Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - zaadstra

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 6
1
QB64 Discussion / Re: Command line to create EXE's ?
« on: March 29, 2022, 03:03:26 pm »
Quote from: Petr on March 13, 2022, 04:57:56 am
@mynameispaul

You can also use QB64 /? for view more options (switches).

I tried that but is appears to be QB64 -?

Code: Text: [Select]
  1. >D:\qb64-2.0.1\qb64.exe -?
  2. QB64 Compiler V2.0.1
  3.  
  4. Usage: qb64 [switches] <file>
  5.  
  6. Options:
  7.   <file>                  Source file to load
  8.   -c                      Compile instead of edit
  9.   -o <output file>        Write output executable to <output file>
  10.   -x                      Compile instead of edit and output the result to the
  11.                              console
  12.   -w                      Show warnings
  13.   -q                      Quiet mode (does not inhibit warnings or errors)
  14.   -m                      Do not colorize compiler output (monochrome mode)
  15.   -e                      Enable OPTION _EXPLICIT, making variable declaration
  16.                              mandatory (per-compilation; doesn't affect the
  17.                              source file or global settings)
  18.   -s[:switch=true/false]  View/edit compiler settings
  19.   -l:<line number>        Start the IDE at the specified line number
  20.   -p                      Purge all pre-compiled content first
  21.   -z                      Generate C code without compiling to executable
  22.  

2
QB64 Discussion / Re: QB64 v2.0.1 released! ⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️
« on: October 27, 2021, 02:44:42 am »
I did a compare of the qb64_2.0.1_win-x86 and qb64_2.0.1_windows_xp_x86 folders, and found some small differences in libraries.

Would creating a next XP version require the new qb64.bas to be dropped into the qb64_2.0.1_windows_xp_x86 folder and then compile (with any version?) ?  I guess compiling will take quite some time.

Not that I really feel the need to, as even v1.4 perfectly does the job anyways.  Just wondering how it al works under the hood :-)

3
QB64 Discussion / Re: QB64 v2.0.1 released! ⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️
« on: October 26, 2021, 04:57:13 pm »
What are improvements or less work when dropping XP support? 
Will the compiler/IDE and/or the code be smaller, faster, whatever on the higher platforms?
Less complex or old compatible code?  Just curious.

4
QB64 Discussion / Re: QB64 v2.0.1 released! ⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️
« on: October 26, 2021, 04:23:12 pm »
You're quite confusing @FellippeHeitor ;-)    I've found the XP version.

I still compile for XP once in a while (yes yes...) - glad to see there is still a special XP version.
Is compilng a new release simply compiling /source/qb64.bas from the source zip?

Will this .0.1 step release be the first of more small update releases?

5
Programs / Re: Spriggsy's API Collection
« on: October 16, 2021, 03:45:52 am »
Thanks!

6
Programs / Re: Spriggsy's API Collection
« on: October 15, 2021, 05:39:30 pm »
Hi @SpriggsySpriggs,

I am trying to have Windows do a time calculation for me.  And I was looking here for the API Collection to see if something will help me.

I want to use the call SystemTimeToTzSpecificLocalTime, to convert an UTC timesmap to local timezone stamp.   I just found out that your API collection is gone from Github (link throws a 404 error), did you know that?

Half a year ago I grabbed a zip from it,  I'll start digging from there.

7
QB64 Discussion / Re: QB64 v2.0 released! ⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️
« on: October 10, 2021, 04:16:21 pm »
Hey and look at THAT !!!  (Dutch):

https://tweakers.net/downloads/57778/qb64-20.html

A good moment to increase visibility of QB64 :-)

8
QB64 Discussion / Re: QB64 v2.0 released! ⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️
« on: October 10, 2021, 03:14:50 pm »
Quote from: OldMoses on October 10, 2021, 12:58:59 pm
I'll be eagerly awaiting the debug video, too. Thanks for all the good work you do.

I second that!

9
QB64 Discussion / Re: QB64 v2.0 released! ⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️
« on: October 10, 2021, 03:09:57 am »
Wow super!  Looking forward to start using it!  Congrats and thanks to the team.

