Sorry your browser is not supported!

You are using an outdated browser that does not support modern web technologies, in order to use this site please update to a new browser.

Browsers supported include Chrome, FireFox, Safari, Opera, Internet Explorer 10+ or Microsoft Edge.

DarkBASIC Professional Discussion / [LOCKED] Criticisms of DarkBASIC Professional

Author
Message
Mistrel
Retired Moderator
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 9th Nov 2005
Location:
Posted: 6th Oct 2009 21:56 Edited at: 6th Oct 2009 22:02
Link
Quote: "Excume me, but I think that this thread will lose its focus if you continue talking about PureGDK and PureBasic."


The point of this thread is to provide criticism of DarkBasic Professional in a vain hope that these issues will be addressed (even addressed quickly). I'm addressing these issues. Instead of waiting for a solution I made a solution: PureGDK. It provides all of the features that have been requested and much, much more.

I've seen threads like this crop up every year and I hope that with enough effort people will some day realize that the answer already exists. It's sold right here on TGC's website -- in the DBP section:

http://darkbasicpro.thegamecreators.com/?f=puregdk

Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
EdzUp
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 8th Sep 2002
Location: UK
Posted: 6th Oct 2009 22:16
Link
Quote: "this discussion is full of people who probably wouldn't make a bug report"


I think the main reason for this is most programmers would sooner find a work around to a problem now than wait months for a patch to fix the problem, tbh this is all part of programming ie working within the limits of the language.

The only reason I stopped using DBClassic was because the errors were not mine to make they were random error thrown up by commands like using the joystick commands and the next compile it was a remark in the code :s. DBPro could be something more amazing than it is now and really push the boundaries if all the quirks were sorted and the language was refined to make it align to the capabilities of other languages not completely just make them work like the other languages so it will allow easy transition from one language to another.

Remember were programmers/problem solvers here and after all thats what the Pro is for

-EdzUp
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
mr Handy
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 7th Sep 2007
Location: out of TGC
Posted: 6th Oct 2009 23:19 Edited at: 6th Oct 2009 23:20
Link
Quote: "Excume me, but I think that this thread will lose its focus if you continue talking about PureGDK and PureBasic."


Agree.

Lee Bamber is so~o sweet'n'cool desu nya ^^
Back to top
Profile PM
Demon000
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 21st Aug 2007
Location:
Posted: 6th Oct 2009 23:32
Link
Quote: "Instead of waiting for a solution I made a solution: PureGDK. It provides all of the features that have been requested and much, much more."


We all know already that you get these features with pureGDK, but most of this stuff is so basic that we shouldn't have to pay $60 plus another 79€ for it.
Back to top
Profile PM
EdzUp
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 8th Sep 2002
Location: UK
Posted: 6th Oct 2009 23:35
Link
We all know that PB etc with PureGDK is the bees knees but what the discussion is about it native DBPro requires the fixes.

-EdzUp
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
mr Handy
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 7th Sep 2007
Location: out of TGC
Posted: 7th Oct 2009 00:17
Link
Holy war detected

Lee Bamber is so~o sweet'n'cool desu nya ^^
Back to top
Profile PM
Olby
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 21st Aug 2003
Location:
Posted: 7th Oct 2009 01:35 Edited at: 7th Oct 2009 01:42
Link
Gee people calm down! I have seen such threads many many times before but those issues most likely wont be ever addressed as lots of people mentioned DB first of all is a beginner/indie game programming language/engine and is maintained by a bunch of people. You can't have everything in it.. it has a clear direction.. a game development language.

If you want something bigger, better and easier to handle look at PureGDK, I can speak from my own experience. I was programming an FPS engine and after almost two years of headaches and lots of problems I switched over to PureGDK which shortened my code almost 2 times due to all the native commands it has plus the advanced features of the PureBasic language.

No offense to all you hard core DB users but you should understand one thing that DBPro can't do nor it does allow you to do everything and if you want to stick with the features and flexibility DBPro engine offers but staying within boundaries of BASIC language go the PureGDK path. Plain and simple!

ACER Aspire 5920G: Core2Duo 2.2GHZ, 2GB, GeForce 8600M GT 1280MB, Windows Vista Ultimate SP1, DBPro 7.4 + PureGDK
Back to top
Profile PM Website
dark coder
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 6th Oct 2002
Location: Japan
Posted: 7th Oct 2009 04:23
Link
Quote: "No offense to all you hard core DB users but you should understand one thing that DBPro can't do nor it does allow you to do everything and if you want to stick with the features and flexibility DBPro engine offers but staying within boundaries of BASIC language go the PureGDK path. Plain and simple!"


Maybe people would rather see the existing product they've used for a long time get improved rather than switching products? It's not like doing the latter fixes the language, and lots of people will still use it so it just makes it worse for the remaining people who still use the language, after all there will be less voices to request changes thus less likelihood it'll ever happen(though I imagine the probably of any of these changes happening is close to 0 as it is).

Back to top
Profile PM Email
Mistrel
Retired Moderator
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 9th Nov 2005
Location:
Posted: 7th Oct 2009 05:16 Edited at: 7th Oct 2009 05:19
Link
Quote: "Maybe people would rather see the existing product they've used for a long time get improved"


What people here want is something that is genuinely not DarkBasic. "DarkBasic" and "DarkBasic Professional" isn't about the language it's about making games easy and having fun while doing it. DBP was never designed to be a general purpose language.

Larry Wall (creator of Perl) said: "There's no such thing as a perfect language. Merely making a more expressive language means it's in some sense more difficult to learn to express yourself responsibly."

This language is designed for beginners. To think of it any other way is beyond the scope of its original design. That's what DarkGDK, DarkGDK.NET, and PureGDK are for. When you're ready to move on you can take the engine with you.

Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Demon000
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 21st Aug 2007
Location:
Posted: 7th Oct 2009 06:00 Edited at: 7th Oct 2009 06:00
Link
Quote: "What people here want is something that is genuinely not DarkBasic. "DarkBasic" and "DarkBasic Professional" isn't about the language it's about making games easy and having fun while doing it. DBP was never designed to be a general purpose language."


Most of this stuff won't change DB or make it more difficult to use. We're not talking about completely changing the language, just improving little things that would greatly improve DB potential, and in some cases make it even more easy to use (i.e. Not having to find a work around).

Hope we can get back on track with the thread.
Back to top
Profile PM
tiresius
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 13th Nov 2002
Location: MA USA
Posted: 7th Oct 2009 06:14
Link
Quote: ""DarkBasic" and "DarkBasic Professional" isn't about the language it's about making games easy and having fun while doing it."

I agree that has been the theme over the years. Perhaps this can change?

Quote: "This language is designed for beginners. To think of it any other way is beyond the scope of its original design. "

To think we want a difficult to learn language now is beyond the scope of this forum post. All of the original points made (except for 2-3 and 2-4) do not complicate the language one bit. Beginners can still do what beginners do, with no negative consequence. Only when you add methods and reference/pointers does it start to get a little complicated if someone not familiar with OOP or C/C++ jumps in too fast.

I'm hoping that TGC takes a look at this, realizes that over the years some of the best coders have been leaving for greener pastures. It is inevitable in any language community, but when that happens the community loses that resource forever. This is probably a vain hope, but it is hope nonetheless. A productive coder that makes fancy games and puts them out there will only draw more people to the language and TGC products, and more people = more $$$. If not that then at least a little more respect in the game making circles -- instead of being branded as a "toy language".

I'm not a real programmer but I play one with DBPro!
Back to top
Profile PM Email
dark coder
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 6th Oct 2002
Location: Japan
Posted: 7th Oct 2009 06:49
Link
Quote: "What people here want is something that is genuinely not DarkBasic. "DarkBasic" and "DarkBasic Professional" isn't about the language it's about making games easy and having fun while doing it. DBP was never designed to be a general purpose language."


You're missing the point then, most of my suggestions(especially ones in the first section) were highlighting pointless and arbitrary limitations that just impede development time and/or code readability. I never suggested DBPro be changed to be a general purpose language, (i.e. the ability of compile to a DLL etc) but instead the language should at least meet basic(pun!) requirements we've come to expect from any language as of the past 20 years. Many of the limitations I mentioned do affect users of all levels, which of the limitations affect specific users however is totally dependant on what they're writing so they many not all be important to each user.


Quote: "To think of it any other way is beyond the scope of its original design."


But that's the thing, most(though I don't think any) of my suggestions aren't out of the scope of DBPro, or even BASIC(as your posts show). DBPro may be aimed at beginners, but that's no excuse to only half implement features and completely omit some obvious ones. If I wanted to discuss things like that then I would have specifically mentioned issues that mainly affect advanced users, such as: the incredibly unoptimized machine code generated by the compiler, the lack of native lower-level access to the rendering etc, but I didn't mention these things as they aren't critical to game development.


Quote: "I'm hoping that TGC takes a look at this, realizes that over the years some of the best coders have been leaving for greener pastures. It is inevitable in any language community, but when that happens the community loses that resource forever."


This is a good point, while it's inevitable for the more advanced users from any community that isn't tailored toward industry standard tools to move on eventually, the difference is what they leave behind. With DBPro's limitations it's very hard to make reusable code, and with the amount of work arounds required for certain tasks like returning multiple values, seeing what code does isn't very easy at all. As such, it's very hard to make libraries for other users to benefit from, or to give people code snippets they can generically use for a lot of applications.

Back to top
Profile PM Email
Mistrel
Retired Moderator
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 9th Nov 2005
Location:
Posted: 7th Oct 2009 07:08 Edited at: 7th Oct 2009 11:05
Link
Why should TGC spend valuable development time manufacturing a solution which already exists several times over (C++/VB.NET/C#/PureBasic)?

Quote: "We're not talking about completely changing the language, just improving little things that would greatly improve DB potential, and in some cases make it even more easy to use (i.e. Not having to find a work around)."


I hate to sound like a broken record here but that's exactly what PureGDK is for. The language improvements are iterative and it's designed to build upon DBP by addressing its shortcomings while still being a BASIC dialect.

Quote: "We all know that PB etc with PureGDK is the bees knees but what the discussion is about it native DBPro requires the fixes."


Bugs in DBP are addressed in the bug forum. Everything that's been requested are features. A missing feature is not a bug and does not require fixing, as you're suggesting.

Quote: "I'm hoping that TGC takes a look at this, realizes that over the years some of the best coders have been leaving for greener pastures. It is inevitable in any language community, but when that happens the community loses that resource forever."


That's what DarkGDK/.NET/PureGDK are for.

Quote: "You're missing the point then, most of my suggestions(especially ones in the first section) were highlighting pointless and arbitrary limitations that just impede development time and/or code readability."


If it's a bug then it belongs in the bug forum otherwise it's a feature.

DBP fulfills its requirements. For anything more there are several immediate solutions. And if that's not enough IanM's plugins provide additional tools.

Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Nathaniel
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 28th Sep 2003
Location: Dallas, Texas
Posted: 7th Oct 2009 07:46 Edited at: 18th Oct 2009 17:29
Link
-gone-

-N.

Not all who wander are lost. - J.R.R. Tolkien
Back to top
Profile PM Email
MayoZebraHat 1979
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 21st Dec 2007
Location:
Posted: 7th Oct 2009 08:13
Link
Quote: "
Quote: "Instead of waiting for a solution I made a solution: PureGDK. It provides all of the features that have been requested and much, much more."

We all know already that you get these features with pureGDK, but most of this stuff is so basic that we shouldn't have to pay $60 plus another 79€ for it.
"



Quote: "Inline ASM is also supported natively by PureBasic. There's no need to sacrifice advanced language capabilities for the sake of games programming. PureGDK is literally "DarkBasic for PureBasic"."

