RE: [ql-users] QLiberator

[Claude Mourier 00]

This was not an attack of Turbo, just my experience. With older versions you need to 
carefully look to all parameters passed to PROCs because behavior is not the same as 
SBasic. And I think Linker+ QD+Sbasic thing+Qlib is still a very good developpment 
tool thanks to good work of Wolgang and Jochen.
But I understand Turbo is up todate and is intended to be new standard for compiled 
Sbasic 

Claude

-Message d'origine-
De : [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] la part de [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Envoye : jeudi 12 fevrier 2004 22:04
A : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Objet : Re: [ql-users] QLiberator



On Wed, 11 Feb 2004 10:36:44 +0100, Claude Mourier 00 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>
> Because it is far more easy to use then Turbo : you have can compile 
> your code directly when you need to adapt it with Turbo (at least 
> versions I know)

That is not true. You do not need to adapt any code apart from what you 
would normally do with any compiler. You cannot use SAVE and LOAD etc but 
you cannot do that in QLiberator anyway. As for Turbo directives like 
IMPLICIT etc. these are optional. There's nothing that says that you HAVE 
to use them.

> And Qlib is the only one implemented as Thing in QD (you can parse and 
> compile without line number) and used by tool like the Linker. (and I 
> don't know if all  features such as overlays etc is supported in Turbo).

That's not really an advantage, compared to the speed, superior math 
libraries and availability of Turbo.
> But it's true that Qlib as some limitation due to is status (no more 
> developpped) and (good) work made around Turbo is a good news (my 
> intention is not to critic this work).
>

Turbo updates come in days once a feature is requested or a bug spotted. 
When I first encountered the BLOCK high-colour bug (Turbo would not assign 
GD2 colour values to blocks) it took George about half a day to fix it. 
Since Q-Liberator is not being developed any more (based on what you said 
as I do not know anything about it, only used it once at a friend's QL; 
never liked it anyway :-) I think that the choice is obvious.

Phoebus
-- 
Visit the QL-FAQ at: <http://www.dokos-gr.net/ql/faq/> (Still uploading 
stuff!)
Visit the uQLX-win32 homepage at: <http://www.dokos-gr.net/ql/uqlx.html>
Visit the uQLX-mac home page at:<http://www.dokos-gr.net/ql/uqlxmac.html>

Re: [ql-users] QLiberator

["Phoebus R. Dokos (Φοίβος Ρ. Ντόκος)"]

On Wed, 11 Feb 2004 10:36:44 +0100, Claude Mourier 00 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

Because it is far more easy to use then Turbo : you have can compile 
your code directly when you need to adapt it with Turbo (at least 
versions I know)
That is not true. You do not need to adapt any code apart from what you 
would normally do with any compiler. You cannot use SAVE and LOAD etc but 
you cannot do that in QLiberator anyway. As for Turbo directives like 
IMPLICIT etc. these are optional. There's nothing that says that you HAVE 
to use them.

And Qlib is the only one implemented as Thing in QD (you can parse and 
compile without line number) and used by tool like the Linker. (and I 
don't know if all  features such as overlays etc is supported in Turbo).
That's not really an advantage, compared to the speed, superior math 
libraries and availability of Turbo.
But it's true that Qlib as some limitation due to is status (no more 
developpped) and (good) work made around Turbo is a good news (my 
intention is not to critic this work).

Turbo updates come in days once a feature is requested or a bug spotted. 
When I first encountered the BLOCK high-colour bug (Turbo would not assign 
GD2 colour values to blocks) it took George about half a day to fix it. 
Since Q-Liberator is not being developed any more (based on what you said 
as I do not know anything about it, only used it once at a friend's QL; 
never liked it anyway :-) I think that the choice is obvious.

Phoebus
--
Visit the QL-FAQ at:  (Still uploading 
stuff!)
Visit the uQLX-win32 homepage at: 
Visit the uQLX-mac home page at:

Re: [ql-users] QLiberator

[Roy wood]

In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, thegilpins 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
Hi,

I'm being asked about the latest on QLiberator (latest version, where it's
available from, how much, what does it (not) work with, etc.)
Can anybody help me please?
John Gilpin.

It has not been updated for a long time. I have one copy left for sale. 
It seems to work well with SMSQ/E what else do you need to know?
--
Roy Wood
Q Branch. 20 Locks Hill, Portslade, Sussex.
Tel: +44 (0) 1273 386030fax: +44 (0) 1273 430501
web : www.qbranch.demon.co.uk

Re: [ql-users] QLiberator

[Malcolm Lear]

Excellent work George!! Its just the incentive I need to really get into
TurboPTR.
Malcolm



[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

In a message dated 11/02/04 01:16:30 GMT Standard Time, 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

(But why would anyone want to get Q-Liberator when Turbo is free, 
twice as
fast, plus now it can incorporate extensions in the executable. We should
know as Q-Word is done this way thanks to George Gwilt).
Turbo IMHO was always a superior product and with TurboPTR you can build
all the Pointer programs that your heart desires.



Thanks for the plug!!

Actually the latest version of TurboPTR, which includes all the new 
colours and the nice advances in the new WMAN should be on the SQLUG 
site at the weekend.

