Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 41 to 80 of 90

Thread: vb6 trans compiling?

  1. #41
    Super Moderator Shaggy Hiker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Idaho
    Posts
    38,989

    Re: vb6 trans compiling?

    Quote Originally Posted by Carlos Rocha View Post
    Besides, my opinion was based in the fact that, e.g, Olaf is not allowed to post a link to his vbRichClient site anywhere in vbforums, and he's not asking for money.
    I'm not going to be one arguing about the use of the word crap. I use it myself, obviously, and the filter allows it, so I'm not inclined to push the issue.

    I never saw this as advertising, or fundraising. I saw it as Don Quixote seeking advice as to whether or not to charge a particular windmill, and I guess I would sum it up like this:

    I don't think it will work, and I don't discourage it, but whether or not you decide to charge, you should see clearly that it is a windmill and not believe it to be a giant.
    My usual boring signature: Nothing

  2. #42
    PowerPoster
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    24,482

    Re: vb6 trans compiling?

    Maybe the best thing would be to wait until we can see an early prototype.

  3. #43
    Member LOfADay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    44

    Re: vb6 trans compiling?

    @Elroy, that's great! That's the sort of input I look for. Sorry about blowing my own trumpet. I'm sure there are those here who are more successful! Your analysis is absolutely agree with every part. Quick replies:
    • interesting about the resource editor. Will look into that.
    • Intellisense -- kept, but some of the more obscure objects may be difficult.
    • "Option Explicit" is the single highest priority. Without that, it's nothing.
    • Data Managemnt, agreed.
    • Visual Component Manager, agreed
    • Object Browser is mentioned in the limitations -- I agree something needs to be done. As yet, I haven't confronted that and suspect that will have to be limited.
    • Custom property pages, agreed
    • Nb: it WILL support your own plug ins via ActiveX's you build yourself. There will be an API published.



    I've given guarantees, but I know all about branding preferences and the IBM principle (no one was ever sacked by buying IBM) and one of the keys to this is to retain a bit of the Microsoft brand in there. If it does gain market traction, it will be bought by an MS or Oracle or etc, and then it will really fly. That said, you have more control over a small development group, especially someone passionate about the philosophy behind VB6 which I think is overlooked.

    @Shaggy, thanks again and I will also try and keep it in the guidelines. Your overall summation is quite fair and the last paragraph (your 2nd last reply) very insightful. You wouldn't believe the number of times I have started on this and dropped it unbeknownst to anyone (but I did complete the Python one and used it internally for profit) but rest assured that If I accept the challenge, I finish it. Hence checking to see if I should accept!

    Here's a few more clues about how things are done.. I wrote a program that took all the Darkbasic instructions and then translated it into more VB6 code. Ie: code to write code. This allowed intelesense, understanding of variable types, and context sensitive help. I also use On foo Goto a lot as that is essentially a vectoring look up. MS don't like for some reason... but it is almost as fast as machine code.

    @dilittante, perhaps, but a prototype or a demonstrator can be a dangerous thing as said earlier.
    Last edited by LOfADay; Jan 26th, 2017 at 12:18 PM.
    www.vb64.com logo courtesy of BadAssTechnologies by permission & with thanks.

  4. #44
    Smooth Moperator techgnome's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Posts
    34,532

    Re: vb6 trans compiling?

    Just for my own edification, I want to make sure that I understand this ... CCE aside... what you're looking to do is build a new IDE for VB6 apps... but that it would still require the use of the VB6 compiler... which means I'd still have to buy/own/procure VB6 in the first place... which comes with the IDE... so.... unless there's a new compiler, I'm not sure what the advantage of a new IDE. Perhaps I lost something along the way.

    Now, if we're talking about something that allows you to write in VB6, then select a "target language"... say C++ and then it generates C++ code and compiles it... now that would be interesting...

    Either way... it sounds like a large undertaking...

    -tg
    * I don't respond to private (PM) requests for help. It's not conducive to the general learning of others.*
    * I also don't respond to friend requests. Save a few bits and don't bother. I'll just end up rejecting anyways.*
    * How to get EFFECTIVE help: The Hitchhiker's Guide to Getting Help at VBF - Removing eels from your hovercraft *
    * How to Use Parameters * Create Disconnected ADO Recordset Clones * Set your VB6 ActiveX Compatibility * Get rid of those pesky VB Line Numbers * I swear I saved my data, where'd it run off to??? *

  5. #45
    Member LOfADay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    44

    Re: vb6 trans compiling?

    @TG, yes to both. And yes, I have admitted in earlier posts that having to own VB6 is clearly a bit of a cheat and a drawback -- but this is only for true VB6 compatibility. Thereafter, there will be a lot of advantages of a new IDE, such as better code management, error protection management, well packaged access to API functionality, automated re-skinning, compatible icon importer, modernised GUI with tabs, cross-linking within comments, etc, etc (most of which has already been coded).

    As a Transcompiler, you have hit the nail on the head -- 1 input language, 1 IDE, 1 skill, many platforms, many operating systems (including tiny PICs). I think of it as the Google Translate of IDEs. However, it is necessary to be pragmatic and know that whilst the IDE will guide you as to what can and can't be done, there is no real attempt to make it efficiently import existing VB6 code because there will be a lot of work around the different widgets etc. C++ will be one of the last Transco projects (albeit Ansi C and GTK will be among the first), but we shall see as my colleague is a C++ expert.

    This is not just a technological project but a sort-of sociological one. VB6 programmers have suffered from the denial of legitimacy by heing forced to use outdated tools. This starts to address the situation by allowing you to claim it's very obviously updated and supported. A lot of effort is going on behind the scenes looking at future direction and I see this as much more than just a coding exercise.

    Hopefully I am not breaking my NDA's by saying use of this is in discussion with robotics companies regarding control and artificial intelligence. ***** has been made aware of It.

    Everyone is impressed with what VB6 can do, the speed and robustness at which it runs, the fact the entire IDE can be quickly copied and deployed to target environments for in-depth debugging, that it already runs on $40 tablets and miniature platforms such as LattePanda perfectly, etc etc. The only thing going against it is the tired looking VB6 IDE that has to be hacked to support mouse mid-scroll and supported by third-party code managers etc.
    Last edited by LOfADay; Jan 27th, 2017 at 06:05 AM. Reason: Removed word which may break my NDA :)
    www.vb64.com logo courtesy of BadAssTechnologies by permission & with thanks.

  6. #46
    Hyperactive Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    400

    Re: vb6 trans compiling?

