|
code
newsgroups
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
|
http://www.kbasic.com (License 25 Euro)
KBasic is a powerful programming language, which is simply intuitive and easy to learn. It is a new programming language, a further BASIC dialect and is related to VB.NETT, Visual Basic®, Visual Basic for Application® and JavaT. It combines the best features of those tools and comes with built-in backward support for those tools and QBasic® as it is 100% syntax compatible to VB6, VBA and QBasic®. ------- Looks good, i tried it. Liked it more than RealBasic.
Show quote
Hide quote
"DotNut" <u***@server.com> wrote in message The question is, who is up for making a converter from VB6 files to KBasic news:i4923s$uoc$1@speranza.aioe.org... > http://www.kbasic.com (License 25 Euro) > > KBasic is a powerful programming language, which is simply intuitive and > easy to learn. It is a new programming language, a further BASIC dialect > and > is related to VB.NETT, Visual Basic®, Visual Basic for Application® and > JavaT. It combines the best features of those tools and comes with > built-in > backward support for those tools and QBasic® as it is 100% syntax > compatible > to VB6, VBA and QBasic®. > ------- > > Looks good, i tried it. Liked it more than RealBasic. files? Especially GUI controls and property values? One would probably have to add wrappers, for example, assuming that PictureBox has something similar in KBasic with different name, you need to add a class to KBasic and call it PictureBox, and add wrappers for every property and method. VB6 has "VB ActiveX Control Interface Wizard", which can be used to generate common property and method declaration. I also written some code that you can find at the link below to automate VB IDE Object Browser using SendKeys, and copies the list of properties, methods, and events. It just copies the name without the parameters, but the area at the bottom of Object Browser which shows the declaration is a RichTextEdit box, and you can send it WM_GETTEXT to get the text. Here is the link to that code: http://groups.google.com/group/microsoft.public.vb.general.discussion/msg/cc92e9e8a2ff9140 So basically, the converter needs to add several files to KBasic project so VB6 code doesn't need to be edited at all, or not as much. If you need to parse VB6 code, here is free parser, but there is no VB6 grammar so you need to make your own. There is however, a VBScript and VB.Nxt grammar, but not VB6 grammar. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GOLD_%28parser%29 I also made a parser for VBP files to extract project filenames so these can be further processed. I used it to edit error messages so they include a sequence number indicating which routine caused the error, rather than showing the routine name to the user. I will post the code in another post. not to port apps but to only vb6 alternative to make new apps instead of
using .net On Sun, 15 Aug 2010 21:16:06 +0530, "DotNut" <u***@server.com> wrote: ¤ http://www.kbasic.com (License 25 Euro)¤ ¤ KBasic is a powerful programming language, which is simply intuitive and ¤ easy to learn. It is a new programming language, a further BASIC dialect and ¤ is related to VB.NETT, Visual Basic®, Visual Basic for Application® and ¤ JavaT. It combines the best features of those tools and comes with built-in ¤ backward support for those tools and QBasic® as it is 100% syntax compatible ¤ to VB6, VBA and QBasic®. ¤ ------- ¤ ¤ Looks good, i tried it. Liked it more than RealBasic. ¤ ¤ No support for ActiveX? Ouch! Even VB.NET supports COM/ActiveX. Paul ~~~~ Microsoft MVP (Visual Basic) "Paul Clement" <UseAdddressAtEndofMess***@swspectrum.com> wrote in message The evanglist strikes again! Any excuse, right dinglepaul?news:rlii66tmrg6j4keldbucg2va0aj9dic0f0@4ax.com... : : No support for ActiveX? Ouch! Even XXXXXX supports COM/ActiveX. : "Kevin Provance" <k@p.c> schrieb im Newsbeitrag Aside from that ...news:i4bjhg$sc3$1@news.eternal-september.org... > > "Paul Clement" <UseAdddressAtEndofMess***@swspectrum.com> wrote in message > news:rlii66tmrg6j4keldbucg2va0aj9dic0f0@4ax.com... > : > : No support for ActiveX? Ouch! Even XXXXXX supports > COM/ActiveX. > : > > The evanglist strikes again! Any excuse, right dinglepaul? As long as the COM/ActiveX-System is yet supported on a Win-OS, then there shouldn't be any problem to use the VB6-IDE/Compiler combination for the glue- code further. KBasic is a platform-independent Compiler, with platformindependent Component-libs (QT-based) - one who's choosing this environment, should code with VBClassic-like "Glue-code" against these new platform-independent Component-libraries and Controls. Olaf On Mon, 16 Aug 2010 10:55:43 -0400, "Kevin Provance" <k@p.c> wrote: ¤ : No support for ActiveX? Ouch! Even XXXXXX supports COM/ActiveX.¤ : ¤ ¤ The evanglist strikes again! Any excuse, right dinglepaul? Seems you're inviting the response so no excuse is necessary. I'm more than happy to help you out with your misunderstandings concerning .NET. ;-) Paul ~~~~ Microsoft MVP (Visual Basic) What misunderstanding?
