with Google. This is Bob Zales' version of "computing in the cloud".

[Haakon Birkeland]

The number that counts is the number of PBer's that will buy such compiler and I think that it is still small, since most seem to be using XP. I myself, I'm using Windows 7 32-bit.

You're thinking of "the" 64-bit PB compiler?!

Even though I'm on 64-bit Windows on all my 3 computers in general use, I don't really see 32-bit applications being an issue. Some applications ought to be 64-bit to utilize memory better - like Photoshop, Lightroom and other graphic intensive / memory hungry applications. And drivers off course ...
Except from that I've only experienced problems with a few utilities that are supposed to add some items to the context sensitive menus in Explorer. The menu items just don't shop up unless explorer is started in 32-bit mode, due to the lack of possibility to have executables/libraries "cross-talk".

So I guess you're quite right that the need for a 64-bit compiler probably ain't that large. But I think more people than those in need, would find it useful by time.

[Patrice Terrier]

And for those who can't wait, then you can move to Visual Studio 2010, and start learning C++ 

[Martin Francom]

I take it that PB has not started to ship version 10. 
This will be the last time I pre-order PB.  I don't
mind waiting a month, but 2 months maybe more?
That's asking to much.  Bob's credibility has now
been tarnish IMHO.

[Marc Giao]

 
The way to hell is paved with good intentions... I doubt we'll see the option to pre-order again.

Marc

[Rolf Brandt]

Good intentions - yes! That sometimes happens to me too, that I promise a customer a piece of software within two weeks. Then you run into some sort of problem, and the two weeks become two months. I have become extremely carefull with such promises.

I think that probably happened at PB.

Usually nobody would mind - as long you did not collect morey for it yet. I think they should at least send some sort of notification to their customers, expecially those that have paid already!

[Rolf Brandt]

I've got a funny feeling in my stomach. I cannot reach the PB website anymore since a half an hour.


Correction:
OK - They are running again.

[James Padgett]

There was some interest in getting PB10 on last year's balance sheet as well. It doesn't apply to me, but I don't have any problems waiting for PB10 and the best part is once I get it ... it's already paid for 

[James Fuller]

I've got a funny feeling in my stomach. I cannot reach the PB website anymore since a half an hour.


Correction:
OK - They are running again.

http://downforeveryoneorjustme.com/

[Michael Stefanik]

So I guess you're quite right that the need for a 64-bit compiler probably ain't that large. But I think more people than those in need, would find it useful by time.

For stand-alone applications on desktop computers, that's true. For libraries, components, plug-ins and so on, 64-bit support is more of an issue. For example, if you developed a inproc COM component for use with Office, it won't work with the 64-bit version of Office 2010. Another consideration is the requirement for only 64-bit applications because the admins are disabling the WoW64 subsystem to reduce the threat surface of their servers.

Unfortunately, the migration to 64-bit may be more painful because the language and documentation really encouraged this idea that pointers and handles were DWORDs and that DWORDs could be treated as pointers and handles. That is going to bite developers in a huge way if/when a 64-bit version of PowerBasic is released and they try to migrate legacy applications.

I'm actually kind of surprised that they haven't introduced a polymorphic data type like DWORD_PTR, updated all of their function declarations and encouraged developers to start using it rather than just DWORD so they'll be able to start preparing their code for 64-bit platforms.

[Patrice Terrier]

I'm actually kind of surprised that they haven't introduced a polymorphic data type like DWORD_PTR

One of the language i am working with, is using SYSINTEGER that is 4 bytes on 32-bit and 8 bytes on 64-bit.

For libraries, components, plug-ins and so on, 64-bit support is more of an issue.

So true!

[Peter House]

Has anybody heard anything regarding the estimated release?

Prepaid, Two months and no information from Powerbasic.  I cannot understand what they are thinking.