    I use, since 1994/1995, a product (VisualObjects) that converts Clipper/xBase code, along with his own OOP syntax, to C++ and then compiles/links it to produce PEs. Like VB6 it is now abandonware, and misses things like native unicode support, 64bit, and up-to VB6 ability to deal with COM/ActiveX. I still use it in a daily basis and, like VB6, with the right tools and 3rd parties (including VB6), I fell I can do anything I need.

    A similar product able to do the same with VB6 code would be good, but first it must be a product. Ideas don't translate anything.

    Then there's things in this "idea" that I really don't like.
    GPL - I didn't see pointed anywhere that GPL forces you to release your own source code.
    $1614? why 1614 and not $1615, or $1599 like in supermarkets?
    If the final "idea" is as confusing as the entire webpage, forget about it, it's useless.

    Fortunately, there are lots of good coders here that ignore VB6 limitations and keep moving it beyond his own bondaries (Olaf, dilettante, Krool, fafalone, jbpro, just to name a few), with REAL working products, not ideas, and still not asking for money. So, what should be asked to the marketeer is WHAT is he able to supply that still doesn't exist. But clearer, if he is able to.
    Carlos

  7. #47
    Member LOfADay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    44

    Re: vb6 trans compiling?

    It's OK Carlos, you don't have to buy it.. LGPL then for the bits I do that are OpenS, and yes, if you use someone else's GPL, you have to do just that -- as do I. On pricing, http://www.vb64.com/0u1Bn3DF--*, you will see I was just having some fun. VB64, $64, $164, $1614. You see? What I bring to it is something I've always brought to the table... I can negotiate, understand contract law, run companies, blow my own trumpet, think out of the box, bang my own head,... kidding. What I'm trying to say is that it's not enough just to be a brilliant coder (and I'm not brilliant), you have to be connected, commercially aware, able to sell it, explain it, understand the legal aspects, understand the driver behind your clients, document it, set up support infrastructure, etc -- all things that I've been doing for years. Do you fancy buying shares? This may well be outside the guidelines for which I apologise.
    Last edited by LOfADay; Jan 26th, 2017 at 03:33 PM.
    www.vb64.com logo courtesy of BadAssTechnologies by permission & with thanks.

  8. #48
    Hyperactive Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    400

    Re: vb6 trans compiling?

    Shouldn't it be $1564, or $1664? Buying shares of what, exactly?
    You are indeed a good talker, but I see nothing to sell...only pageantry and blatant "how good I am".
    Carlos

  9. #49
    Super Moderator Shaggy Hiker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Idaho
    Posts
    38,989

    Re: vb6 trans compiling?

    Actually, I'm thinking of changing my answer. If the goal is a new IDE on top of VB6, and eventually others, I'm less supportive. That's exactly what I think MS is trying to do with VS (though not including VB6, of course, or you'd have heard of it). The VS IDE is pretty good, and is actively being extended, which are not two points that are always compatible. They take a step forwards with one thing, and a step back with another, in each new release. In general, I'd say that progress is being made, but that's quite open to debate. However, the other thing they are doing is broadening the languages that you can work with in the VS IDE. VS2015 has the various .NET, C/C++, JS, Cordova, and Xamarin. Probably more, too. VS2017 is going to add at least Python and R.

    One IDE to rule them all, seems to be the goal of MS. Writing something to allow VB6 to work on different platforms is massively difficult, but valuable. I'm not at all convinced that writing a new IDE that works with ONLY VB6 is worthwhile at all, and making an IDE that works with VB6...and other languages, is what MS is doing minus the VB6 part. So, your competition outnumbers you considerably already.

    Aside from VB6, what would the IDE offer that MS isn't about to include into VS 20..whatever? They seem to be sticking things onto VS like a mad collage artist in a magazine factory. I'm sure there are languages that they won't include, but you'll be dodging a rolling, apparently random, behemoth. That doesn't even seem like tilting at windmills. Sounds more like playing the staring role in a game of frogger.
    My usual boring signature: Nothing

  10. #50
    Hyperactive Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    400

    Re: vb6 trans compiling?

    Quote Originally Posted by Shaggy Hiker View Post
    Actually, I'm thinking of changing my answer. If the goal is a new IDE on top of VB6, and eventually others, I'm less supportive. That's exactly what I think MS is trying to do with VS (though not including VB6, of course, or you'd have heard of it). The VS IDE is pretty good, and is actively being extended, which are not two points that are always compatible. They take a step forwards with one thing, and a step back with another, in each new release. In general, I'd say that progress is being made, but that's quite open to debate. However, the other thing they are doing is broadening the languages that you can work with in the VS IDE. VS2015 has the various .NET, C/C++, JS, Cordova, and Xamarin. Probably more, too. VS2017 is going to add at least Python and R.

    One IDE to rule them all, seems to be the goal of MS. Writing something to allow VB6 to work on different platforms is massively difficult, but valuable. I'm not at all convinced that writing a new IDE that works with ONLY VB6 is worthwhile at all, and making an IDE that works with VB6...and other languages, is what MS is doing minus the VB6 part. So, your competition outnumbers you considerably already.

    Aside from VB6, what would the IDE offer that MS isn't about to include into VS 20..whatever? They seem to be sticking things onto VS like a mad collage artist in a magazine factory. I'm sure there are languages that they won't include, but you'll be dodging a rolling, apparently random, behemoth. That doesn't even seem like tilting at windmills. Sounds more like playing the staring role in a game of frogger.
    Agree. I forgot to mention that VS is also used by Vulcan.NET and XSharp, both claiming to be Visual Objects descendants. I didn't adopt them because they only produce .NET code.
    Carlos

  11. #51
    Member LOfADay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    44

    Re: vb6 trans compiling?

    @Shaggy - It's very late and I hope you don't mind that I might change my answer tomorrow when thinking clearer.

    A: Yes! But with these huge differences.. One language!, No bloat, Fast, You have some control over it/me. This is not a multi language IDE, it is a multi language translator. And I will declare Iegally binding contracts (to bind myself) that you will never be (I can't think of any words without swearing) crapped on again. I have already declared that if we can't support it, it all gets released as GPL (or as Carlos prompted me to add, LGPL).
    www.vb64.com logo courtesy of BadAssTechnologies by permission & with thanks.

  12. #52
    PowerPoster
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Posts
    2,224

    Re: vb6 trans compiling?

    define translator? because i thought we just covered that you're not making a transpiler.
    But then you said you were targetting Ansi C etc.

    are we being duped?
    Last edited by DEXWERX; Feb 16th, 2017 at 01:56 PM.

  13. #53
    Member LOfADay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    44

    Re: vb6 trans compiling?