25Meg runtime to run my shareware app? p-code which anyone can decompile? slow and resource hungry applications. I made a keylogger in VB6 with SMTP support, compressed it with UPX. its size was just 25 KB. Boy! "Paul Clement" <UseAdddressAtEndofMess***@swspectrum.com> wrote in message than happy to help you outnews:ncni66h6vae5uiffkv1shva7tvsbhjt7hj@4ax.com... | | On Mon, 16 Aug 2010 10:55:43 -0400, "Kevin Provance" <k@p.c> wrote: | | ¤ : No support for ActiveX? Ouch! Even XXXXXX supports COM/ActiveX. | ¤ : | ¤ | ¤ The evanglist strikes again! Any excuse, right dinglepaul? | | Seems you're inviting the response so no excuse is necessary. I'm more Show quoteHide quote | with your misunderstandings concerning .NET. ;-) | | | Paul | ~~~~ | Microsoft MVP (Visual Basic) VB.NUT supports COM because of backward compatibility, to 'SUCK' existing
developer to .NUT. If you have seen some MS Webcast and VB6 section on MSDN, they are all filled with example on using .NUT from VB6, to partially UPGRADE you application to .NUT. VB.NET supports ActiveX but using it is not recommended, even use of Windows API is not recommended BUT you can. ActiveX support is not a big deal, i have written a few application which uses no ActiveX, even the statusbar was made using pure code. Show quoteHide quote | | No support for ActiveX? Ouch! Even VB.NET supports COM/ActiveX. | | Paul | ~~~~ | Microsoft MVP (Visual Basic.NUT) On Mon, 16 Aug 2010 20:43:31 +0530, "DotNut" <u***@server.com> wrote: ¤ VB.NUT supports COM because of backward compatibility, to 'SUCK' existing ¤ developer to .NUT. ¤ ¤ If you have seen some MS Webcast and VB6 section on MSDN, they are all ¤ filled with example on using .NUT from VB6, to partially UPGRADE you ¤ application to .NUT. ¤ ¤ VB.NET supports ActiveX but using it is not recommended, even use of Windows ¤ API is not recommended BUT you can. False. There are situations when it is necessary, such as the native or equivalent functionality not being available in the .NET Framework. Of course it is recommended to use the native functionality when it is available. ¤ ActiveX support is not a big deal, i have written a few application which ¤ uses no ActiveX, even the statusbar was made using pure code. It's a big deal if you are porting your VB 6.0 app to KBasic since most rely on ActiveX or COM to function. Paul ~~~~ Microsoft MVP (Visual Basic)
Show quote
Hide quote
"Paul Clement" <UseAdddressAtEndofMess***@swspectrum.com> skrev i It can be no more rewriting of code than porting to .nxt, fully using .nxt meddelandet news:l1oi66d6k4l4gbetpp5tumd0mnb3ct31b6@4ax.com... > On Mon, 16 Aug 2010 20:43:31 +0530, "DotNut" <u***@server.com> wrote: > > ¤ VB.NUT supports COM because of backward compatibility, to 'SUCK' > existing > ¤ developer to .NUT. > ¤ > ¤ If you have seen some MS Webcast and VB6 section on MSDN, they are all > ¤ filled with example on using .NUT from VB6, to partially UPGRADE you > ¤ application to .NUT. > ¤ > ¤ VB.NET supports ActiveX but using it is not recommended, even use of > Windows > ¤ API is not recommended BUT you can. > > False. There are situations when it is necessary, such as the native or > equivalent functionality not > being available in the .NET Framework. Of course it is recommended to use > the native functionality > when it is available. > > ¤ ActiveX support is not a big deal, i have written a few application > which > ¤ uses no ActiveX, even the statusbar was made using pure code. > > It's a big deal if you are porting your VB 6.0 app to KBasic since most > rely on ActiveX or COM to > function. > > > Paul > ~~~~ > Microsoft MVP (Visual Basic) features. The next version Q7Basic uses QtDesigner for GUI development. /Henning On Mon, 16 Aug 2010 21:03:43 +0200, "Henning" <computer_h***@coldmail.com> wrote: ¤ > ¤ VB.NUT supports COM because of backward compatibility, to 'SUCK' ¤ > existing ¤ > ¤ developer to .NUT. ¤ > ¤ ¤ > ¤ If you have seen some MS Webcast and VB6 section on MSDN, they are all ¤ > ¤ filled with example on using .NUT from VB6, to partially UPGRADE you ¤ > ¤ application to .NUT. ¤ > ¤ ¤ > ¤ VB.NET supports ActiveX but using it is not recommended, even use of ¤ > Windows ¤ > ¤ API is not recommended BUT you can. ¤ > ¤ > False. There are situations when it is necessary, such as the native or ¤ > equivalent functionality not ¤ > being available in the .NET Framework. Of course it is recommended to use ¤ > the native functionality ¤ > when it is available. ¤ > ¤ > ¤ ActiveX support is not a big deal, i have written a few application ¤ > which ¤ > ¤ uses no ActiveX, even the statusbar was made using pure code. ¤ > ¤ > It's a big deal if you are porting your VB 6.0 app to KBasic since most ¤ > rely on ActiveX or COM to ¤ > function. ¤ > ¤ > ¤ > Paul ¤ > ~~~~ ¤ > Microsoft MVP (Visual Basic) ¤ ¤ It can be no more rewriting of code than porting to .nxt, fully using .nxt ¤ features. I haven't use KBasic but I sincerely doubt it. In one of my apps, moving to the .NET ListView and TreeView was relatively easy and my Classic ADO code still works. Has that been your experience with .NET or are you just speculating? ¤ The next version Q7Basic uses QtDesigner for GUI development. Hmm...looks like it uses Visual Studio Express 2008. Is it the IDE? The QTDesigner looks like Linux stuff. Paul ~~~~ Microsoft MVP (Visual Basic)
Show quote
Hide quote
"Paul Clement" <UseAdddressAtEndofMess***@swspectrum.com> skrev i I've only used MySQL, and it is very easy to do db stuff the 'ado-way'. Very meddelandet news:229l66d1c8mkjktsrogl9hb4nlm5mu44v7@4ax.com... > On Mon, 16 Aug 2010 21:03:43 +0200, "Henning" <computer_h***@coldmail.com> > wrote: > > ¤ > ¤ VB.NUT supports COM because of backward compatibility, to 'SUCK' > ¤ > existing > ¤ > ¤ developer to .NUT. > ¤ > ¤ > ¤ > ¤ If you have seen some MS Webcast and VB6 section on MSDN, they are > all > ¤ > ¤ filled with example on using .NUT from VB6, to partially UPGRADE you > ¤ > ¤ application to .NUT. > ¤ > ¤ > ¤ > ¤ VB.NET supports ActiveX but using it is not recommended, even use of > ¤ > Windows > ¤ > ¤ API is not recommended BUT you can. > ¤ > > ¤ > False. There are situations when it is necessary, such as the native > or > ¤ > equivalent functionality not > ¤ > being available in the .NET Framework. Of course it is recommended to > use > ¤ > the native functionality > ¤ > when it is available. > ¤ > > ¤ > ¤ ActiveX support is not a big deal, i have written a few application > ¤ > which > ¤ > ¤ uses no ActiveX, even the statusbar was made using pure code. > ¤ > > ¤ > It's a big deal if you are porting