[RESOLVED] Develop a new/modern VB6-IDE

[yereverluvinuncleber]

The proof of the pudding is in the eating, yes?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qV1GgTI-oRU

Well, let's go and eat some puddings, ready your plates...

Reserve comment until the puddings have been served.

[Niya]

yep....lets wait for the pudding...

[SearchingDataOnly]

IMO it was pretty subtle to just say (From dm) in a few posts. Had you announced your (past) identity more clearly in your opening post, I can guarantee the reception in this thread would have been different.

I hope your plans come to fruition.

Good luck.

Below is a comment I post in 2017. I originally planned to develop two heavyweight controls for Olaf's new IDE: a spread control like FarpointSpread and a chart control like FusionCharts (Note: Farpoint Spread is the best Spread control in the world, FusionCharts 1.0 is the world's best chart control dedicated to VB6). But the dark forces here successfully prevented (delayed) the development of Olaf's new IDE. I also gave up the plan to develop a chart control similar to FusionCharts, and the Spread control I developed was also used for other purposes. Perhaps there will never be a VB6 chart control as good as FusionCharts in this world.

https://www.vbforums.com/showthread....=1#post5167741

I think Olaf has fully considered these issues.

If other people can help do some peripheral work and test work of the new IDE, then Olaf could focus on the core things.

I will be very busy this two years, but I am still willing to take some time to test the new IDE every day. Maybe I can also help on the Form-Designer. In addition, when the core development work of the new IDE is completed, maybe I can help develop 1-2 heavy-weight COM controls, such as Grid Control(similar to Farpoint Spread or Component One Spread), Chart Control(similar to FusionCharts)

[Eduardo-]

So Dreammannor, are you saying that you didn't do the work because "the dark forces here in the forum" prevented you from doing it?

[axisdj]

My opinion is that it will take 3-5 olaf caliber devs working full time for a couple years to pull this off. That is why in 2014-15 I put together a crowd funding approach: https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/a...and-compiler#/

I think the problem is each brilliant person who proposes a solution has there own perspective on how to approach the problem and unless compromises are made and people work together the likehood of any of them working out is slim.

Some of the recent attempts like RadBasic and twinBasic do seem to be using advances in existing open source compiler tech and IDE which will same alot of time and effort.

I am definitely hoping for the best, but as has been said before many,many many attempts have failed.

I will say I have found some success in porting to Lazarus using the vbto product. I converted a small app from vb6 to Lazarus and got it running on MAC.

Lets hope we all get a surprise in 2021 and new life to vb6 code base and eco system.

[Eduardo-]

IMO this big problem have to be divided into pieces.
It needs to be splitted into parts that can encapsulate a feature/part/tool.

For example:
IDE is one part.
Compiler is another part.
Controls are another part.

But... lets start taking about something else:

Of course it would be nice to be able to compile on any platform (Mac, Linux, etc. and even for ARM processors)... but in reality that's currently barely needed...or for most of the devs not needed at all.

The first goal should be to reach what VB6 currently does, no more.
You can develop having in mind to easy a later support for other OSs, but not to the point to delay too much a VB6 replacemetn as it is now.

Once there is a working replacement, then start thinking how to implement 64 bits support and things like that.

The other point is about the problem splitted into pieces.
There could be more that one person developing a different compiler and other "competing" developing an IDE.
The (main) controls are already made.

That's my idea. Each part cannot be more than what a person can do.
Anyway that's somewhat the way that big companies also work.

Can we use the VB6's current compiler? OK, then first focus on replacing the IDE (or the opposite). We need to see that something is already replaced.
So far we only can replace the controls, but they are not default in the current IDE and the Unicode support is not total (not on design time properties, not MsgBoxes, for example).

[yereverluvinuncleber]

I get all optimistic when I hear about people working together...

[Niya]

I get all optimistic when I hear about people working together...

In the 9 years I've been here, I've seen this many times. Better to get excited about seeing actual progress.

[ThEiMp]

Sure we can then be, excited but then where is the technology in doing it with, even

[yereverluvinuncleber]

Sure we can then be, excited but then where is the technology in doing it with, even

Not sure I understand that?