I should have mentioned that I did download the demo of PureBASIC and was aware of that. (well, the x64 version since I was interested in working with a language that could compile 64bit code) It's nice, but it reminds me way too much of FreeBasic so having PureBASIC just so I can use PureGDK doesn't work for me. The point above kinda illustrates why I didn't even consider the option.

Anyway, way to sell it! I appreciate you giving the ability to port the libraries over, Mistrel. And I love the fact that you have an AmigaOS version even if that's not Dark-related! The big problem I have with moving to PureGDK at the moment is that I would have to shell out yet more money. I'm broke. Enough to the realization that I probably won't have heat for home and water most of this fall and maybe part of the winter so I can't really put that in the budget. Even if I had enough money to be comfortable I'd still have to really think about putting money into yet another compiler. I don't mean any disrespect but I think we all know there is an option that fixes problems but we also probably don't see the need to pay for something we should already have purchased. Actually, come to think of it, buying a compiler is probably the most difficult thing to ever evaluate. There are more features in a compiler than any commercially available thing. There is no warranty or money back guarantee.

The smaller problem is how much pure reminds me of freeBASIC. Then again no one has made any DB libraries available for that compiler, yet.

Also, reading Posts made by some people who like DBPro but still have lots to say for "growing up" and using a more complete language/compiler have convinced me to try and get over my lack of enthusiasm for C like syntax (I just can't get over the nostalgia of my AmigaBASIC days and I kinda hate ";"s). FreeBASIC has been and Dev C++ is really starting to grow on me. These and libraries like Irrlict, Allegro, and SDL are giving me second thoughts about ever paying for another compiler or library.

I can avoid all of the pitfalls mentioned in the first post with these other free compilers. From a technical level I may have to work more but I don't have to rely on anyone else or implement work- a- rounds. I think we've pretty well dissected DBPro and it's "problems". I know why I paid for DBP, but reading everyone's posts really made me think about it. If these limitations bother you then you probably need to move from hobbyist level to a bit more technical as I am. The problems you have in DBPro are easily solved in something you can have for free if it limits you. It just doesn't come with someone to hold your hand. I still like DBPro and will use it for lots of quick prototypes. I'll use it because I paid for it and I hope that that leads to really good customer service and surprising updates that I get for free. I mean one of the most fun things is that the updates I get for DBPro are more like bonus ice cream scoops I get fairly often. The free ones not quite as often (well dev C++ is pretty complete and I just find libraries or code my own stuff). I don't think I would ever buy DBPro again if I suddenly had to for some reason.
Back to top
Profile PM
Mistrel
Retired Moderator
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 9th Nov 2005
Location:
Posted: 7th Oct 2009 08:54 Edited at: 7th Oct 2009 08:56
Link
Quote: "The smaller problem is how much pure reminds me of freeBASIC."


I hope for PureGDK to eventually support freeBASIC as well, if it makes you feel any better.

A future language-agnostic version is planned which will allow the DarkBasic Professional engine (and all of its supporting plugins) to be available from any language.

Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
dark coder
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 6th Oct 2002
Location: Japan
Posted: 7th Oct 2009 09:53
Link
Quote: "I hate to sound like a broken record here but that's exactly what PureGDK is for. The language improvements are iterative and it's designed to build upon DBP by addressing its shortcomings while still being a BASIC dialect."


The issue with this is that PureGDK isn't simply some 'pro'/'deluxe' version of DBPro, it's a completely separate product thus isn't a viable solution. If someone hits limitations within a language that make no sense then the language should be improved until the only things that are left are features that would be either nice to have, or are out of the scope of the language. Which is why I separated my OP into two sections.


Quote: "If it's a bug then it belongs in the bug forum otherwise it's a feature."


I've listed nothing but limitations in this thread, with one possible exception, though I posted an argument for it being a limitation and not a bug.

Back to top
Profile PM Email
MayoZebraHat 1979
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 21st Dec 2007
Location:
Posted: 7th Oct 2009 10:03
Link
Quote: "
I hope for PureGDK to eventually support freeBASIC as well, if it makes you feel any better.

A future language-agnostic version is planned which will allow the DarkBasic Professional engine (and all of its supporting plugins) to be available from any language."

That would be interesting... I would have jumped on something like that a year ago. But the only thing that would make me feel better would be if it was free, like FreeBASIC itself.

Actually, I forgot the other free option, DarkGDK with Visual Studio Express, lol. Well, unless you plan on making money off your production. It may just be economy but I'm starting to feel strongly against anything that I'd have to pay for.
Back to top
Profile PM
Mistrel
Retired Moderator
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 9th Nov 2005
Location:
Posted: 7th Oct 2009 10:07 Edited at: 7th Oct 2009 11:05
Link
Quote: "The issue with this is that PureGDK isn't simply some 'pro'/'deluxe' version of DBPro, it's a completely separate product thus isn't a viable solution."


Actually, it is the exact same product in the sense that it uses the same DLLs as DBP. Which is why all plugins are compatible.

Quote: "If someone hits limitations within a language that make no sense then the language should be improved until the only things that are left are features that would be either nice to have, or are out of the scope of the language."


Your statement is completely obtuse. I think the most direct way to answer this is a quote:

“I don’t know what the language of the year 2000 will look like, but I know it will be called Fortran.”
– CA Hoare, 1982

There is a reason we don't use DarkBasic for writing a web server or PHP for making games. The analogy here being DBP is designed as a simple language; albeit less simple than you would like.

Quote: "That would be interesting... I would have jumped on something like that a year ago. But the only thing that would make me feel better would be if it was free, like FreeBASIC itself."


PureGDK licenses DBP from The Game Creators. Even "PureGDK - Upgrade" requires a license to use the documentation and project source code which is owned by TGC.

