FreeBasic is going 64 bit

[Paul Squires]

But I would first look at languages/compilers that can produce stand-alone executables. I don't want the hassle of run-time libraries and/or dot-whatever frameworks. Not so much the distribution or installation of these, but coping with the different versions of it. Dll hell as it were...

I agree 100% with you here. It was the multiple versions of .net libraries and hassle of installations, etc that turned me off from it. C# has a tremendous amount of power built into it but it also reminded me of all of the runtime DLL issues I had with the old Visual Basic stuff.

[Brice Manuel]

I might also take a look at Jame's creation.

To be clear, I am not using his creation, I am working with BCX.

[Petrus Vorster]

I assume nobody to date bought the PB company?
It is such a shame that something that powerful is in this predicament. I wish Jose or Paul can take it over!!
I have been playing with Freebasic alongside PB and it not as fast as the PB code. (My perception)
And the forum is much like QB64 where it seem its a bunch of nostalgic guys trying to make old QB games run on Windows, whereas Pb was designed with some real work in mind.
BUT....If PB dies in some time because it is not keeping up with the needs and the times, then that Freebasic will be something to look into.
The Firefly tool PAUL supplied for it makes the transitions very simple, although one struggle as many commands in FB are not properly indexed in a help file like in PB. (Especially Xprint and so on)

For a hobbyist like me, Freebasic is a real option, but for the serious guys im not so sure...
But i will follow Paul wherever he goes....

[James Fuller]

I might also take a look at Jame's creation.

To be clear, I am not using his creation, I am working with BCX.

Brice,
  Care to share your reasons for BCX over bc9Basic?

James

[Brice Manuel]

Brice,
  Care to share your reasons for BCX over bc9Basic?

Reasons?  There are none.  I had never heard of BC9 until a couple of weeks ago when I saw you mention it on one of the forums.  I have been swamped lately and have not had the time to explore BC9.  I do not even know what it offers over BCX.

[Paul Squires]

More progress on FreeBasic 64 bit development: http://www.freebasic.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=22169 There is even downloads for it now http://www.freebasic.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=19095&start=135#p194305

Still lots of work to do but it is nice to see those guys making progress. Here is an independent, free, open source, BASIC language that is self compiling, produces Windows/Linux executables, ASM or C generated code. Not bad for a few programmers working on this project in their spare time. The COM capabilities are weak, as is the WinAPI translated files as compared to Jose's. The OOP is getting better all the time with each release.

[Eddy Van Esch]

That is very good news, but.. in general, people are only willing to spend that much effort on a project without being paid...
Volounteers all sooner or later give up. Work without reward ('reward' can be a lot of things. Doesn't have to be money.) always stops at some point.
So, what this is concerned, In case of disaster with PB, I prefer to put my money on a commercial product. Which one that could be, I do not know.
I think of the purchase fee paid as an insurance to make sure that the product in question continues to be supported and (preferably) developed.
That said, I feel pretty confident about FreeBasic at the moment, but what about a few years time? Will the current handful of programmers continue to develop and support FreeBasic (without being paid..)...?

[Israel Vega Alvarez]

 But also in a commercial product there is no guarantee...we can see with PowerBasic. Nothing is for ever ... take the best of every moment.
I am learning C# but also I am using Firefly with PowerBasic.  I have PureBasic,  Longtion RadBuilder and all is great products. I am happy with all and if
a version of FreeBasic of 64 bits  comes (free or commercial) is welcome.

[Jim Dunn]

... Volounteers all sooner or later give up. Work without reward ... I feel pretty confident about FreeBasic at the moment, but what about a few years time? Will the current handful of programmers continue to develop and support FreeBasic (without being paid..)...?

I guess we can't *know* the future, but FreeBasic has been around for at least 10 years... and their forum has nearly 200,000 posts, and nearly 8000 members...

It seems to be *growing* strong...

[Eddy Van Esch]

It seems to be *growing* strong...

That is a good sign. There is also the benefit of open source I guess. If some developers give up, others can pick up the thread were they left off.
Ok, I will keep FreeBasic on my list of potential candidates ... 

[James Fuller]

Paul,
  You follow FB more than I do.
Is this a 64bit FB that creates only 64bit apps/shared libraries for Windows and Linux?

James

[James Klutho]

I downloaded the 64 bit version of Freebasic (0.91) and tried a few sample programs and they compiled and worked.  Maybe this will go somewhere.  The link to the thread with the download is below.   The compiler switches need to be "-gen gcc" which I believes uses the gcc C compiler to produce the 64 bit exe.  Jim

Note:  the samples I compiled generated pretty big exes and the 64 bit Windows headers are not usable (so I have read) so more work needs to be done of course.

http://www.freebasic.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=19095&start=150#p194661