your VB 6.0 app to KBasic since > most > ¤ > rely on ActiveX or COM to > ¤ > function. > ¤ > > ¤ > > ¤ > Paul > ¤ > ~~~~ > ¤ > Microsoft MVP (Visual Basic) > ¤ > ¤ It can be no more rewriting of code than porting to .nxt, fully using > .nxt > ¤ features. > > I haven't use KBasic but I sincerely doubt it. In one of my apps, moving > to the .NET ListView and > TreeView was relatively easy and my Classic ADO code still works. > > Has that been your experience with .NET or are you just speculating? > > ¤ The next version Q7Basic uses QtDesigner for GUI development. > > Hmm...looks like it uses Visual Studio Express 2008. Is it the IDE? The > QTDesigner looks like Linux > stuff. > > > Paul > ~~~~ > Microsoft MVP (Visual Basic) close syntax. It uses, for some unknown reason, the VC compiler to get-around problems with mysql and sqlite driver plugins. I, for known reasons, havn't tried, but it's told to be possible to use the VC IDE. At least on windows. ;) It is, as I understand, the intention to make it possible to interleave C++ code. Qt is platform independent Linux, Mac, Windows C++, as long as no OS specific API's are used. KB uses only the .ui GUI Forms. The problem I can see is the often mentioned 'one-man-job'. Future will tell... /Henning As a feature or as a excuse?
Show quoteHide quote | | No support for ActiveX? Ouch! Even VB.NET supports COM/ActiveX. | | | Paul | ~~~~ | Microsoft MVP (Visual Basic) btw, PowerBasic and RealBasic can use ActiveX. only downside is .exe made
using RealBasic are minimum of 4 Meg in size. "DotNut" <u***@server.com> wrote in I had just started to try to use KBasic under a KDE-based news:i4bl11$utc$1@speranza.aioe.org: > btw, PowerBasic and RealBasic can use ActiveX. only > downside is .exe made using RealBasic are minimum of 4 Meg > in size. Linux distro to port a VB app I had written to Linux....... I was put off for a while by what looke dlike a phantom control on the main form that I could not get rid of, and didn't seem to be defined anywhere. As it turned out, it wasn't a phantom control, it was a setting of the main form itself...I can't member exactly which though.... ....not important though.... I had the main form, and the top half was taken up by a 'tree' and a 'web view' side by side sharing the top half of the form. The 'web view' is just like a web control in VB..you give it a URL and it loads the page. (Using all default settings) when I compiled to an executable file for Linux, this file was 80 megs !!!!!! That's to show a main form, an empty 'tree' with no code, and the 'webview'. I'm assuming the entire 'web view' thing was compiled directly into code...like compiling the entire IE engine into a program. Another assumption is that this can be set with compiler settings, which should make the size much more manageable. The option I'm weighing now is to just go right into using QT and whatever variation of 'C' I need to use that. 
Other interesting topics
.NUT Fail
Microsoft may back off of .NET languages ActiveX EXE SingleUse Vs MultiUse DCOM Error Array question .Net slipped itself in while I wasn't looking! Specify DLL version when using mc.exe, rc.exe and/or link.exe Formating Hex Values MsgBox and a pop up form Running more then one Functions at once, HOW? |
|||||||||||||||||||||||