Quote: "It may just be economy but I'm starting to feel strongly against anything that I'd have to pay for."


I'm sure Lee is feeling the pinch where people want him to provide a free service as well in addition to the updates he already provides.

Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
MayoZebraHat 1979
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 21st Dec 2007
Location:
Posted: 7th Oct 2009 10:28
Link
I think Dark Coder made a big point in starting this. I'm not sure if it changed the global perspective or will change any of these shortcomings but it certainly made me personally think about how I develop and how what I will someday need in a compiler, with larger projects especially, will make the fun and easiness of DBPro seem a waste.

I guess I like DBPro enough to try and support it but no longer see how I can afford it so I can't see it from Lee's point of view. Or rather even if I could afford it I feel like I'm forced to pay money to keep up with it.

I hate to admit that I feel like I'm being dealt drugs and I am a bit addicted. If I want something I sometimes have to buy the plug-in to get my fix. If I want to keep ahead of the game I have to get the latest plug-ins. If I just happen to hit a little bit o' the hard times my development suffers. That's not an issue with the language but my personal feelings of the business model. I digress. Sorry.

I think this topic has not only been a more successful attempt to bring out shortcomings and talk about it in a more educated and professional manner but it also may help people decide if they really want to stick with a hobbyist type compiler or actually take the plunge into doing everything yourself. I think the thing I love about DBPro most would be helping me get into something I love doing even more and being the gateway to something that only requires me to be a tad less lazy, lol. So in that regard it's kinda silly to even consider the shortcomings.
Back to top
Profile PM
Alfa x
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 1st Jul 2006
Location: Colombia
Posted: 7th Oct 2009 16:57
Link
this thread is called "Criticisms of DarkBASIC Professional", Im not a moderator but people should stick to it as possible as they can.

Speaking of other things a lot (making one or two intervations is fine in my opinion) is disrespectful to the thread creator and with the community in general.
Back to top
Profile PM Email
tiresius
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 13th Nov 2002
Location: MA USA
Posted: 7th Oct 2009 17:33
Link
Mistrel I respected your first few posts which showed that PureBasic offers all those language features and with PureGDK includes the DBPro engine. But after that the PureGDK advertisements are getting old, and in the most recent replies you've been arguing with us that we shouldn't want DBPro to improve in the ways dark coder originally posted. Why can't we want that?

I know why you don't want DBPro to improve its language features, but let the rest of us look for a positive change, okay?

I'm not a real programmer but I play one with DBPro!
Back to top
Profile PM Email
KISTech
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 8th Feb 2008
Location: Aloha, Oregon
Posted: 7th Oct 2009 18:07
Link
Quote: "after that the PureGDK advertisements are getting old"


Agreed, and after a while you're shooting yourself in the foot and turning people away with unnecessarily pushy advertising.

Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
aki
15
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 8th Nov 2008
Location:
Posted: 7th Oct 2009 18:37
Link
Quote: "Agreed, and after a while you're shooting yourself in the foot and turning people away with unnecessarily pushy advertising."

Very true.
Back to top
Profile PM
the_winch
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 1st Feb 2003
Location: Oxford, UK
Posted: 7th Oct 2009 20:33
Link
Quote: "There is a reason we don't use DarkBasic for writing a web server or PHP for making games. The analogy here being DBP is designed as a simple language; albeit less simple than you would like."


You can't really use the argument that DBP is designed for really simple tasks when TGC themselves sell a load of plugins aimed at performing complex tasks.

If DBP is too simple for basic network programming like a web server what's the point in DarkNet?

By way of demonstration, he emitted a batlike squeak that was indeed bothersome.
Back to top
Profile PM Website
mr Handy
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 7th Sep 2007
Location: out of TGC
Posted: 7th Oct 2009 20:37
Link
Err... this thread sounds like Lee is going to quietly stop DBPro project, and Mistrel is preparing people for alternative variant. Maybe 7.5 upgrade will be last... That all wery suspicious and strange...

Lee Bamber is so~o sweet'n'cool desu nya ^^
Back to top
Profile PM
Mobiius
Valued Member
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 27th Feb 2003
Location: The Cold North
Posted: 7th Oct 2009 20:39
Link
Quote: "Err... this thread sounds like Lee is going to quietly stop DBPro project, and Mistrel is preparing people for alternative variant. Maybe 7.5 upgrade will be last... That all wery suspicious and strange..."

Not in the slightest.

Your signature has been erased by a mod because we're sadistic losers with nothing better to do. (joke)
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
TechLord
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 19th Dec 2002
Location: TheGameDevStore.com
Posted: 8th Oct 2009 09:58 Edited at: 8th Oct 2009 10:08
Link
Dark Coder's assessment of DBPro hits the nail on the head. DBPro is a good RAD Game Dev Language, but, it has the potential to be the Ultimate Game Dev Language (if it didnt require so many workarounds).

My frustrations in working with DBPro lead me to DGDK. Redemption for DBPro's shortcomings can be found in DGDK. It offers both DBPro's RAD game creation library and VC++ features. VC++ is packed with features, but, they're completely optional. Let me stress the word - optional.

Others have repeatedly stated that `DBPro is a BASIC language`. True, but, I would prefer it to be a EZ2USE language. Workarounds for expected features really complicate what could be a Kick Azz Game Creation Language! So just because its BASIC doesn't mean it cannot have advanced features.

I too desired to work with a BASIC syntax, I ran from C++ for years. However, along my path to game development, I found myself learning other languages/syntax for a variety of purposes: scripting, web pages, data formats, etc. Once exposed to these other languages my dedication to BASIC was no longer justified.

DBPro's Plug-in's, API, Media Packs, and Tools set it apart from the competition of RAD Game Creation using the latest technologies. You can create any game or application imaginable easier than the other systems. I would rather spend time on coding game logic for the game, instead of the game engine. Add the features requested to DBPro would be like hitting the Warp Drive Button.