    Transpiler TransCompiler indeed... Source to source compiler. Input always Dartmouth Basic (with VB6 leanings which I have to be careful of saying for copyright reasons), output = whatever, translated by extensions that you can add to. VB6 is treated as just one of the languages it transpiles to, and in that case it does not transco unless you set some switches (eg: error management). And by the way, the intention is your edits in VB6T4 are always backwards compatible so you can switch back to the VB6 IDE at any time. I like Trump.
    Last edited by LOfADay; Jan 26th, 2017 at 05:11 PM.
    www.vb64.com logo courtesy of BadAssTechnologies by permission & with thanks.

  14. #54
    PowerPoster PlausiblyDamp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Location
    Pontypool, Wales
    Posts
    2,458

    Re: vb6 trans compiling?

    Quote Originally Posted by LOfADay View Post
    @Shaggy - It's very late and I hope you don't mind that I might change my answer tomorrow when thinking clearer.

    A: Yes! But with these huge differences.. One language!, No bloat, Fast, You have some control over it/me. This is not a multi language IDE, it is a multi language translator. And I will declare Iegally binding contracts (to bind myself) that you will never be (I can't think of any words without swearing) crapped on again. I have already declared that if we can't support it, it all gets released as GPL (or as Carlos prompted me to add, LGPL).
    Is one language really such a big deal though? I admit to no longer doing anything with VB6 but when I did I found it a very good language however these days I tend to use VB.Net, C#, Javascript (or preferably Typescript) with occasionally a winforms app but more often a web based system - I am not sure the VB6 language would benefit even with the ability to target other backends for these scenarios.

    A language isn't just the familiarity of keywords, it includes a mindset and an approach to problem solving. OO Systems like VB.Net, C# and Java make you think about things in a certain way and are suitable to a lot of programming areas, however a functional language like F# or Haskell gives a completely different approach and therefore a different mindset which could make them suitable for a different type of problem domain. R, as mentioned by @Shaggy earlier, is aimed at statistical programming, C or C++ tend to be suited for more performance critical code or low level programming. Each of these also requires you to think in the language, not just type the correct words. Developing in one language and expecting to be able to produce decent code for an entirely different language is a mammoth undertaking, and that is without considering the overall experience; if we can use your proposed tooling to write VB6 code but generate C++ code how do we integrate things like debugging?

    Personally I would need a very good reason to switch from an IDE and development platform I am familiar with to an unknown one, anything I could no longer do would be one more reason to not switch; a product like this would therefore need either a 100% feature parity as a minimum or one or more features that make up for the loss of anything I already have.

  15. #55
    PowerPoster
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    7,219

    Re: vb6 trans compiling?

    Quote Originally Posted by LOfADay View Post
    Transpiler TransCompiler indeed... Source to source compiler. Input always Dartmouth Basic ...
    That's not going to fly - Dartmouth Basic doesn't support Classes.
    There's really a lot of confusing statements you made - but from what you said above,
    your "Transpiler-chain" would look like:
    VB6-Code -> Dartmouth Basic? -> C/C++? -> native Binary (for x86, x64, ARM, etc...)

    And what about these "other languages" - how are they come in?
    Normally, when an IDE supports "multiple languages", they stand on the
    left-hand-side of the above chain (because only that makes sense).

    But if I understood you correctly, you mean it entirely different, as e.g. for "Python-support":
    VB6-Code -> Dartmouth Basic? -> Python?

    Who on earth would want to use Python as a *compile-target* (when he can get native-code-
    output for VB6-code on all platforms already with a C/C++ in the final stage on the right-hand-side?

    Python (for those who are familiar with it and love its syntax) would only make sense
    on the left-hand-side - but if you now say, "yes, my NDA-protected supertech would of course also support that"
    (like I expect you to do) - how would that look like then?
    Python-Code -> Dartmouth Basic?(really?) -> C/C++ -> native Binary (for x86, x64, ARM)

    Sorry to inform you, but for Python-Input to end up native compiled, there already exist
    projects which do just that (Cython for example).

    So, something in your "Transpiler-idea" is seriously backwards (either way), coming from a lack of deeper
    understanding I assume (not meant as an insult - but what you write is really contradicting itself).

    You're also underestimating enormously, what the VB6-IDE already does under the covers with its PCode/VBA-engine
    (especially with regards to debugging - and in that field with regards to Edit&Continue).

    That's exactly the point where I'm "hanging" currently in my own efforts - it can be solved with C-CoRoutines,
    but it needs a large amount of time (which is sparse at the moment on my end, because I'm not selfemployed
    anymore like in earlier years - but work in a "normal fulltime-job" now).
    So, Edit &Continue requires a really deep integration/interaction between Compiler and Code-Editor,
    to do this properly - and thus it doesn't make sense to "release what I have early" (with regards
    to the current "only loosely coupled" Code-Editor and Compiler...) - it would be "just another FreeBasic"
    when I do so, requiring to "rip it all apart" later again (because there is no other way to implement
    Edit&Continue).

    A straight-forward compiler for VB6 (with an intermediate C-CodeEmitter) is comparably simple - and *not* the problem.
    (A whole lot of Basics out there demonstrate that approach already - and they are not as successful
    as they could be, because of that missing tight integration of VB6-like Debugging-support - and also
    because (and that's the second highly important point):
    Because of their lack of a library-format, which is selfdescribing (like COM does over Typelibs) - so that
    Intellisense-support for the IDE can be written in a generic fashion.

    I also don't like (as others have already pointed out), that you put "business and money first" -
    your project depends on sucessfully solving really difficult technical problems first (the already mentioned
    "tightly integrated Debugging" - and "selfdescribing libraries"-problem ... the GUI, including FormDesigner-
    support, DPI-awareness and Unicode-support in a platform-independent way is not that much of a problem -
    it is already solved with vbRichClient5).

    But before I would invest any coin into your project, you would have to *name the guy* first, who you think
    can solve the above problems for you - if it's not "a name I've read about" (from comparable projects on GitHub
    or elsewhere), your project will not be successful, believe me. An average C/C++ developer will not be able
    to cut the mustard on that front - especially when he doesn't have any deep experience about the inner workings
    of VB6, its Runtime and COM.

    Olaf

  16. #56
    Member LOfADay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    44

    Re: vb6 trans compiling?

    Too negative. Perhaps another day. If you really want the answers, it's all been said before. I've unsubscribed from the thread for now in an effort to get on with my life. Thanks again to Elroy for your guidance.
    Last edited by LOfADay; Jan 27th, 2017 at 11:33 AM. Reason: Softened. Now must be off. :)
    www.vb64.com logo courtesy of BadAssTechnologies by permission & with thanks.

  17. #57
    PowerPoster
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    24,482

    Re: vb6 trans compiling?

    I was immediately reminded of Gnomes (South Park) when I read the web page.

