QB Phoenix Edition name?

[SMcNeill]

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.

[bert22306]

Am I the only one objecting to any such draconian name change?

QB64 is a great name. First, it makes it obvious that this is indeed QuickBasic, but modernized to work with 64-bit processors. Secondly, it has gained a certain amount of recognition, globally. I even had a software colleague and C programmer ask me if I had ever heard of it, knowing that I use QuickBasic. And it's even mentioned in some school textbooks, we've been told here.

A name change to QBPE confuses everything. All the legacy is lost, and people may be wanting QB64 instead, given what they've been reading or hearing about it. Such as, almost total compatibility with the original MS QB. And never mind, QB64 is easily found in search engines, and has been for years.

Adding PE at the end, as in QB64PE, or a more cumbersome QB64_PE, that might be okay. I say, stick with QB64PE. No confusion, no ambiguity, no loss of identity. If other QB64 development offshoots don't really exist, then the stable versions of QB64PE could begin with version 3.0, for example. That will differentiate from the versions of Fellippe and Luke.

[DSMan195276]

Just as an aside, the word "phoenix" really came out of nowhere. The mythology of the word suggests that QB64 died, and was brought back ...

This has already been done to death, and I don't know who you think you're trying to "explain" this too. Nobody on this forum has attempted to "hide" the fact that QB64 Phoenix Edition is a new and separate thing, in fact this literal thread acknowledges that QB64 Phoenix Edition is a fork. Additionally, nobody has been pretending that qb64.com or QB64 Official don't exist, and we have no problem with anybody talking about them or using them (or any other basics for that matter, several projects on this forum were written in other basic languages). We're also not going into their discord or forums or GitHub or etc. and telling people to use Phoenix Edition instead, people can use what they want to.

You're trying to create drama when everybody working on Phoenix Edition has already well moved on, and frankly as far as the project goes are moving on just fine. If you or anybody else wants to use QB64 Official or make something new/different then you should feel free to do so, we're not trying to "compete" with them.

Additionally, if you would like to help or give us useful feedback on improvements, we would welcome that as we have from many people already. Complaining that 'we're doing everything wrong' or 'you should rewrite the whole thing' while being angry about everything is not useful feedback.

To get back to the _actual_ topic of this post, thinking about it more I actually like QB64PE But it sounds like I might be out numbered.

[bert22306]

I'm with you, DSMan, but I think this is important enough to require more insisting. To me, at the risk of sounding like a drama queen, a name change to QBPE would constitute an existential threat to the project.

And, for what purpose?? What's the big hangup?

[SMcNeill]

I like the QB64PE, but it's a little much to try and get on an icon, whereas the QBPE fits in as an easy replacement. Once you get down to 32x32 pixels, it's hard to get several letters readable on an icon.

Personally, I'm all for QB64-PE.exe and QB32-PE.exe as the filenames (to distinguish between 32-bit and 64-bit compiler versions), with QBPE for the icon for both (to show they're the same base product). I like the -PE as it basically showcases us as an offshoot from the old QB64 versions.

[bert22306]

Simple solution, either keep the same icon, to show continuity, or at most, stick a small "PE" in there somewhere. Honestly, my preference is to stick with the same icon.

[RhoSigma]

I think QBPE just came up because its 4 letters, as QB64 was. More than that it seems to me, as it popped up for the first time in the new forum banner/logo, which was in fact just created, because somebody objected to the originally used Phoenix image.

I'm personally fine with QB64PE too (or QB64-PE, as for Product-Edition, but no underscore please).

However, which ever name we choose, we should do it rather quickly.

[DSMan195276]

I'm with you, DSMan, but I think this is important enough to require more insisting. To me, at the risk of sounding like a drama queen, a name change to QBPE would constitute an existential threat to the project.

Just to be clear, that comment wasn't aimed at you, you happened to post a new comment while I was writing it

Yes your thoughts are basically why I like QB64PE as an abbreviation to be used. If the icon just says 'QBPE' then I think that's not a huge deal, but otherwise it gets referred to as QB64PE (or "QB64 Phoenix Edition", as a more detailed description).

[Fifi]

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. If QB64 "moves forward", then I should look forward to using it on more devices, in cleverer ways, with more capacity to expand. This comment extends years backwards too: the Team was really just dancing around what Galleon handed them. All vertical movement with QB64 was done by Galleon, anything recent is horizontal. In fact, any improvement people keep making just further crystalize, further snuggle into the same rut. Micro optimization unto death. Grassroots spinoffs have a real shot at breaking the spaghetti ceiling.

BASIC will move forward in the browser, on mobile. The desktop is more of a specialized hobby tool, time to catch up.

-1000
 
QB64 by itself is dead and I bet will never be back due the lack of devs perfectly knowing its "so well documented" internals.

BTW, QBPE could very easily become a web server side compiled language (as a matter of fact without any modification) Vs any new slow and heavy pseudo interpreted BASIC language integrated in the browser "à la Java".

Last point: thanks to SMcNeill and his gang, QBPE with its makefile faces a more recent, concise and modern development approach and culture than the old QB64 spaghetti compilation mode  (e.g. I removed 94 of 155 lines of my new multi lingual installation script).

With regard to the name, I too vote for QBPE Vs QB64PE just because is shorter.

Cheers.
Fifi

[Coolman]

QB64 is the official name. to differentiate from the original version and especially to indicate that there is a new forke version, it makes sense to keep the original name and add another identification like QB64PE or QB64Pe. those who are interested in QB64 and use search engines with this string will find the forke version unless the new name is QBPE.
it's up to you if you want to attract more people to this forum. the success of a language lies in the number of those users...