Trapped inside the DGDK Open Source Project.
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Joe T
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 27th Sep 2007
Location: United Kingdom
Posted: 8th Oct 2009 18:42
Link
Quote: "Why should TGC spend valuable development time manufacturing a solution which already exists several times over (C++/VB.NET/C#/PureBasic)?"


OK, so the solution to the limitations in DBPro is to use a product that isn't DBPro, that is fairly obvious. However, is this really the message that TGC want to be sending out? (I appreciate that you are not an employee of TGC, Mistrel) I would have thought that with a large part of DBPro-related sales coming from the feature improving add-ons, keeping your long term customers would be of fairly high priority. With the PureBasic-PureGDK combo costing £102 ($176), on top of having to learn another language, and the fact that people may already have hundreds, or thousands of hours-worth of code written in DBPro, switching from DBPro may not be as easy as you make it out to be.

Now, I am not overlooking that fact that the TGC staff are probably stretched to capacity, and that spending time dishing out improvements for free may not seem viable at the moment, but the suggested changes really aren't that unreasonable, and I don't believe that addressing them would take that much time.

This language is designed for beginners. To think of it any other way is beyond the scope of its original design.

I really wish TGC had come up with a better name than DarkBASIC Professional for a language for beginners. If I can get an official statement from TGC saying that DBPro is solely for those whose knowledge of programming is such that they wouldn't be bothered by the limitations in the DBPro language addressed by this thread, then I will move on without a fuss. Again, I will say that the "BASIC" label, which some people interpret as "for beginners", is not an excuse for incomplete and arbitrarily limiting features.

Finally, in my opinion, if TGC expect people to keep shelling out cash for additional engine features via the add-ons, then they really ought to provide some free support on the language front, of course with regard to their income as well.
Back to top
Profile PM
david w
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 18th Dec 2005
Location: U.S.A. Michigan
Posted: 8th Oct 2009 22:48
Link
I would like to state that I think DBP/DBC are great products. While it is true, doing many work arounds and the lack of what some consider "basic" features can be very annoying. Part of the learning process with any compiler is figuring out what the language can and can't do. If there is no "real" OOP support then "it is what it is".

You can sit here and point out what you consider limitations all day long, if you so desire. The TGC crew has done a great job with the product, regular patches, that expand the language and fix bugs that have been found. I would rather see the language optimized more and bugs fixed, rather than overloading functions and everything else that has been suggested. Those are mere annoyances, compared to a bug that stops you.

In the end, we all know that these "features" are not going to be added. I'm not by any means suggesting that these "features" would not be a great idea. But we all know that its not going to happen.

I don't want to spend a money on PureBasic/GDK, etc. DBP/DBC do what they do, and they do them extremely well. If you get to the point were you have reached the point when you are no longer a beginner, then perhaps you should then consider weighing your options.

DBP/DBC are for BEGINNERS. After a period of time, you will get to a certian proficeny and it will be time to move on. This happened to me. Though I use C++ for my projects now, I constantly find myself prototyping an idea in DBP. I know if I can get it to work in DBP I can get it to work in my application.
Back to top
Profile PM Website
Green Gandalf
VIP Member
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 3rd Jan 2005
Playing: Malevolence:Sword of Ahkranox, Skyrim, Civ6.
Posted: 9th Oct 2009 00:23
Link
Well said.
Back to top
Profile PM Email
Zotoaster
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 20th Dec 2004
Location: Scotland
Posted: 9th Oct 2009 00:27
Link
Quote: " After a period of time, you will get to a certian proficeny and it will be time to move on."


That's the point. Why would TGC do this? Customer retention is more important than customer acquisition.

"everyone forgets a semi-colon sometimes." - Phaelax
Back to top
Profile PM Email
Olby
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 21st Aug 2003
Location:
Posted: 9th Oct 2009 03:42
Link
Quote: "That's the point. Why would TGC do this? Customer retention is more important than customer acquisition."


Umm... well obviously because they don't have enough people and resources to create a full fledged programming language environment so it would be better for us to stop complaining and move on with our projects.

ACER Aspire 5920G: Core2Duo 2.2GHZ, 2GB, GeForce 8600M GT 1280MB, Windows Vista Ultimate SP1, DBPro 7.4 + PureGDK
Back to top
Profile PM Website
Zotoaster
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 20th Dec 2004
Location: Scotland
Posted: 9th Oct 2009 04:01 Edited at: 9th Oct 2009 04:32
Link
Quote: ""Umm... well obviously because they don't have enough people and resources to create a full fledged programming language environment so it would be better for us to stop complaining and move on with our projects.""


Oh please. I'm 18. Check out my latest WIP and tell me that small teams (of even one person) can't make a decent language.

"everyone forgets a semi-colon sometimes." - Phaelax
Back to top
Profile PM Email
Mistrel
Retired Moderator
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 9th Nov 2005
Location:
Posted: 9th Oct 2009 04:33 Edited at: 9th Oct 2009 04:40
Link
Quote: "Oh please. I'm 18. Check out my latest WIP and tell me that small teams (of even one person) can't make a decent language."


Comparing DBP to a scripting language written on top of a virtual machine is comparing apples to oranges. DBP is compiled to machine code.

I have no opinions of your work, Zotoaster, but the analogy isn't accurate.

Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Zotoaster
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 20th Dec 2004
Location: Scotland
Posted: 9th Oct 2009 04:40
Link
Quote: "Comparing DBP to a scripting language written on top of a virtual machine is like comparing apples to oranges. DBP is compiled to machine code."


No, it's like comparing apples and pears, which are pretty similar, even if not the same. DBC ran on top of a VM IIRC, and it didn't even support types. My point is that I've had no formal training, and not as much industry experience as Lee. But, I still know what's useful in a game programming language and what's not, which is why I'm trying hard to achieve that. DBP lives on the excuse that it's a "beginner's language" and need not be this complex. I think, a couple of extra months and research on Lee's part would have been a healthy investment, because then it would be both a beginner's and a professional's tool. Who loses that way?

