06-19-2022, 10:04 PM
(06-19-2022, 08:11 PM)triggered Wrote: I don't have the patience to filibuster like SMcNeill does, but it seems like the recent and proposed updates to the PE compiler are comprised of (i) things that the old Team cautioned against, and finally they're gone, so SMcNeill can have fun, and (ii) creating change just for its own sake, simply to be different from QB64 legacy as fast as possible.
Some examples, please.
Exactly what have we pushed that the old team objected to?
A fix in the source so that the IDE won't freeze when someone goes to update the help files? (version 0.1)
Swapping out the windows compilers so that users have the most modern and up to date version? (version 0.5) Note, please, that *every time* the windows compilers have *ever* been updated, it was **ME** who did so for us. This includes both the 32-bit and 64-bit window's compilers. Exactly who is it that objects to such an update?
Would they object to adding the "Run Only" option in the IDE? Or swapping out the PNG library to one which is 30% faster and more efficient than what we had in it previously? (version 0.6) Surely they wouldn't object to the bug fixes in this version, or us highlighting _BIN$ which was part of the development build from the previous team? What is it out of this version that the old team would object to??
Would they object to swapping over to a makefile system? Strange -- that was one of the oldest issues that the old team had in their repo: *WIP* Make-based build system · Issue #2 · QB64Team/qb64 (github.com) Hardly seems like they'd object to us doing what they were trying to do, yet never got around to finishing. Maybe the issue is with moving the compilers outside the github? Strange -- that's something else they had in their issue list that they were trying to do: Move mingw outside the repository · Issue #213 · QB64Team/qb64 (github.com).
Version 0.7.1 was mainly just to update our version number. Is that something they'd object to???
Version 0.8+ has been to allow the user the ability to set optimization flags and such for their programs. It's something that was talked about several times, but no one ever got around adding it into the language, as it was supposed to be part of the makefile system. Do you think they'd object to those changes??
Exactly what is it that's been changed, added, or removed, that the "old team" would object to??? Be specific, please!!
And what is different from QB64 Phoenix Edition, that is different than from QB64 version 2.0.2?? Point out a single command, syntax, or piece of code that runs differently now than how it ran before. You claim changes are being pushed, "simply to be different from QB64 legacy as fast as possible", but kindly show me one piece of QB64 legacy code which runs differently under Phoenix Edition than it did under version 2.0.2.
For some reason, you seem to have a lot of misconceptions about the Phoenix Edition, and you like to make a lot of accusations and complaints without any sort of backing to them. My honest question is: If you're so against what we're doing here, why are you here?? If you don't like the work that we're doing here at the Phoenix Edition, then simply don't download or use the Phoenix Edition. It's not like we're charging for any product costs or usage fees or anything. Try it, if you don't like it, delete it. It really is that simple of a process.