  18. #58
    Super Moderator Shaggy Hiker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Idaho
    Posts
    38,989

    Re: vb6 trans compiling?

    Quote Originally Posted by Schmidt View Post
    Who on earth would want to use Python as a *compile-target*
    Snake charmers.
    My usual boring signature: Nothing

  19. #59
    Member LOfADay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    44

    Re: vb6 trans compiling?

    @dilettante, Coming here, I thought I'd stumbled across the People's front of Judea -- Python. That was the good old days when Python meant something.
    Last edited by LOfADay; Jan 28th, 2017 at 07:58 AM.
    www.vb64.com logo courtesy of BadAssTechnologies by permission & with thanks.

  20. #60
    PowerPoster
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    24,482

    Re: vb6 trans compiling?

    If we seem skeptical it is only because we've seen a lot of unrealized promises of this kind in the past. With time we've become pretty hardened cynics about such proposals.

  21. #61
    PowerPoster
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    7,219

    Re: vb6 trans compiling?

    Quote Originally Posted by dilettante View Post
    If we seem skeptical it is only because we've seen a lot of unrealized promises of this kind in the past. With time we've become pretty hardened cynics about such proposals.
    Speaking for me, the scepticism is not "automatic" or something... (because "you never know" and all that).

    Though what I'm always looking for is, whether the "technical approach is sound" -
    (when there's at least a rough description of something like that at all).

    And although a rough description was given in this case, it doesn't seem sound, hence my questions about that.

    Failing to answer these technical questions was, what now got my scepticism sparked.
    The people who propose something like that (asking for help, financially or coding-wise),
    should know what they're doing/attempting - and this doesn't seem the case here.

    @LOfADay
    Why not explaining in more detail, how you plan to compile a simple VB6-Class?

    I'm not that much interested in an IDE-clone which uses the original VB6-compiler under the covers,
    because it will in many places not reach the functionality of the original VB6-IDE - it's the other
    part, the "usage of a compiler-chain, which is something else than VB6.exe" which would make such
    an effort worthwhile - and something to be considered (despite missing some features initially).

    Olaf

  22. #62
    Member LOfADay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    44

    Re: vb6 trans compiling?

    Hi Olaf, I've heard a lot about you and studied the Indiegogo effort you were named in (and learned what not to do).

    • To compile a class, or anything from a CMD like, "VB6.EXE /make Project1.vbp /out result.txt" (http://stackoverflow.com/a/232476/1863152 explains more). I don't program using classes myself but I do see the attraction to them, especially with DLLs, and wonder if we could extend support in the T4 IDE, but for now, a *.cls is simply treated as another source file and must be loaded as part of a project. It is C2 and LINK that make sense of it from the Project File.
    • T4 (VB6T4) handles debugging, breakpoints, watch, by use of inserting debug code. Step-Through and Pause-Edit-Resume is not well supported as yet, but there are plans. In the meantime, you can STILL use the VB6 IDE for that as the T4 always generates backward compatible code (otherwise, VB6 couldn't compile it!).
    • Cython: T4 can be used to derive C++ 64bit via Python using Cython. I have been working on it. Their 64bit is a bit shaky IMHO as yet.
    • Option Explicit: T4 effectively precompiles (ie: has a p-code style hashing compiler) in order to accurately and perfectly check syntax. At a much much later stage, it is hoped to make this a basis for a fully integrated IDE that will allow Step-Through and Pause-Edit-Resume.
    • A business model was chosen because it will work for you, the user, providing stability and continuity, and for me. We have all seen that Open Source doesn't really fly (unless taken up by a major investor).
    • I used the term Dartmouth Basic because it has no copyright restrictions. If I use the term VB6 Basic, or if I refer to it as 100% VB6 compatible (without using a licensed VB6 compiler), I risk the wrathful attention of Microsoft's's lawyers (more below).

    I'm sorry to say, the reason why many find the website obfuscated is as I have to avoid saying "it's identical to the VB6 IDE, it uses exactly the same syntax as VB6". It is simply illegal to clone the VB6 IDE or it's Syntax, as was precedented many moons ago with Lotus 1-2-3 shutting down the plethora of clones that were around at the time. It may even be risky comparing it to VB6. The look and feel is locked down. That said, if you own a VB6 licence, you can use the VB6 syntax, but that must not be the primary syntax model offered by the IDE for use on other compilers. All I can say is it will be familiar. You can also modify the T4 IDE so that menus are identical and easily found, and I'm sure you could circulate that script/OCX, but I can't sell it or even give it away without risk. The one major advantage of open source over a business model is to get away from patent trolls over look and feel etc, but of course the disadvantage is that generosity doesn't pay mortgages.

    As I keep saying, this is not some venture to bleed you, my main motivation is having this for my own purposes to keep my own skills alive and port those skills elsewhere. It is upsetting, hurtful, very time wasting and frustrating to hear snide remarks like references to Southpark Gnomes and this constant barrage of negativity that seems at times intent on vandalism (upon me and your own futures), psychologically and financially, by undermining the project itself as well as me. I am not Microsoft, I did not do this to you. You could so easily have done this yourself -- and I'm not quite sure why nobody has. The only hard part of T4 is making a hashing vectoring indexer (just like proper databases and google etc itself obviously uses).

    No one has succeeded at this before because IMHO I think they've adopted the wrong approach and don't project manage etc, but I suspect you are all capable of the technology. It was clear from the unsuccessful IndieGogo that it will be very difficult to get people on board. Profit would be nice, so maybe I can take the kids for a vacation, but I see my profit coming from the USE of this tool, not the making of it. If I am the only one that uses it, then I cannot claim (as I hope we'll all be able to) that it is an actively supported prominent RAD coding solution. If I don't charge, I cannot possibly proceed, because I cannot justify making no money for months. On the other hand, if it does "fly", and become a major revenue stream, that's the best possible news for you! (Isn't it?). This all started when I made the point to someone that success is not in the technology, but in the productization. We don't need a new VB6 IDE, we need a CONCEPT that you can be taken to our clients and that we can work with and learn.

    The project code is well in hand having been evolved from earlier projects (to repeat, I have done a simpler version already). Please don't forget I have not decided to proceed to make this publicly available yet. Of course I will be looking for further encouragement from other than this forum, but I thank all for their input. If I could offer you all free copies, I would and may yet do so.

    (Website has been just updated by the way). It will be interesting to see how many people read all that! (One naughty remark I will make -- does anyone read anything here?). Now I must get back to the salt mine, which means I will only check back here occasionally, sorry
    Last edited by LOfADay; Jan 29th, 2017 at 12:48 PM. Reason: removed a bit of rant. Kept some tho'. Thanks for your understanding.
    www.vb64.com logo courtesy of BadAssTechnologies by permission & with thanks.

