QB64.com?

[mnrvovrfc]

:
Also is, there a place to discuss startup time of QB64 exes? A program that takes millisecond to load in FreeBASIC takes several seconds to load in QB64. I use version 2.0.1. Will version 0.8 have faster exe startup time? What about in qb64-x?

The EXE program on Windows that was created by QB64, for me, took at least one second to launch and it was very noticeable. Even more on 32-bit and the SDL version with all its external libraries. I was doing v0.98 (without SDL) on a laptop with Windows10 always kept off Internet. A created EXE file took 1-1/2 seconds in the least to begin because it was a program created by a 32-bit compiler. Even if it used only the console, never mind graphics and sound. Damn OS creating multiple entries into registry didn't help, doing it even with EXE files launched from pluggable USB disks so I had to stop doing that. I don't notice it now (it's more about caring about it, on Linux so long as it runs) because creator and created are both 64-bit. Freebasic could only create smaller executables than QB64 could. This is by design. That's unless somebody creates a fork of QB64 that comes with its own optimizing compiler that could work on any system and at least 32-bit and 64-bit architecture.

Almost forgot to say that's not worse than the stick-up for five seconds or longer, at the "first time" I launched an EXE created by Free Pascal v2.0.2 32-bit. It happened to me for a payware music-development application too, which was 32-bit. It should have happened also starting that old version of QB64 soon after boot and startup. The 64-bit version of QB64 instead takes much longer to create an EXE file than the 32-bit at starting and creating. The total number of lines in the source code doesn't seem to matter.

Also what's up with the topics about "qb64-dot-whatever"? Why do people get confused so easily by it? I'll raise my hand for one day in April I tried to go into the usual site which had the "latest version numerically" and get "site cannot be reached" error message from web browser. Thought Google or ISP blocked me, and just before that, when I tried to use Chromium, was nagged once in a while by the former saying I was generating too much traffic. Yeah I dump Firefox for Chromium, not for Chrome and get that junk... This is on Linux, I wouldn't like to create another day I have to go online with M$ program and updating for anything.

(Sorry for bumping months-old thread...)