[SearchingDataOnly]

vue.js was originally developed by a Chinese engineer alone, but now it has formed a complete ecosystem. Maybe its development method and operation mode are worthy of reference for all new VB6-Compiler/IDE developers.

https://vuejs.org/
https://v3.vuejs.org/

Forming a software ecosystem is the only way for any new VB6-Compiler and new VB6-IDE to survive.

[ThEiMp]

Well we have to keep the COM Arteticure and then integrate the .NET framework, plus other key elements about 5GL technology, like now

[SearchingDataOnly]

Yes. The COM architecture is a core foundation for maintaining the ecological chain, and JS libs is a bridge to the Web world. Of course, if the NET architecture (technology) can be integrated, the ecological chain will be more complete.

Among all the well-known JS frameworks, vue is the only one maintained and developed by folk forces. Bootstrap comes from Twitter and is supported by Google; React originates from Facebook; and vue comes from individuals, and there is no company support behind it, but it's still growing.

[ThEiMp]

How spooky is that to be true, then. But then a language that isn't supported anymore, is then pushing your boat up stream without a paddle, then so to speak.

[Arnoutdv]

Why the need for integrating everything.
Use the right tool for the right job and when needed use a range of tools.

Why would you try to combinate the functionality of a saw, a screwdriver and a hammer in a single tool?

[ThEiMp]

Well there is a fact of computer programming to make a tool or app, into a self supportive program/app, even. I mean one that is dependant upon runtime files, but works alone and cross platformed, even

[Niya]

Well we have to keep the COM Arteticure and then integrate the .NET framework, plus other key elements about 5GL technology, like now

Oh yea. We need to also integrate AI and voice commands so we can tell it what code to write for us. Maybe we can also include a built in Android, Mac, iOS and Linux emulator so we can write code for those platforms. We can also include a compilers for ARM, PowerPC and Intel processors. Then we can think about how to get it all to run in a web browser. Also, why stop at COM and .Net. We can also include compilers for the Java Runtime, Web assembly. We should also include all JavaScript frameworks as well. We can also integrate in-line Python code. Maybe then we can start figure out how to make it into it's own operating system because why wait to use it after the operating system boots when we can boot straight into it. We should also include an image editor like PhotoShop and a video editor in case we need to create videos for our applications. We could also create a sound and music editor. Applications are always attractive with some music. Then we might want to think about creating an add-on like Maya so we can create 3D movies.

So.......think we can have this done by next month? After all, if it's easy to say, it should be easy to create. Right? What are we waiting for?

[yereverluvinuncleber]

I agree, this thread is now definitely going anywhere it likes... for me it is nowhere sensible. It is closed already so shall we all close our own participation in it? TTFN! Until the next.

[ChrisE]

Oh yea. We need to also integrate AI and voice commands so we can tell it what code to write for us. Maybe we can also include a built in Android, Mac, iOS and Linux emulator so we can write code for those platforms. We can also include a compilers for ARM, PowerPC and Intel processors. Then we can think about how to get it all to run in a web browser. Also, why stop at COM and .Net. We can also include compilers for the Java Runtime, Web assembly. We should also include all JavaScript frameworks as well. We can also integrate in-line Python code. Maybe then we can start figure out how to make it into it's own operating system because why wait to use it after the operating system boots when we can boot straight into it. We should also include an image editor like PhotoShop and a video editor in case we need to create videos for our applications. We could also create a sound and music editor. Applications are always attractive with some music. Then we might want to think about creating an add-on like Maya so we can create 3D movies.

So.......think we can have this done by next month? After all, if it's easy to say, it should be easy to create. Right? What are we waiting for?

LOL
you forgot, the Unknown stuff we don't know about

[SearchingDataOnly]

The ecological chain I mean refers to the development of a series of new application software and tools with VB6 based on the new Compiler and the new IDE. These software include Desk-Apps, Web-Apps, Mobile-Apps, and these software can be cross-platform (cross Windows, Mac, Linux). Is there anything wrong with this assumption?

If .NET architecture can't be integrated, it doesn't matter. IMO, on the new platform (new Compiler and new IDE), we can almost implement all the features of the application software developed on .NET.