  23. #63
    PowerPoster
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    7,219

    Re: vb6 trans compiling?

    Quote Originally Posted by LOfADay View Post
    Hi Olaf, I've heard a lot about you and studied the Indiegogo effort you were named in (and learned what not to do).
    Just for the record - these efforts were initiated without myself knowing about it - and I wouldn't have
    suggested to make any attempt in that regard (at that time) - because I had a gut-feeling, that it was too early.

    Looking back however, I'm thankful that AxisDJ (the OP of this thread) was trying something like that regardless,
    because (as you say), there was something to learn from it - although it seems that we both drew
    differing conclusions:
    - you think, that perhaps with "more intensive, more business-like marketing" the outcome will be different (your proposals read that way)
    - whilst I know now for sure, that without "something to show beforehand" (something to touch, something working that's truly promising)
    .. that without at least *some* of the technical challenges already solved, there will be no chance for success...

    And for me it's not that much about "money" being the critical factor here (although being able to work "fulltime"
    on something like that "unhampered by daily struggles" would be nice) - but I think the whole thing is more about "acceptance".

    Acceptance of the project in the community (because it will be sustainable in the long-run only, when a few of the
    gifted developers will take up the baton, trying to understand the code, diving in and developing the project further).

    And these developers will not necessarily have to recruit themselves entirely out of the VB6-community.
    When the approach is sound - and the whole thing is basically working (in a truly RADish way), developers from other
    languages will be interested as well (especially then, when the approach has all the necessary bits to work platform-independent as well).


    Quote Originally Posted by LOfADay View Post

    To compile a class, or anything from a CMD like, "VB6.EXE /make Project1.vbp /out result.txt". I don't program using classes myself but I do see the attraction to them, especially with DLLs, and wonder if we could extend support in the T4 IDE, but for now, a *.cls is simply treated as another source file and must be loaded as part of a project. It is C2 and LINK that make sense of it from the Project File.
    T4 (VB6T4) handles debugging, breakpoints, watch, by use of inserting debug code. Step-Through and Pause-Edit-Resume is not well supported as yet, but there are plans. In the meantime, you can STILL use the VB6 IDE for that as the T4 always generates backward compatible code (otherwise, VB6 couldn't compile it!).
    Cython: T4 can be used to derive C++ 64bit via Python using Cython. I have been working on it. Their 64bit is a bit shaky IMHO as yet.
    Option Explicit: T4 effectively precompiles (ie: has a p-code style hashing compiler) in order to accurately and perfectly check syntax. At a much much later stage, it is hoped to make this a basis for a fully integrated IDE that will allow Step-Through and Pause-Edit-Resume.
    A business model was chosen because it will work for you, the user, providing stability and continuity, and for me. We have all seen that Open Source doesn't really fly (unless taken up by a major investor).
    I used the term Dartmouth Basic because it has no copyright restrictions. If I use the term VB6 Basic, or if I refer to it as 100% VB6 compatible (without using a licensed VB6 compiler), I risk the wrathful attention of Microsoft's's lawyers (more below).
    You complain about too much negativity in this thread - and there is indeed a lot of it to find here (and myself
    contributing to it in a way, because I have to tell you, that what you've written above is still absolutely unconvincing).

    But I'm arguing from a technical point of view (and if you want, I can take apart - and write-up my "criticisms" on each of your points above in more detail).

    I share your sentiments about a "somehow missing community spirit on this board" though...
    Nobody really seems to be interested in (helping with) a renewed VB6 here, not sure why that is -
    but that's the reason why I was marking the snippet above in magenta, because that's important
    to keep in mind, since there's only very few VB6-developers willing to invest any considerable
    amount of time into a community-project which would save this (their, our) nice RAD-environment.

    Olaf

  24. #64
    PowerPoster PlausiblyDamp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Location
    Pontypool, Wales
    Posts
    2,458

    Re: vb6 trans compiling?

    Quote Originally Posted by LOfADay View Post
    The only hard part of T4 is making a hashing vectoring indexer (just like proper databases and google etc itself obviously uses).
    I honestly doubt that is the hardest part of building a full IDE with debugging, intellisense and multiple language support.

    I really think the hardest part of all this is going to be convincing people of the value in an IDE that might not offer all the functionality they already have and also require them to own VB6 anyway. You will need something that offers substantially more than people already have, cross-compiling to Dartmouth Basic or Python really doesn't seem that big a deal.
    Last edited by PlausiblyDamp; Jan 28th, 2017 at 07:20 PM.

  25. #65
    Member LOfADay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    44

    Re: vb6 trans compiling?

    @Olaf, I am keen to hear a critique of the points raised -- yes please. You too are trying to achieve something I sense.

    @PlausiblyDamp, you're absolutely right -- convincing people will be the hardest. Keep in mind they don't need to own VB6 if they are not needing 100% VB6 code compatibility. I think Python & Cython are quite a big deal, but I agree there are better targets, perhaps even including VB.Net which should allow a closer translation.
    www.vb64.com logo courtesy of BadAssTechnologies by permission & with thanks.

  26. #66
    PowerPoster Elroy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    Near Nashville TN
    Posts
    9,853

    Re: vb6 trans compiling?

    Quote Originally Posted by LOfADay View Post
    It is simply illegal to clone the VB6 IDE or it's Syntax
    You know? I really don't believe that's true. And, even if it were, which I seriously doubt, it's probably not enforceable given that Microsoft abandoned this product well over 10 years ago, and now refuses to sell it. Maybe reproducing the exact "look-and-feel" of the IDE is illegal (which I also seriously doubt), reproducing its functionality is almost certainly not illegal.

    Similar endeavors are done all the time in Word processing, spreadsheets (regardless of your dubious Lotus example), presentation software, statistical analysis software, just to name a few. In fact, it's common practice to reverse-engineer and read each other's data files.

    Regards,
    Elroy
    Any software I post in these forums written by me is provided "AS IS" without warranty of any kind, expressed or implied, and permission is hereby granted, free of charge and without restriction, to any person obtaining a copy. To all, peace and happiness.

  27. #67
    Hyperactive Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    400

    Re: vb6 trans compiling?

    Quote Originally Posted by Elroy View Post
    You know? I really don't believe that's true. And, even if it were, which I seriously doubt, it's probably not enforceable given that Microsoft abandoned this product well over 10 years ago, and now refuses to sell it. Maybe reproducing the exact "look-and-feel" of the IDE is illegal (which I also seriously doubt), reproducing its functionality is almost certainly not illegal.

    Similar endeavors are done all the time in Word processing, spreadsheets (regardless of your dubious Lotus example), presentation software, statistical analysis software, just to name a few. In fact, it's common practice to reverse-engineer and read each other's data files.