"everyone forgets a semi-colon sometimes." - Phaelax
Back to top
Profile PM Email
Mistrel
Retired Moderator
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 9th Nov 2005
Location:
Posted: 9th Oct 2009 04:54 Edited at: 9th Oct 2009 22:02
Link
Apples to pears is not apples to apples. That's like saying C++ and Java are similar just because they have the same root. Sure, you can draw similarities but their paradigms are completely different.

Quote: "My point is that I've had no formal training, and not as much industry experience as Lee. But, I still know what's useful in a game programming language and what's not, which is why I'm trying hard to achieve that."


Your analogy is that because you made a scripting language it should be easy for Lee to implement all of these features in machine code. Is this an accurate interpretation?

Zotoaster, I don't mean for what I said to be taken personally. It's just that you're still comparing apples to oranges.

Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
tiresius
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 13th Nov 2002
Location: MA USA
Posted: 9th Oct 2009 06:23
Link
Quote: "In the end, we all know that these "features" are not going to be added. I'm not by any means suggesting that these "features" would not be a great idea. But we all know that its not going to happen."

Keep the dream alive! It's not over until a statement from TGC arrives, perhaps in the next newsletter?

Lee or Mike could make these changes if they wanted to. There's no technical reason why at least some of them couldn't be included. It would be a business decision, plain and simple.

I'm not a real programmer but I play one with DBPro!
Back to top
Profile PM Email
TechLord
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 19th Dec 2002
Location: TheGameDevStore.com
Posted: 9th Oct 2009 10:27 Edited at: 9th Oct 2009 10:31
Link
DBPro is NOT for beginners, the name in itself suggests that. The problem for DBP is that it (and the community) exposes a beginner to higher programming concepts. You evolve as you develop with it. You will begin to want more. DBP fails to deliver that. This herein is a plea to add the features to the language to bring it to it's full potential. Sure, it will not come soon, thus, many move on. IMHO that will be the death of the language. Add the features!

Trapped inside the DGDK Open Source Project.
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Van B
Moderator
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 8th Oct 2002
Location: Sunnyvale
Posted: 9th Oct 2009 11:25
Link
DBPro is what, 6 or 7 years old, and it's been dying since then according to some of you. Don't be ridiculous here, if you can't see a project through in DBPro then your not gonna see it through anywhere, not in C, PureGDK, DarkGDK, the only place the game will exist is in your head.

These are feature requests that we all seem to agree would benefit the language, the language is not dying without them, people aren't giving up on project due to the lack of them. If you think they are, then you are a fool - people give up on projects because they can't finish them within their time frame or skill set. It's easy to lay the blame at time frame, and quite easy to lay the blame at your skill set, because it conveniently links to time frame.

Low skills = Learn more skills = Time
Low time = Slow progress = Abandonment

Realistic goals + Time + Skills = Success

So that is probably quite tricky to argue with, I mean the simple premise that with enough time to learn the skills needed plus finish the game you will be successful.

Now where does the lack of a non-vital feature come into blame when a project fails? - Time?, Skills?, or Procrastination?

I'm going for the last one myself.

Maybe all these people who move on, don't really move on, maybe the just stop. There's a couple of DBPro users who have moved onto better things, but where are the rest of them, where are all these peoples games that they had to migrate platforms for?

I say again because I say it all the time in these threads. If you cannot complete a game project in DBPro, then there is absolutely no point in moving to another platform. Take PureGDK - that's for people who want more control, PureBasic is a much deeper language so people who are pushing DBPro's envelope but would rather stay with BASIC can migrate to that. People who use PureBasic and are rightfully sick of the 3D non-features can get PureGDK and have a massive and proven engine at their disposal. But if someone can't success in DBPro, even with a small project, then anything else they spend their money on will be a waste.
I have bought all the major plug ins and you know I've never used any of them in a finished game, not even Sparky's collision DLL, and I'm polishing off game number 10, that's 10 games released, probably 3 or 4 older projects quite close to completion. So I get vocal in threads like this because I want to know why people say you have to pay for this that and the other, or that DBPro can't complete a project, or any of that stuff because every single time it's an excuse, an excuse for either lack of ability or lack of interest. People need to stop blaming their tools and start a project that they can actually see all the way through.

DBPro is as direct as a game programming language can get - PureBasic is a lot more complex, fact. There are some incredible PB coders out there, if some of them got hold of PureGDK, then I'm sure they'd blow our minds. Have you considered giving away a couple of free copies to those PB guru's Mistrel, with a couple of them on board things could really take off. But this is not due to a lot of lacking in DBPro, it's due to a distinct lack of a good 3D engine for PB, there's no reason why PureGDK shouldn't be that comprehensive 3D engine that people want.

Right now, there's probably not many PGDK users yet, and it'll be mostly converted demos, demos that have been in place since DBPro was released. Know what I mean? - people need to see a PB project and go 'wow!, what engine is that your using?'. Without that big project or two, there is nothing substantial to back up PGDK's potential.

I believe that the spread of products here covers any base. Absolute beginners who want something to learn on and make simpler games can get DBClassic, then there's DBPro for those with experience, then if they outgrow that they can move onto C++ or PureBasic with GDK.


Health, Ammo, and bacon and eggs!
Back to top
Profile PM Email
Benjamin
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 24th Nov 2002
Location: France
Posted: 9th Oct 2009 11:34
Link
@Van B: So what you're saying is, there isn't a large enough (competent) DBPro userbase to benefit from such improvements?
Back to top
Profile PM Email
david w
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 18th Dec 2005
Location: U.S.A. Michigan
Posted: 9th Oct 2009 12:43 Edited at: 9th Oct 2009 12:44
Link
I have to agree with Van B. on this one. I pick procrastination. You make some very excellent points Van B.