10
QB64 Discussion / Re: QB64 competitors... It is an hard life!
« on: October 06, 2021, 06:26:26 am »
Talking here about BASIC or QB64 not good enough anymore for professional purposes.

There are several QB64 programs by my hand running on Windows Servers at work, as "glue" or diagnostic tools, or report generators.
QB64 suits the job perfectly if you ask me.

11
Programs / Re: Function Timestamp
« on: October 03, 2021, 05:25:29 pm »
I wanted to display difference between epoch times in the Exif program, and since you asked for it @bplus, here it goes:

Code: QB64: [Select]
  1. FUNCTION TimeStampDiff$ (tm_epoch&&)
  2.    ' call with argument: UNIX epoch time difference - a number of seconds - best called with ABS(val1_epoch&& - val2_epoch&&)
  3.    year&& = tm_epoch&& \ 31536000: tm_epoch&& = tm_epoch&& - year&&
  4.    month&& = tm_epoch&& \ 2678400: tm_epoch&& = tm_epoch&& - month&&
  5.    day&& = tm_epoch&& \ 86400: tod = tm_epoch&& - day&& * 86400
  6.    hh = tod \ 3600
  7.    mm = (tod - hh * 3600) \ 60
  8.    ss = tod MOD 60
  9.    TimeStampDiff$ = RIGHT$(STR$(10000 + year&&), 4) + ":" + RIGHT$(STR$(100 + month&&), 2) + ":" + RIGHT$(STR$(100 + day&&), 2) + " " + RIGHT$(STR$(100 + hh), 2) + ":" + RIGHT$(STR$(100 + mm), 2) + ":" + RIGHT$(STR$(100 + ss), 2)

This looks like 0000:00:00 00:12:18 for an epoch diff of 738. 

12
QB64 Discussion / Re: How organized are you guys?
« on: October 03, 2021, 01:40:09 pm »
Nice topic by the way :-)

Maybe we should share the tools as well that we are using to conquer the mess we've created ...

Like I use Duplicati for backup and I would be helpless without Everything Search.

13
QB64 Discussion / Re: How organized are you guys?
« on: October 03, 2021, 12:43:11 pm »
I've got a massive pile of programs floating on many pc's and disks ...  Stuff that is useful gets copied to 'the new' pc and so lives on ...
Also I've found programs from which I really don't have an idea what they do.... specific tools probably.  And also I suspect to have written programs twice to solve the same problem :-)

But I'm a bit more organized now, With a \BAS folder with all subfolder per program or group of programs.
And a tree of the same folders in a Projects share on a nas.
Stuff is backed up by Duplicati (a kind of Time Machine), which has really helped me out when I need to look back at an 'in-between version' and forgot to increase the version number and go on in a new file.

14
Programs / Re: Function Timestamp
« on: October 03, 2021, 11:53:27 am »
You may remove the loop and setup the tm$ yourself to verify values.  It gets coverted to UNIX time, and then the outcome is converted back.

Gregorian calendar was introduced in the year 1582, and Julian calendar was introduced by Julius Caesar in 46 BC.  Julian date 0 is in the year -4712.... There has been a lot of hassling with the calendars during the ages.  This Julian calculation with a Gregorian sauce on top calculates the current leap years (UNIX to timestamp routine).  You might discuss if that is accurate befoure introducing it before 1582, I did not research that.
Wikipedia and other sites have a lot of information.

15
Programs / Re: Function Timestamp
« on: October 03, 2021, 11:36:24 am »
Quote from: bplus on October 03, 2021, 11:06:43 am
@zaadstra

Can yours be used to calculate the difference between 2 dates and times?

Is there a limit to earliest date & time (like start of Gregorian calendar, assuming Gregorian calculations) and future dates like something in year 2050?

I think yes,  that's what I intend to use it for.  Although my date/times will be in this age, I have tested working on dates from the year 488 to 2521 and the results checked out with the website.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 6