    Regards,
    Elroy
    You are absolutely right. Ideas just can't be patented, or copyrighted. This means you can freely copy behaviors.
    Carlos

  28. #68
    Member LOfADay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    44

    Re: vb6 trans compiling?

    Elroy and Carlos, I hope you are right. To be safe I will err on the side of not doing a total look-and-feel copy. Besides, new features are being added all the time. But your points increase my confidence.
    Last edited by LOfADay; Jan 29th, 2017 at 05:28 PM. Reason: small typo
    www.vb64.com logo courtesy of BadAssTechnologies by permission & with thanks.

  29. #69
    PowerPoster
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    7,219

    Re: vb6 trans compiling?

    Quote Originally Posted by LOfADay View Post
    @PlausiblyDamp, you're absolutely right -- convincing people will be the hardest. Keep in mind they don't need to own VB6 if they are not needing 100% VB6 code compatibility. I think Python & Cython are quite a big deal, but I agree there are better targets, perhaps even including VB.Net which should allow a closer translation.
    Neither Python, nor Cython, nor VB.NET are ideal vehicles in the last stage of a compiler-chain -
    and I guess you're joking with the last one, because that would neither address the goal of
    platform-independence, nor would it be "lightweight" when you introduce a dependency to the
    .NET-class-framework - sure, there's Mono - but that is still "frowned upon" in the OpenSource-scene,
    and a real "heavy-weight-dependency" as well).

    Quote Originally Posted by LOfADay View Post
    @Olaf, I am keen to hear a critique of the points raised -- yes please.
    Ok then, since you asked for it explicitely...

    This will be harsh when you read it, but keep in mind, that one of the main-points
    when you're about to gather support around an idea like that is, that the trust you expect
    from your potential "followers", needs to be well-founded... People will (rightly) expect, that
    you know what you're doing (or talking about), and in my opinion this is not the case here.

    Quote Originally Posted by LOfADay View Post
    - To compile a class, or anything from a CMD like, "VB6.EXE /make Project1.vbp /out result.txt"... I don't program using classes myself ...
    You cannot write a compiler which is (roughly) compatible to VB6-code, without deep
    knowledge about Classes, Interfaces, Typelibs, Variants, SafeArrays, COM and the COM-ABI.

    Quote Originally Posted by LOfADay View Post
    ...but I do see the attraction to them, especially with DLLs, and wonder if we could extend support in the T4 IDE, but for now, a *.cls is simply treated as another source file and must be loaded as part of a project. It is C2 and LINK that make sense of it from the Project File.
    As already stated, a new IDE with a compiler that isn't really (an MS-independent-) one (just re-directing the original source-files to VB6.exe),
    is not of much use, something like that could (should) be used only as a "rough intermediate vehicle, to test the GUI of the new IDE"
    (for the inner circle of developers, but not something intended for an End-User).

    Quote Originally Posted by LOfADay View Post
    T4 (VB6T4) handles debugging, breakpoints, watch, by use of inserting debug code...
    I think we both know, that we are talking about "only a plan" here, not about something that already exists.
    So, wording like the above is not well-suited to build up trust, so please stick to the truth, and clearly mark
    "things which are planned, but not yet there" as what they are.

    Quote Originally Posted by LOfADay View Post
    Step-Through and Pause-Edit-Resume is not well supported as yet, but there are plans.
    Well, the above is already a step into the right direction (since the word "plan" was mentioned at the end) -
    but the first part of the sentence is just not true (Step-Through and Edit-Resume are not-existing at all) -
    so as said, please make that more obvious to potential supporters.

    Quote Originally Posted by LOfADay View Post
    In the meantime, you can STILL use the VB6 IDE for that as the T4 always generates backward compatible code (otherwise, VB6 couldn't compile it!).
    Still requiring the VB6-IDE (as a necessity to be able to debug things) will not
    help with the acceptance of the project in my opinion - the (potential) ability
    of the new IDEs "VB6-Code-Preprocessor" doesn't offer as many benefits as
    you may think...

    What kind of "cool Macros" do you have in mind, which might convince VB6-Developers, to work with
    two IDEs in parallel (instead of only the original IDE, without Macro-support from a pre-processor)?

    In my opinion, the gain from a potential pre-processor will not outweigh the missing debugging-support -
    an easier to develop, simple PreProcessor-Addin for the original VB6-IDE would serve the purpose better IMO.

    Quote Originally Posted by LOfADay View Post
    Cython: T4 can be used to derive C++ 64bit via Python using Cython. I have been working on it. Their 64bit is a bit shaky IMHO as yet.
    Again, the wording.
    If there really already exists something like the following compiler-chain:
    VB6-code-input -> T4-PreProcessor -> Cython-Code -> C++64Bit -> x64-native binary
    I'd really like to see a working example (or a video or something).

    BTW, what C++ compiler do you use currently (MS, Intel or GCC per MinGW-w64)?

    Quote Originally Posted by LOfADay View Post
    Option Explicit: T4 effectively precompiles (ie: has a p-code style hashing compiler) in order to accurately and perfectly check syntax. At a much much later stage, it is hoped to make this a basis for a fully integrated IDE that will allow Step-Through and Pause-Edit-Resume.
    Ok, a HashList-like container (e.g. a VB6-Collection could serve that purpose) is required,
    to perform fast checks, whether a given "Symbol" already exists (in a given Scope).
    But the build-up of (and checking against) Symbol-Tables is only a very small part in a real compiler-run
    (which will require also lexical analysis + semantic-checks to deserve your labelling: "accurately and perfectly checks syntax",
    I seriously doubt, that you do that already at the same level, as the original VB6-IDE does).

    Quote Originally Posted by LOfADay View Post
    A business model was chosen because it will work for you, the user, providing stability and continuity, and for me.
    We have all seen that Open Source doesn't really fly (unless taken up by a major investor).
    That "Open Source doesn't really fly (unless taken up by a major investor)" is a wrong statement
    (since there's OpenSource-projects which do just fine without a "major investor").

    More important for potential followers of your planned project will be, as said - whether they can
    trust in your own technical abilities (or those of your Co-Developers), that you are capable to understand
    and solve all the problems and necessities involved, to be able to stem a project like that successfully.

    Quote Originally Posted by LOfADay View Post
    I used the term Dartmouth Basic because it has no copyright restrictions.
    I don't think so, since you mentioned the name twice in your former postings (as being an integral part of your planned "transpiler-chain").
    Then I brought up the importance of Class-support (missing in Dartmouth Basic) - and suddenly you play-down your former usage of the term.

    This really comes across as "making things up, on the go", a far cry from the "careful planning of an experienced developer",
    (who really knows what he's getting into with such an ambitious project).

