01-08-2023, 10:04 AM
Maybe I wasn't clear enough with what I said.
A few people in the Unix/Linux world make such a big deal about how much memory a program takes, whether it's stored on disk or it's loaded into RAM. By its very nature, QB64(PE) is unable to create an executable file small enough to satisfy those people. This is even with using console-only stuff. Therefore they have to do it in C++ or assembly language, and if that doesn't make them comfortable, they buy a programming system suite. They are willing to compromise efficiency but not too much, if it could be made smaller at both ends.
The compiler itself doesn't have to be very small, indeed. The MS-DOS target for Freebasic mostly requires programs compiled on a system more sophisticated than the target of the user program. There's too much needing for the sake of extended memory, for peripherals such as printers and USB devices, and there's even begging for Internet Wifi functionality. Maybe I don't know what I'm saying but...
Let's go back to what I have read on other forums, about the protesting that it's "too big". Coding in assembly language is difficult and doesn't guarantee cross-platform but the one who could do it correctly benefits from memory and speed improvements. This is essential for a setup which doesn't have a lot of RAM; not everybody is on 64-bit with 16GB RAM. A portable phone is most suspect to memory limitations. Definitely it has to run fast and faster.
For those situations which have enough memory, magic is being done with Python such as the famous "archinstall" for Arch Linux which didn't work on my computer LOL because I have too many partitions on my HDD and it wanted to pick one at random.
BASIC as a replacement for the mind-boggling Bash command processor language would be great, but it would be one bloated complex program replacing another.
A few people in the Unix/Linux world make such a big deal about how much memory a program takes, whether it's stored on disk or it's loaded into RAM. By its very nature, QB64(PE) is unable to create an executable file small enough to satisfy those people. This is even with using console-only stuff. Therefore they have to do it in C++ or assembly language, and if that doesn't make them comfortable, they buy a programming system suite. They are willing to compromise efficiency but not too much, if it could be made smaller at both ends.
The compiler itself doesn't have to be very small, indeed. The MS-DOS target for Freebasic mostly requires programs compiled on a system more sophisticated than the target of the user program. There's too much needing for the sake of extended memory, for peripherals such as printers and USB devices, and there's even begging for Internet Wifi functionality. Maybe I don't know what I'm saying but...
Let's go back to what I have read on other forums, about the protesting that it's "too big". Coding in assembly language is difficult and doesn't guarantee cross-platform but the one who could do it correctly benefits from memory and speed improvements. This is essential for a setup which doesn't have a lot of RAM; not everybody is on 64-bit with 16GB RAM. A portable phone is most suspect to memory limitations. Definitely it has to run fast and faster.
For those situations which have enough memory, magic is being done with Python such as the famous "archinstall" for Arch Linux which didn't work on my computer LOL because I have too many partitions on my HDD and it wanted to pick one at random.
BASIC as a replacement for the mind-boggling Bash command processor language would be great, but it would be one bloated complex program replacing another.