okay...

>> NO! The original philosophy was to create a version of QB for 64 bit machines as closely as possible!

yes, but "as closely as possible" INCLUSIVE, of new additions like udts, bigger arrays, longer strings, and whatever else galleon sees fit. WE AGREE that the FIRST priority should be compatibility. but it is the first priority. if i agreed with you that qbguy was a threat to that ideal we BOTH share, i would argue on your side. we disagree that he is threatening it.

oddly, there are a number of things, like octal, that ARE compatibility issues (as closely as possible! you said) but you tell him not to nitpick about those.




>> Galleon has decided to add some extra stuff and things like SCREENs do need to be addressed.

they need to be addressed because he is currently working on developing and adding to qb64's "2d" capabilities. screen is directly related to this. there will not be a better time to ask about 2d related keywords in the future than now, when galleon is writing them.




>> But QBguy just continually DEMANDS more and I am getting a little TIRED of it.

your getting tired of it won't change galleon's plans more than qbguy will. but if that's your protest, you should make it. my issue is not with your protest, i just wish you didn't act like EVERYONE ELSE posts "bs" all the time. it's not bs.




>> There are many things that could be added as it is developed, but I think this kind of stuff is just FURTHER delaying the original idea. I don't even need QB64 yet and the XP extension to 2014 means that I will probably NEVER need it.

qbguy and i are using qb64 more and more, and we've been waiting a long time for galleon to come along and make a REAL qb compiler, not an alternative language. i haven't seen anyone put more effort into maintaining that compatibility than qbguy and galleon. as much as i care about it, i just can't match qbguy's ability. he's good.




>> If QB64 is ever gonna take off, we don't need continual delays for the sake of a few people that want Linux...

okay, i'm gonna stop here.

1. we're free to talk about the upcoming linux version that galleon has planned on the qb64 forum. from the beginning, galleon has clearly done a lot to build qb64 in a way that will be easy to duplicate in linux, qbguy is only helping that, not slowing down the windows version.

2. have you seen how fast galleon puts out new features, and bug fixes, and new versions, every month qb64 becomes twice as cool.

3. if what you're accusing qbguy of is true, then qb64 is LOSING MOEMENTUM in terms of compatibility. other than galleon running out of unimplemented qbasic functions, you're accusing qbguy of being responsible for a "crime" that i don't even think has taken place.

if and when i agree with you that galleon is slowing down (i do not think he is, and if he is, not beyond reason or convenience) then i will join you in saying as much.

i probably will not blame qbguy though. it's galleon that decides what galleon does, more than qbguy can be blamed.