    Quote Originally Posted by LOfADay View Post
    If I use the term VB6 Basic, or if I refer to it as 100% VB6 compatible (without using a licensed VB6 compiler), I risk the wrathful attention of Microsoft's's lawyers (more below).
    There is only a (potential) problem, with certain "namings" (when they resemble already existing trademarks).

    Otherwise there's nothing that holds anybody back, to use a Basic-Language as input for an entirely
    "clean-room-developed" compiler, which is OpenSourced in a GitHub-Repo. (the VB6-syntax being no exception,
    there's nothing really special about it, compared with other Basics - and don't mistake language-syntax with "library-functions").

    FreeBasic for example is already nearly VB6-compatible, when you restrict yourself to code in *.bas-modules,
    when those don't make use of "COM-Objects or the more exotic Functions in the VBRuntime-lib".
    Nobody ever made an attempt to "sue them" for that grade of compatibility (because it'd be absurd - doomed to fail in a lawsuit).

    Olaf
    Last edited by Schmidt; Jan 29th, 2017 at 09:27 PM.

  30. #70
    PowerPoster
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    2,083

    Re: vb6 trans compiling?

    I have been concerned about Golang for several years, maybe using Golang to develop a TRUE VB7 IDE is a good choice.

  31. #71
    PowerPoster
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Posts
    2,224

    Re: vb6 trans compiling?

    Quote Originally Posted by Schmidt View Post
    You cannot write a compiler which is (roughly) compatible to VB6-code, without deep
    knowledge about Classes, Interfaces, Typelibs, Variants, SafeArrays, COM and the COM-ABI.
    I couldn't agree more - except He doesn't even use classes...
    I'll leave out the rest of my negativity on that, and try to add something more constructive to the conversation.

    Here's a roadmap I would propose.

    Code:
    Step 0 -
       Parse Source files to an CST, Run Syntax checking rules
       Transform CST to an AST, Build the symbol table
       Translate AST to C or C++ (2 modes, COM compatibility, Platform independent)
    Step 1 - Runtime
       COM compatibility and replacing the Runtime (Including Forms, the Message Pump, Thread Safety)
       Optionally make the runtime platform independent. 
    Step 2 - 
       IDE, Form Editor, Debugging
    edit:MY understanding of AST/CST seem to be backwards... And in practice I would eliminate the CST altogether.
    Last edited by DEXWERX; Jan 30th, 2017 at 11:07 AM.

  32. #72
    Member LOfADay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    44

    Re: vb6 trans compiling?

    @dreammanor, golang may be for some, but not from me. My biggest beef with a Google language is to point out what they did with Sketchup. They SOLD it along with the many thousands of freely submitted models. I want to try and bring consistency and Google don't impress in that department.

    @Dex, I'm not developing a compiler. That said, I have done TransCompiler's before and they worked. It's easy to make it work, but making it work well and cover a wide range of programming requirements is another matter. I will be open-source-ing the output for other translators (via OCX/DLL plug-ins) so that you and others can come on board and add TransCompilers as you clearly know your stuff. Tip: You can start straight away by just translating the basic syntax pre-parsed output of the VB6 IDE.

    @Olaf, thanks! In order..
    • VB.Net and Mono Xamirin or whatever .. Some people may want it. Python/Cython -- I want it to deploy industrial control software on Linux. Also, people make a big deal out of C++64b, and this is a reasonable roadmap to it.
    • Please see my reply to Dex!
    • The "VB6.EXE /make" route will be a big deal for those that maintain VB6 code. Also, IMHO VB6 is still unsurpassed and I intend to continue to use it -- and by giving it this makeover, I hope not to have to suffer the stigma of working with legacy software.
    • A version already exists -- and there is a screenshot of it http://www.vb64.com/0s6Pt4ED--DRAFT_STATUS
    • Don't know why people don't believe me. I've already done Python/Cython and Darkbasic. Both worked. Both simply injected debug code.
    • Yes, to have to use the old IDE for for certain things isn't the best I will agree. However, I hardly ever use step, edit, resume myself and if there is some debugging included, I think it is unlikely I will be using the VB6 editor any more. Don't forget, this is only a need for people supporting VB6 code.
    • I used GCC 32-bit. I've never tried 64-bit (looking back, sorry I gave that impression). I only mentioned it being a bit flaky from what I saw on forums(it seems to be still evolving). Incidentally, Cython is itself a trans compiler and is unbelievably slow. When you look at the C++ code it generates, they seem to have gone down bloat avenue, but then they do something which I've never promised -- 100% compatibility with the input code. On the point of a demo, it's coming -- but a demo has to be perfect or it just fails everything, so I think it best to make sure it is perfect first.
    • Re "I seriously doubt, that you do ... as the original VB6-IDE does". It won't and frankly can't -- but T4 will make up for it in other areas. :-)
    • Re "open source... fly" quite subjective. I'm sure we can both find good examples to back up our statements.
    • Re Dartmouth Basic... splitting hairs and descending into judgemental speak again. I can only point you to my commercial success in that department.
    • Re Syntax, you're right -- I'm talking about the familiar methods and properties for objects and controls. There is some comfort to be had in what you say but people are quick to tell me there is no risk without pointing to precedence in law to back up their claim. Ie: Easy to say if you're not taking the risk.

    Anyway, I'm happy to add what I can to help give people a clearer picture of this particular way forward, but am getting busier on other projects (including this). At least if I don't go forward with it, I hope it gives others ideas about how to get VB6 out of the stone age. It would be nice if people could also in turn spread the word, go to the website and comment + like, and don't forget please https://visualstudio.uservoice.com/f...instate-vb5cce -- Thanks.
    Last edited by LOfADay; Jan 30th, 2017 at 11:44 AM. Reason: typos..
    www.vb64.com logo courtesy of BadAssTechnologies by permission & with thanks.

  33. #73
    PowerPoster Elroy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    Near Nashville TN
    Posts
    9,853

    Re: vb6 trans compiling?

    I'm going to hopefully make this my last post to this thread. The whole idea obviously sparks some interest in VB6 developers or it wouldn't have gone on as long as it has.

    Olaf and I sometimes go round-and-round on certain things, but I must agree with pretty much everything he said in post #69. In particular...

    Quote Originally Posted by Schmidt View Post
    You cannot write a compiler which is (roughly) compatible to VB6-code, without deep
    knowledge about Classes, Interfaces, Typelibs, Variants, SafeArrays, COM and the COM-ABI.
    ... and ...

    Quote Originally Posted by Schmidt View Post
    People will (rightly) expect, that
    you know what you're doing (or talking about), and in my opinion this is not the case here.
    ... and ...