@Benjamin I dont think Van B. is saying that its not a good idea. As a matter of fact he does state:
Quote: "These are feature requests that we all seem to agree would benefit the language"


But I can see exactly what he is saying and have to agree with it, because it is the truth.
Back to top
Profile PM Website
StevetS
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 19th May 2004
Location:
Posted: 9th Oct 2009 13:21
Link
I don't class myself as a beginner but by no means am I an experienced programmer. I'm probably a hobbyist! My time on my PC is limited and I've found that with DBPro I can get pretty decent results fast.

My interest lies in the 8/16 bit era and DBP as-is, is more capable than I am at doing what I want it to.

I agree with the point that calling it 'professional' may not be wholly accurate. Maybe 'Extended' or 'Advanced' would have been more accurate. The 'professional' suffix may tend to scare beginners away.

Darkcoder presents a well written and well thought out original post but to be honest as a bog-standard casual coder I'd probably not use the features noted. Mind, this doesn't mean they shouldn't be included as its important the DBP product evolves or it'll die a quiet death.

What's this rumour about lack of continued developer support?! Now that is a worry, if it were to be true. . . .

Back to top
Profile PM
Mistrel
Retired Moderator
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 9th Nov 2005
Location:
Posted: 9th Oct 2009 13:40 Edited at: 9th Oct 2009 13:40
Link
Quote: "What's this rumour about lack of continued developer support?! Now that is a worry, if it were to be true. . . ."


DBP is still being updated. Don't worry, the rumor it isn't true.

Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
mr Handy
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 7th Sep 2007
Location: out of TGC
Posted: 9th Oct 2009 15:16
Link
Quote: "DBP is still being updated. Don't worry, the rumor it isn't true. "

oh, thats good that i was wrong!!!

Lee Bamber is so~o sweet'n'cool desu nya ^^
Back to top
Profile PM
EdzUp
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 8th Sep 2002
Location: UK
Posted: 9th Oct 2009 15:47
Link
Quote: "DBPro is what, 6 or 7 years old, and it's been dying since then according to some of you. Don't be ridiculous here, if you can't see a project through in DBPro then your not gonna see it through anywhere, not in C, PureGDK, DarkGDK, the only place the game will exist is in your head.
"

Its only limitation is its stuck to Win32

Quote: "
These are feature requests that we all seem to agree would benefit the language, the language is not dying without them, people aren't giving up on project due to the lack of them. If you think they are, then you are a fool - people give up on projects because they can't finish them within their time frame or skill set. It's easy to lay the blame at time frame, and quite easy to lay the blame at your skill set, because it conveniently links to time frame.
"

Or real-life issues that normally kills my projects (Kids and wives normally kill things stone dead)

Quote: "
Low skills = Learn more skills = Time
Low time = Slow progress = Abandonment

Realistic goals + Time + Skills = Success

So that is probably quite tricky to argue with, I mean the simple premise that with enough time to learn the skills needed plus finish the game you will be successful.
"

And breaking down everything into managable chunks not something like 'write physics engine' more like 'write test gravity', 'write falling code' etc.

Quote: "
Now where does the lack of a non-vital feature come into blame when a project fails? - Time?, Skills?, or Procrastination?

I'm going for the last one myself.
"

I would go with that too, another good thing for coders to do is ADD REMARKS I cant count the number of times ive gone away from a project for a long spell due to real-life issues to find I cant read the code because there are no remarks.

Quote: "
Maybe all these people who move on, don't really move on, maybe the just stop. There's a couple of DBPro users who have moved onto better things, but where are the rest of them, where are all these peoples games that they had to migrate platforms for?

I say again because I say it all the time in these threads. If you cannot complete a game project in DBPro, then there is absolutely no point in moving to another platform. Take PureGDK - that's for people who want more control, PureBasic is a much deeper language so people who are pushing DBPro's envelope but would rather stay with BASIC can migrate to that. People who use PureBasic and are rightfully sick of the 3D non-features can get PureGDK and have a massive and proven engine at their disposal. But if someone can't success in DBPro, even with a small project, then anything else they spend their money on will be a waste.
I have bought all the major plug ins and you know I've never used any of them in a finished game, not even Sparky's collision DLL, and I'm polishing off game number 10, that's 10 games released, probably 3 or 4 older projects quite close to completion. So I get vocal in threads like this because I want to know why people say you have to pay for this that and the other, or that DBPro can't complete a project, or any of that stuff because every single time it's an excuse, an excuse for either lack of ability or lack of interest. People need to stop blaming their tools and start a project that they can actually see all the way through.
"

The main reason I moved on (more like lurk on occasions), is simply I have limited time to make a game. I am working on two iPhone games on a Mac, Elite Multiplayer in BlitzMax with minib3d (for cross platform if DBPro was cross platform I would use that but its not). I would rewrite SF2000 in DBPro as its a good language BUT I dont have time for free projects and what with Vista and Windows7 not natively being able to run DX9 games it causes a bone of contention with users not being 'sure' they can do the install of dx9 alongside dx10/11. Really which first time PC user is going to install DX9 to make sure your game works they want it to work out of the box.

Quote: "
DBPro is as direct as a game programming language can get - PureBasic is a lot more complex, fact. There are some incredible PB coders out there, if some of them got hold of PureGDK, then I'm sure they'd blow our minds. Have you considered giving away a couple of free copies to those PB guru's Mistrel, with a couple of them on board things could really take off. But this is not due to a lot of lacking in DBPro, it's due to a distinct lack of a good 3D engine for PB, there's no reason why PureGDK shouldn't be that comprehensive 3D engine that people want.

Right now, there's probably not many PGDK users yet, and it'll be mostly converted demos, demos that have been in place since DBPro was released. Know what I mean? - people need to see a PB project and go 'wow!, what engine is that your using?'. Without that big project or two, there is nothing substantial to back up PGDK's potential.