In addition, if we can't use the new platform (new Compiler and new IDE) to develop several heavyweight application software (such as Photoshop-like software), then the language of VB6 will hardly be recognized by other communities, and it will not attracting young programmers to use VB6(an ancient language abandoned by large companies), and will not form a sustainable software ecosystem.

If a sustainable software ecosystem cannot be formed, what is the point of developing a new Compiler and a new IDE?

[Niya]

I agree, this thread is now definitely going anywhere it likes... for me it is nowhere sensible. It is closed already so shall we all close our own participation in it? TTFN! Until the next.

You only just figured this out?

[ThEiMp]

Hey dudes, check this out now, like so and you can help me with my project, I call: QuickDirector SX...

[baka]

don't share .exe
also, look here: https://www.virustotal.com/gui/file/...7d3a/detection

[Shaggy Hiker]

Yeah, you have some thing wrong there. The forum doesn't allow the addition of compiled code, and that code, in particular, triggers virus warnings.

[Eduardo-]

...the new Compiler and the new IDE. These software include Desk-Apps, Web-Apps, Mobile-Apps, and these software can be cross-platform (cross Windows, Mac, Linux). Is there anything wrong with this assumption?

Yes, IMO. We currenty don't need to support any other platform than Windows.
To try to develop that huge monster is (IMO) the cause we still don't have anything done.

In my previous message I have dwelt more on the subject.

I propose to the experts on the subject to try to define the different parts as clearly as possible. But that would take a new thread I guess.

[Eduardo-]

[taking about the thread going anywhere]

Please filter in you mind some posts, so we don't need to also filter yours when complaining about posts that everybody knows how to take.

[Niya]

Please filter in you mind some posts, so we don't need to also filter yours when complaining about posts that everybody knows how to take.

What?

[Eduardo-]

What?

sent PM

[Niya]

Yea I got it

[ThEiMp]

I don't follow you guys, now like so then okay

[ThEiMp]

-- Here is my latest version of my project, that I call: QuickDirector SX!!
Richie's IDE.zip

[SearchingDataOnly]

Yes, IMO. We currenty don't need to support any other platform than Windows.
To try to develop that huge monster is (IMO) the cause we still don't have anything done.

In my previous message I have dwelt more on the subject.

I propose to the experts on the subject to try to define the different parts as clearly as possible. But that would take a new thread I guess.

(1) TwinBasic has made great progress on the compiler, and Olaf's compiler is also extremely worth looking forward to.

(2) Krool's control library has been recognized by many people, and vbWidgets has also been tested in practice.

(3) At present, only the progress of IDE is still unclear. TwinBasic uses VSCode as the basis of IDE is a good attempt and a good direction. We don't know what Olaf's IDE looks like, but he always surprises us. I hope to explore another IDE, completely different from theirs. If The trick can make some in-depth exploration and guidance on "How to integrate VB6-Debugger", then my probability of success will be greatly increased, otherwise, I can only start from scratch (that is, develop a scripting language first , and then develop the IDE, but the scripting language can hardly be fully compatible with VB6)

But there is a very clear fact that 2021 is a year that all vb6ers are looking forward to, and it's destined to be full of surprises.

[techgnome]

IMO this big problem have to be divided into pieces.
It needs to be splitted into parts that can encapsulate a feature/part/tool.

For example:
IDE is one part.
Compiler is another part.
Controls are another part.

But... lets start taking about something else:

Of course it would be nice to be able to compile on any platform (Mac, Linux, etc. and even for ARM processors)... but in reality that's currently barely needed...or for most of the devs not needed at all.

The first goal should be to reach what VB6 currently does, no more.
You can develop having in mind to easy a later support for other OSs, but not to the point to delay too much a VB6 replacemetn as it is now.

Once there is a working replacement, then start thinking how to implement 64 bits support and things like that.

The other point is about the problem splitted into pieces.
There could be more that one person developing a different compiler and other "competing" developing an IDE.
The (main) controls are already made.

That's my idea. Each part cannot be more than what a person can do.
Anyway that's somewhat the way that big companies also work.

Can we use the VB6's current compiler? OK, then first focus on replacing the IDE (or the opposite). We need to see that something is already replaced.
So far we only can replace the controls, but they are not default in the current IDE and the Unicode support is not total (not on design time properties, not MsgBoxes, for example).