    Quote Originally Posted by Schmidt View Post
    That "Open Source doesn't really fly (unless taken up by a major investor)" is a wrong statement
    (since there's OpenSource-projects which do just fine without a "major investor").

    LOfADay, you've clearly hit a nerve, or everyone would just be ignoring this thread. I've done this before in this thread, but here is a list of things I'd need to see before I'd ever give even the most remote consideration to an alternate IDE for VB6-like development.

    • As Olaf stated, it'd absolutely must be able to support COM style memory overlays. Even the old DOS PDS-Basic did this, which didn't even have an IDE.
    • It'd have to be backed by a rock solid (probably NYSE traded) company that I could have drop-dead trust in.
    • It'd have to give me some advantage over the existing VB6 IDE. I can think of a few ways this might happen (none of which you've mentioned):
      • Possible compilation on other platforms (maybe OSx, iOS, Linux, Android, etc).
      • Possible improvements, some of which I've listed here.
      • A clear commitment to continued improvement and timely updates.
    • And, unless it was an exceptional product backed by a worldwide established company, it'd almost certainly have to be open-source.


    And truth be told, you're barely scratching the surface of those criteria. Yep, I'd love for a COM-based VB-type language to be brought back to the mainstream, but I really don't see you as our guy. Sorry.

    All The Best,
    Elroy

    EDIT1: PDS Basic didn't do COM-style overlays, but it did do overlays via the linker.
    Last edited by Elroy; Jan 30th, 2017 at 01:36 PM.
    Any software I post in these forums written by me is provided "AS IS" without warranty of any kind, expressed or implied, and permission is hereby granted, free of charge and without restriction, to any person obtaining a copy. To all, peace and happiness.

  34. #74
    PowerPoster
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    24,482

    Re: vb6 trans compiling?

    Something else that people often fail to consider is that VB6 has stability that is unmatched. The closest thing out there might be older versions of Cobol on some mainframes.

    Stability is both a blessing and a curse, but in this case it means that you can take VB6 skills and even existing VB6 projects from almost two decades ago and use them today. Being "cast in stone" has real advantages. All you have to do is deal with changes to Windows over the years that may change the environment the VB6 program must operate within.

    It is a rare programming language that can make that boast. Most are "living" software that goes through rapid churn. Python could be a poster child for this. I've seen case after case where something uses Python but "Requires Python version x.y!" is marked on the outside of the tin.


    So some "new" language or set of tools might seem whizzy and all, but replacing VB6 is going to be tough for a ton of reasons, including stability.

  35. #75
    Fanatic Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    806

    Re: vb6 trans compiling?

    Settings aside this project's numerous technical issues (which have been well-articulated by everyone else), I just wanted to quickly comment on the silliness of "Open Source doesn't really fly (unless taken up by a major investor)". This is clearly wrong, yet I've seen it articulated more than once in these forums, which speaks to the large disconnect between the VB community and the open-source community (a disconnect which has already been discussed ad nauseum, I think).

    There are countless small examples of successful "built on open source" companies, but for a large example, look at Red Hat. They've been a billion-dollar company since 2012, yet all of their major products are open-source, and they've been publicly owned for nearly 20 years. (RHT on the NYSE.)

    I find it a tad concerning when developers aren't aware of companies like this, yet they're posting in a forum built around sharing "open-source" components.
    Check out PhotoDemon, a pro-grade photo editor written completely in VB6. (Full source available at GitHub.)

  36. #76
    Fanatic Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    806

    Re: vb6 trans compiling?

    Quote Originally Posted by dilettante View Post
    Something else that people often fail to consider is that VB6 has stability that is unmatched.
    Precisely.

    If you take away VB's 20-year stability (by replacing its run-time or whatever else), I have no idea what you're left with. Certainly not a competitive product, I think, not when there are a million other "not-exactly-stable" languages, compilers, and run-times out there, many of which are developed by massive companies with massive R&D budgets.
    Check out PhotoDemon, a pro-grade photo editor written completely in VB6. (Full source available at GitHub.)

  37. #77
    Member LOfADay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    44

    Re: vb6 trans compiling? ?

    @Elroy, some people are just hard to please! Just quickly
    • COM is supported as much as the VB6 compiler supports it. T4 manages them as well.
    • You'll be waiting quite a while...
    • Lots - see website. Other platforms (maybe OSx, iOS, Linux, Android, etc) supported by TransCompiler modules that you can add to.
    • A clear commitment to continued improvement and timely updates. -- QSL's Guarantee is quite exhaustive now. See web.
    • And, unless it was an exceptional product backed by {a Brand}, it'd ... have to be open-source. -- Well that's going to be my problem.


    @dilettante -- I couldn't agree more. That's one of the reasons I don't want to open source it... things just become a mess IMHO.

    @Tanner_H -- Jobaco? KBasic? Mono? QB64? Gambas? The list is HUGE. Successful ones exist of course. Red Hat makes money off their services and that goes back to Linux itself which was undoubtably successful. IMHO, Linux's success is because the planet desperately needed an alternative to Microsoft and UNIX which both have operating systems in "patent" fuelled lockdown. Ref Stability, it will be as stable as the target compiler (which is VB6 itself if you wish). Nb: Did you read all the forum?

    I must get back to my development of it as you would obviously all love to see it in the flesh...
    Last edited by LOfADay; Feb 1st, 2017 at 08:27 AM. Reason: Removed bad-taste joke
    www.vb64.com logo courtesy of BadAssTechnologies by permission & with thanks.

  38. #78

    Thread Starter
    Hyperactive Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    481

    Re: vb6 trans compiling?

    I am glad I got you guys talking....

    I honestly think because we are dealing with a bunch of very smart and logical people here, LOfADay I think all you can expect here is criticism and doubt, just due to the fact that people in this realm are very logical...

    I really support your effort, and sometimes if a person has a calling to do something... just do it. There is no amount of market research that can validate your vision.

    In history people who are considered crazy, incapable, destined to fail are those who make the biggest impact in our world: https://www.entrepreneur.com/article/249961

    So if you have the drive and the passion I urge you to continue, some of the very people here criticizing you will one day thank you.

    Winston Potgieter

  39. #79
    Member LOfADay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    44

    Re: vb6 trans compiling?

    Thanks Axis. I was being a bit naughty at the end there. I have learned a lot from here and am very grateful to all (albeit my psychological well-being has fared better). Work has started. Don't hold your breath...
    www.vb64.com logo courtesy of BadAssTechnologies by permission & with thanks.

  40. #80
    PowerPoster
    Join Date
    Feb 2017
    Posts
    4,996

    Re: vb6 trans compiling?


Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  



Click Here to Expand Forum to Full Width