I believe that the spread of products here covers any base. Absolute beginners who want something to learn on and make simpler games can get DBClassic, then there's DBPro for those with experience, then if they outgrow that they can move onto C++ or PureBasic with GDK."

I came from C++ to DBClassic but atm writing iPhone stuff im doing ObjC and C++ . If I ever get round to finishing SF2000 I will do it in DBPro or write an OpenGL engine to complete it in (this is a possibility for 100% cross platform including OpenGL ES)

-EdzUp
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
dark coder
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 6th Oct 2002
Location: Japan
Posted: 9th Oct 2009 16:58
Link
Quote: "These are feature requests that we all seem to agree would benefit the language, the language is not dying without them, people aren't giving up on project due to the lack of them."


If these limitations were resolved a few years ago then I would likely have made more projects using DBPro, or at least I'd be using it more than I am now(almost not). Also you could say I gave up on a project due to a lack of them, but there are also other flaws with the language/compiler that made me ditch it, which I will go into later.


Quote: "So that is probably quite tricky to argue with, I mean the simple premise that with enough time to learn the skills needed plus finish the game you will be successful."


You neglect to mention that time is exponential with project size due to some of these limitations and others, large projects using DBPro aren't feasible due to many compounding factors. This strays from the original intent of my topic a lot, but the compiler speed coupled with the (lack of)debugging ability in DBPro are probably the biggest killers of large projects assuming you have the skill and time to work around its other limitations. The compile speed is a joke for large projects and its debugging ability is also a joke, if you try debugging faulty code in 99% of other languages with IDEs that work then you'll fall in love with them because they just have so many more features that are incredibly useful and you can't really live without them for large projects.

Don't get me wrong, DBPro is great for small projects and for prototyping, but that's all it'll ever be with the package we're presented. The issues mentioned in the above paragraph highlight why working on large projects in this language is a chore, but there are other issues such as the lack of facilities to allow you to abstract code better, i.e. classes/namespaces/libraries. Their omission also makes it hard to write clean and reusable code, both of which are important to larger projects. This forces you to use a very consistent style for your whole program otherwise it'll be a complete mess after you reach several thousand lines[1].

As Mistrel highlights, these are issues with the core language and not the packaged libraries, the libraries sometimes get updates but the language rarely does, and the language is where 99% of the problems lie. So either the language needs an overhaul or the language needs to be replaced, akin to PureGDK.


Quote: "If you cannot complete a game project in DBPro, then there is absolutely no point in moving to another platform."


There's a significant difference between being unable to complete a project in DBPro and not being willing.


Quote: "I want to know why people say you have to pay for this that and the other, or that DBPro can't complete a project, or any of that stuff because every single time it's an excuse, an excuse for either lack of ability or lack of interest. People need to stop blaming their tools and start a project that they can actually see all the way through."


The same reason why (most)people don't use horses for travelling to places normally? Sure they can get the job done, but cars offer so many more advantages and at their core they do the same thing, they just do it better.


Quote: "PureBasic is a lot more complex, fact."


You're confusing complexity with breadth of features, I'm sure if you're presented with DBPro code and were to write a PureBasic version(note: talking about core languages here), they would look almost identical. The advanced features of the language(like the advanced features of C++) are all optional after all. It's also possible that PB is less complex when using features DBPro supports, as I'm sure its preprocessor/compiler is far more consistent and robust.

Back to top
Profile PM Email
Van B
Moderator
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 8th Oct 2002
Location: Sunnyvale
Posted: 9th Oct 2009 17:22
Link
Quote: "You're confusing complexity with breadth of features, I'm sure if you're presented with DBPro code and were to write a PureBasic version(note: talking about core languages here), they would look almost identical."


No. PureBasic's syntax is more complex than DBPro, functions have to be declared at the start, there's a few things here and there that just push them apart. If you put DBPro code beside PB code, they would look very different in syntax, although your right that the basic operation would be the same, just like it is when comparing most modern languages.

Have you had a look at the PureGDK examples? - the PB versions are more complex, but I'm not saying that's a bad thing, it just might be a scary thing to some people. Of course I'm assuming you've used PureBasic before and are aware of it's syntax style - if you haven't then you can't really say I'm confusing anything!. PureBasic forces the user to structure code well, set things up properly, organize variables. It's a different way of working than DBPro, a more complex way, you can't just throw similar code at it and hope it will work. As I keep saying, PB is not your standard incarnation of BASIC, it's more like a hybrid between BASIC and Pascal IMO.


Health, Ammo, and bacon and eggs!
Back to top
Profile PM Email
HavokDelta6
14
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 22nd Aug 2009
Location: United Kingdom
Posted: 9th Oct 2009 17:51
Link
So, my question is then.

How can you support DB for not having to update, say type support, the fact you cannot return / enter a type from a function, or an array (you can only send back one thing)

....find me a good reason why fixing functions would be bad?
Equally why mid$ is so slow.

OH and:

while file support is so UNBELIVABLY (i dont care about spelling) rubish. (thanks to IanM)

There is no excuse for files, really.

Back to top
Profile PM
Van B
Moderator
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 8th Oct 2002
Location: Sunnyvale
Posted: 9th Oct 2009 18:00
Link
Havok,
Not sure who your talking to, but what do you mean by file support?

The file access commands are spot on IMO, never had issue with them - as for file format support, well DBPro is a DX engine, so all media ends up as DX internal formats anyway, no point in bloating a language just to save the user from converting media.

I think maybe you missed a page, because I can't even see a post from you on this page - it's often a good idea to include a quote from the question your responding to, especially in busy threads like this.


Health, Ammo, and bacon and eggs!
Back to top
Profile PM Email
Back to top

Login to post a reply

Server time is: 2024-05-03 12:16:41
Your offset time is: 2024-05-03 12:16:41