Use, sure, redistribute? No. Which means then anyone usin the "new" IDE would need to have a valid VB6 license to use it... which then really would negate the part of the point of needing a new one. Better off developing a new one.

In the 9 years I've been here, I've seen this many times. Better to get excited about seeing actual progress.

Not just progress, but results.

Yes. The COM architecture is a core foundation for maintaining the ecological chain, and JS libs is a bridge to the Web world. Of course, if the NET architecture (technology) can be integrated, the ecological chain will be more complete.

Among all the well-known JS frameworks, vue is the only one maintained and developed by folk forces. Bootstrap comes from Twitter and is supported by Google; React originates from Facebook; and vue comes from individuals, and there is no company support behind it, but it's still growing.

Ick, eew, barf.
No. stop. Full stop. Seriously. Just stop right there. There is absolutely no reason for a VB6 IDE to do anything other than VB6. We've got N++, VS Code, and plenty of other options out there. Let's not take something that's supposed to be pure and simple and powerful and pollute it with something like JS. Please. For the love of all humanity. Don't. Just. Don't.

The ecological chain I mean refers to the development of a series of new application software and tools with VB6 based on the new Compiler and the new IDE. These software include Desk-Apps, Web-Apps, Mobile-Apps, and these software can be cross-platform (cross Windows, Mac, Linux). Is there anything wrong with this assumption?

If .NET architecture can't be integrated, it doesn't matter. IMO, on the new platform (new Compiler and new IDE), we can almost implement all the features of the application software developed on .NET.

In addition, if we can't use the new platform (new Compiler and new IDE) to develop several heavyweight application software (such as Photoshop-like software), then the language of VB6 will hardly be recognized by other communities, and it will not attracting young programmers to use VB6(an ancient language abandoned by large companies), and will not form a sustainable software ecosystem.

If a sustainable software ecosystem cannot be formed, what is the point of developing a new Compiler and a new IDE?

Yes, there is everything that is wrong. It's called crossing the streams. You just don't do it. There is a reason VSCode isn't the IDE of .NET developers, and why web developers don't use VS Studio. They are different reams of expertise. When I want to write Java code, I use IntelliJ, because it's what allows me to work best. When I want to write React code, I sue VS Code. When I want to write .NET code I use VS Studio. When I want to write SQL I use SQL Server Studio or SQL Developer (depending if SQL Server or Oracle)... I use the right tool for the right job. Yes, I sometimes can (and in a pinch will do so) use the butt end of a screwdriver to hammer in a nail, and yes it does work, but that doesn't make it right.

[Eduardo-]

Use, sure, redistribute? No. Which means then anyone usin the "new" IDE would need to have a valid VB6 license to use it... which then really would negate the part of the point of needing a new one. Better off developing a new one.

We are already is that situation, so what's the problem?
To get rid of the need of a MS VB6 license is a goal, but not a primary goal (or the first thing to achieve in time).

The point is to have the problem splitted into smaller and well defined, separate parts.
If the compiler is not the first thing that gets replaced it doesn't matter IMO.

[ThEiMp]

We can compress stuff in the resource file editor, using my CustomDialogBox control, which makes single files about 10 Bytes in file size, ain't that great hey dudes???

[Arnoutdv]

No ThEiMp, you can't compress any file to 10 bytes.
I've talked about this with you before and shown that you are using hash hash values and basic encryption.
This all based on the source code you shared.
Hashing and encrypting are not the same as compressing.

From your Director SX code you posted:

Public Sub cmdSaveAs_Click()
    On Error Resume Next

    InitLUT

    Dim bAry() As Byte
    Dim Item1 As String

    Item1 = SaveAs.txtData.Text

    With SaveAs
        .StatusBar.SimpleText = "Saving the file contents hass now begun..."

