Feature Request: Split Screen

[hanness]

Steve, as the originator of this particular thread, I just wanted to chime in and add my final comments. Thanks greatly for that recap - it helps clarify many things for me.

Please also don't understand my original post as a complaint in any way. I had merely thought of it as an idea of something that would be useful to me.

As it stands right now, I absolutely love QB64. I'm getting countless hours of enjoyment out of it. As I mentioned earlier, I have a program I'm currently working on that is over 5,000 lines long at this point. I've never really done much in the way of programming. I did play with QuickBasic 4.5 many years ago when I was young lad, but only really simple programs.

I'm using QB64 currently to automate a whole bunch of command line operations in Windows which allow me to automate tasks. These tasks would take days to run manually but with the aid of my trusty QB64 program takes mere minutes. I had originally started this program as a batch file, but trying to build any decent logic into a batch file was just not an easy task for me.

For the most part it's been incredibly easy to be productive with QB64 and it's now an absolute necessary part of my toolkit.

Thanks for maintaining and enhancing such an incredibly useful tool!

[Petr]

Hi,

Steve, thank you for your summary. Writing my own IDE - I didn't even think about it. I'm really happy for the new commands you add to the IDE. I also have to apologize to Fellippe Heitor for the grumpy commentary right after QB 1.3. I think I touched him deeply. I really didn't want to.
There's only one thing I'm sorry about. You keep pushing some broken things from the past. That's why I (wrongly) thought that when the new version came out, it was such a huge step forward that the flies from the past will not be there. Unfortunately, it did not concern them and it was my stupid reaction. I understand that it is not in the human power of an individual to correct a foreign code, especially if there is no contact with the original author so that one can ask him  for advice, if something see as unlogical.

Fellippe Heitor, I'm sorry. I didn't mean to offend you in any way.

I respect you all. Developers and contributors, because I am always expanding my knowledge.

Hannes: Thanks for the reply. I realized that what you describe is true. It would really be beneficial.

Only in general. If  was found someone (sheer lunatic) who wanted to completely write a new IDE. I assume that without knowing C ++ it absolutely makes no sense to try, is it? I also assume that it would not be enough to overwrite qb64, but also other large attached bass files. I would like to discuss this topic (without obligation and really out of knowledge) in a new thread.

I enjoy QB64. Very much.

[SMcNeill]

Please also don't understand my original post as a complaint in any way. I had merely thought of it as an idea of something that would be useful to me.

No worries at all.  I didn’t think anybody was complaining at all; I just wanted to explain a bit about why I didn’t think we’d see such changes in the IDE anytime soon.  The way it’s structured just simply doesn’t present itself for easy modification or alteration. 

If you’re curious, just look inside the source yourself and examine ide_methods.bas (where most of the IDE related code is located).  Do a search for SCREEN and see how many SCREEN , , 3, 4 statements and such are in it.  Those are all page flippers which set various active display and source pages.  Then search for VIEW, and WINDOW commands and see how many of them are peppered into various places and multiple routines...  Then, just imagine how complicated it’d be to make *any* simple change to the IDE and integrate it into the existing system — all without being able to ask the original coder any questions about how things work.

It’s just a tangled mess and hard to sort out, so I wouldn’t hold my breath in waiting to see any major changes happening to the IDE.  ;D

Personally, if I could just POOF a new feature into the IDE, I’d like TABS for multiple programs to be open at the same time, in just one instance of the IDE running....   But, like with your request, I don’t think I’ll hold my breath waiting to see that functionality added either, anytime soon.  ;)

[SMcNeill]

Only in general. If  was found someone (sheer lunatic) who wanted to completely write a new IDE. I assume that without knowing C ++ it absolutely makes no sense to try, is it? I also assume that it would not be enough to overwrite qb64, but also other large attached bass files. I would like to discuss this topic (without obligation and really out of knowledge) in a new thread.

I enjoy QB64. Very much.

If you look in the Steve64 folder you downloaded to test things previously, there’s a file in the archive folder there called NewIDE, I think — it was my experimental attempt to write my own IDE, and it’s 100% all .BAS file.  QB64’s IDE is, more or less, all inside ide_methods.bas, and it’s all .BAS code.  I think Stxatic’s IDE is all in QB64 as well. 

You don’t need to know c++ to write one at all; you just need to mainly work out screen scrolling, highlighting, copy/paste, and mostly text handling/input manipulation routines.  I learned a lot playing around with my IDE, as I sorted things out with it; and I’d encourage anyone who’s interested in them to give creating one a try.  Who knows — you might even come up with some nice functionality which we can then plug into QB64 itself!  (After all, that’s what happened with my IDE — the ASCII chart and internal math routines we use inside QB64 now, first originated in my IDE as features which I thought would be nice to have, and then were imported over...)

[STxAxTIC]

Just a correction:

I think Stxatic’s IDE is all in QB64 as well

It was Dav who wrote the alternative IDE. If there's a rumor that I made anything similar, the closest hit would have been qxed.

[Dimster]

Growing pains - no meaningful change in life or anything we do, which involves others, can be accomplished without it.

I hope Galleon and you guys carrying the mantle now can take some pride in where QB64 is going and all you guys carrying the mantle now can somehow recognize the issue in comments, no matter how hard it is to see when the remarks are so personally directed.

And we,who benefit and depend on your talents, present our wants and needs in terms of an issue or topic, and avoid personal remarks that begin " You need to do .." or Galleon did..." Just removing personal stuff goes a long way toward civility and thoughtful discussion.

Pretty pious statement but we lose so many good people over personally directed remarks.