DIM syntax from FreeBASIC

[FellippeHeitor]

I think that the change makes 'Dim' simpler to use. My only niggling concern would be, are the changes being made to make QB64 more efficient or to make QB64 more like FreeBasic? Just a thought...

Changes would be made just to type less. Don’t overthink it :-)

[Pete]

I'M OUTRAGED... YOU USED THE F-WORD!

Well just because I hate FB as a hole... I mean a whole, doesn't mean some parts of it are not worth a look. This DIM format is a good example. I'm for it.

Pete

[johnno56]

Fillippe,

I think the change is a good one. But I'm reminded of the old question "How do you eat an elephant?" "One bite at a time."
This time, 'Dim' is changed, one bite. Eventually the elephant will be unrecognizable... But that's just me... over-thinking is what I do... lol

Pete,

If, I had been aware of your dislike of FreeBasic, I would not have used the word FreeBasic... lol (I'm not a fan of FreeBasic either...)

[Cobalt]

Nay says I.

So I'm the only one who doesn't care for it I guess.

[Pete]

Pete,

If, I had been aware of your dislike of FreeBasic, I would not have used the word FreeBasic... lol (I'm not a fan of FreeBasic either...)

I forgive you, because you included an elephant joke... which reminds me. Why do jungle ducks have flat webbed feet? To stomp out flaming jungle fires. Why do elephants have big flat feet? To stomp out flaming jungle ducks.

As if Cobalt didn't feel bad enough about this thread, already. :D

Pete

[johnno56]

Thanks Pete! It took me over half a century to forget the 'flat webbed feet' joke! Looks like I will be taking it to my grave... *sigh*
(but the flaming ducks IS a classic! lol)

[Unseen Machine]

@Fellippe

It sounds fine to me but i'd much rather see type definitions that support arrays and have the broken linking to external libraries issue sorted out before you go adding features that do nothing for the languages capabilities. Also, if your thinking about adding stuff, are enumeratioun blocks possible!

Unseen

P.s. FB Sucks!

[luke]

I intensely dislike the parenthesisation approach for some reason.

The DIM AS INTEGER X, Y, Z is fine. Parser-wise it should just checking if the second element is AS, then copying the code that does the list parsing.

[Richard Frost]

It'd be a nice addition, but the variable type _BITCOIN would be better.

[FellippeHeitor]

@Fellippe

It sounds fine to me but i'd much rather see type definitions that support arrays and have the broken linking to external libraries issue sorted out before you go adding features that do nothing for the languages capabilities. Also, if your thinking about adding stuff, are enumeratioun blocks possible!

Unseen

P.s. FB Sucks!

Unseen, I understand your beef. But not implementing this won't make me automatically know how to implement your long awaited features, which are beyond my abilities.

All the changes required to implement this will be done on the .bas source, while any of your wishes would require c knowledge, which I only scratch.

I take this as a vote in favor.

I take the thread as a vote in favor too.

As I mentioned in the first post, there isn't even guarantee it will make it to the code base any time soon either.

To those against, I remind you it won't ever affect you if it gets added.

Thanks to all for chiming in.

PS: Pete was my worst fear and who I'd see ever getting outraged :-D - this thread was started with mostly you in mind.

[Unseen Machine]

Unseen, I understand your beef. But not implementing this won't make me automatically know how to implement your long awaited features, which are beyond my abilities.

Fair enough but i think you are under rating yourself mate.

With your new way would this be allowed?

TYPE aType
 X, Y, Z AS Single

Unseen

[FellippeHeitor]

There's a lot to consider beyond DIM/REDIM: TYPEs, SUB/FUNCTION parameters, DECLARE LIBRARY blocks, STATIC, SHARED, all scattered. Not gonna be an easy task when undertaken.

[bplus]

I intensely dislike the parenthesisation approach for some reason.

The DIM AS INTEGER X, Y, Z is fine. Parser-wise it should just checking if the second element is AS, then copying the code that does the list parsing.

It's also more typing.

But if you write a new FUNCTIONs? INTEGERS(a, b, c(), z... ) might be easier to add?

Oh what about UDT's?

DIM AS UDT  a, b c(), z
probably going to be difficult also.

Does OPTION _EXPLICIT check some kind of array list or lists?

[Pete]

PS: Pete was my worst fear and who I'd see ever getting outraged :-D - this thread was started with mostly you in mind.

I figured as much. I hope my reply didn't knock you too far off your chair. The fun in being a forum admin is to see how many times you can "ask" the members these types of questions, while preventing an all out uncivil war. Kudos, you did a great job with this one. Also kudos from the old guard for keeping QB64 more of an updated version of QuickBASIC. I never felt like I had to abandon it to learn something new. You need FreeBASIC for that! Oops, now you've got me using the F-word.

Pete

[FellippeHeitor]

❤️