        Call FXInCipher(Item1, bAry)
        If Dir(.File1.Path & "\" & .txtFilename.Text) = "" Then
            Open .File1.Path & "\" & .txtFilename.Text & "." & .Combo1.Text For Binary As #1
                    Put 1, 1, bAry
            Close #1
            .StatusBar.SimpleText = "Saving the file has now been completed..."
            Unload SaveAs
        ElseIf Dir(.File1.Path & "\" & .txtFilename.Text) <> "" Then
            .StatusBar.SimpleText = "That file already exists, please try again..."
            .txtFilename.Text = ""
            .cmdSaveAs.Enabled = False
        Else
            .StatusBar.SimpleText = "Bad command or filename, please try again..."
            .txtFilename.Text = ""
            .cmdSaveAs.Enabled = False
        End If
    End With
End Sub

Public Sub FXInCipher(strIn As String, bOutString() As Byte)
  Dim X As Long
  Dim bString() As Byte

  bString = strIn
  ReDim bOutString(UBound(bString))

  For X = 0 To UBound(bString)
     bOutString(X) = baLUT(bString(X))
     Debug.Print bString(X) & ">" & bOutString(X) & ",";
  Next X
End Sub

Option Explicit
'
Private baLUT(255) As Byte, backLUT(255) As Byte
'

Public Function FXDeCipher(strIn() As Byte) As String
  Dim X As Long
  Dim bString() As Byte
  Dim bOutString() As Byte

  bString = strIn
  ReDim bOutString(UBound(bString))

  For X = 0 To UBound(bString)
    bOutString(X) = backLUT(bString(X))
    Debug.Print bString(X) & "<" & bOutString(X) & ",";
  Next X

  FXDeCipher = bOutString
End Function

Public Sub InitLUT()
  Dim X As Long, Y As Long, bChr As Byte

  For X = 0 To 255
    baLUT(X) = X
  Next X

  Rnd -1
  Randomize 1234

  For X = 1 To 255
    Y = Int(X * Rnd)
    If X <> Y Then
        bChr = baLUT(X)
        baLUT(X) = baLUT(Y)
        baLUT(Y) = bChr
    End If
  Next X

  For X = 0 To 255
    backLUT(baLUT(X)) = X
  Next X
End Sub

[ThEiMp]

Sorry, I got too over myself in the last post of mine. but then using the CustomDialogBox source code it will be able to make such things happen for me, like so you have read them here, like so

[IndicSoftware]

We haven't demoed it yet because it isn't particularly user friendly, and one area that definitely needs work before release. Ultimately, a WYSIWYG editor is perfectly feasible.

For this I would advice you to check TMS Web Core it is pascal based but they have built a very powerful and usable Visual IDE in VS Code.

[IndicSoftware]

Hello,

After reading all the posts in this thread I want to say that now the world has shifter from 32bit to 64bit in a big way.

TwinCompiler looks promising (while Olaf's VBRichcClient IDE's look and feel is still unknown) but the practical part is that if any developer wants to upgrade their VB6 project to any of the new IDEs they will have re-code most of it if not all of it!

In the same way adopting existing VB6 code to any future compiler which claims to be 100% compliant will require hell lot of changes at coding level.

Let us imagine that there is VB7 which is 100% compatible with VB6 coding standards. We all know that VB6 is a 32bit compiler and can generate software as 32bit applications only. So all coding especially that of WinAPI will be 32Bit compatible. Now the moment we say we want to move our application from 32Bit to 64Bit we will have to upgrade all the WinAPIs as well as find and upgrade all necessary ActiveXs to 64Bit.

We have used many ActiveX (for example CascadeDB) in our applications developed in VB6 which just do not have any 64Bit version so what we have to do is to find a substitute that is very near to what we are using and ultimately modify our code drastically as we have to respect the event model of the ActiveX we adopt along with properties and methods if and when we migrate our code base to the deemed new breed of VB6 compatible compilers.

From the back of my memory. Once upon a time we also tried out KBasic as a way to migrate from VB6 and stay with BASIC and which claimed to be most compatible to QBasic and VB6. But our experience was otherwise. Unfortunately KBasic faded in the oblivion in a few years of its launch.

Disclamer: Lastly I am not attacking anyone personally directly or indirectly in any way so please do not take this as criticism from a negative angle. I am just listing practical facts as we are an ISV and face similar challenges if not same.

[WaynePhillipsEA]

For this I would advice you to check TMS Web Core it is pascal based but they have built a very powerful and usable Visual IDE in VS Code.

That really is slick. They've done a great job. That is exactly what we are aiming for with TwinBasic. Thanks!