George

Re: [ql-users] QLiberator

[Geogwilt]

In a message dated 11/02/04 01:16:30 GMT Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

(But why would anyone want to get Q-Liberator when Turbo is free, twice as 
fast, plus now it can incorporate extensions in the executable. We should 
know as Q-Word is done this way thanks to George Gwilt).
Turbo IMHO was always a superior product and with TurboPTR you can build 
all the Pointer programs that your heart desires.



Thanks for the plug!!

Actually the latest version of TurboPTR, which includes all the new colours and the nice advances in the new WMAN should be on the SQLUG site at the weekend.

George

Re: [ql-users] QLiberator

[RWAPSoftware]

In a message dated 11/02/2004 10:28:32 GMT Standard Time, 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Thanks 
  for your info.I am now only waiting for Price etc before getting back 
  to the member whomade the query.I will pass on your very valid 
  comments regarding Turbo/QLib but just at themoment I am answering some 
  specific questions.Thanks for your 
help.
A quick look at QL Today shows latest Qlib is £50 from QBranch (the 
last version was v3.36 as far as I know).
 
--Rich 
Mellor RWAP Services35 Chantry Croft, Kinsley, Pontefract, West 
Yorkshire, WF9 5JHTEL: 01977 610509Visit our website at 
URL:http://www.rwapsoftware.co.ukStuck with ordinary dial up 
internet connection ?? Read our review of internet accelerators and 
broadband 
at:URL:http://members.aol.com/RWAPSoftware/reviews.html

Re: [ql-users] QLiberator

[Wolfgang Lenerz]

On 10 Feb 2004 at 20:31, Timothy Swenson wrote:

> With all honesty, I find Qlib to be an easier compiler to use.  Now, both 
> have their problem compared to a "real" compiler like C68.  Both require 
> you to LOAD the program into SBASIC.

This is, actually, not quite true. QLIB requires the program to exist in "Qsaved" i.e. 
tokenised form on a disk. It then loads & compiles that. There are ways to get a 
program tokenised without the need for Basic:

A program such as the Basic Linker (plug, plug) uses this and sometimes doesn't even 
load the program into Basic as it can use an external (supplied) parser which takes a 
Basic program as input file and outputs the tokenised program.
(actually, if the Basic Linker runs on an smsq/e machine, it does load the program 
into 
an sbasic and then forces that to QSAVE the program, it only uses the external parser 
if there is no Sbasic).

This allows me to write the code in modules and without line number - the modules are 
linked together by the basic linker.

Sorry if this sounds like a blatant advertisement.

Wolfgang

Re: [ql-users] QLiberator

[thegilpins]

Hi Guys,

Thanks for your info.

I am now only waiting for Price etc before getting back to the member who
made the query.

I will pass on your very valid comments regarding Turbo/QLib but just at the
moment I am answering some specific questions.

Thanks for your help.

John Gilpin.


- Original Message -
From: "Phoebus R. Dokos (Φοίβος Ρ. Ντόκος)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2004 1:14 AM
Subject: Re: [ql-users] QLiberator


>
> On Tue, 10 Feb 2004 23:08:57 -, thegilpins
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > I'm being asked about the latest on QLiberator (latest version, where
> > it's
> > available from, how much, what does it (not) work with, etc.)
> > Can anybody help me please?
> >
> > John Gilpin.
> >
>
> Roy Wood or Jochen Merz. AFAIK they both carry it :-)
>
> Phoebus
>
> (But why would anyone want to get Q-Liberator when Turbo is free, twice as
> fast, plus now it can incorporate extensions in the executable. We should
> know as Q-Word is done this way thanks to George Gwilt).
> Turbo IMHO was always a superior product and with TurboPTR you can build
> all the Pointer programs that your heart desires.
>
> --
> Visit the QL-FAQ at: <http://www.dokos-gr.net/ql/faq/> (Still uploading
> stuff!)
> Visit the uQLX-win32 homepage at: <http://www.dokos-gr.net/ql/uqlx.html>
> Visit the uQLX-mac home page at:<http://www.dokos-gr.net/ql/uqlxmac.html>

RE: [ql-users] QLiberator

[Claude Mourier 00]

Because it is far more easy to use then Turbo : you have can compile your code 
directly when you need to adapt it with Turbo (at least versions I know)
And Qlib is the only one implemented as Thing in QD (you can parse and compile without 
line number) and used by tool like the Linker. (and I don't know if all  features such 
as overlays etc is supported in Turbo).
But it's true that Qlib as some limitation due to is status (no more developpped) and 
(good) work made around Turbo is a good news (my intention is not to critic this work).

Claude

>>>
Phoebus

(But why would anyone want to get Q-Liberator when Turbo is free, twice as 
fast, plus now it can incorporate extensions in the executable. We should 
know as Q-Word is done this way thanks to George Gwilt).
Turbo IMHO was always a superior product and with TurboPTR you can build 
all the Pointer programs that your heart desires.

Re: [ql-users] QLiberator

[Timothy Swenson]

At 08:14 PM 2/10/2004 -0500, you wrote:
(But why would anyone want to get Q-Liberator when Turbo is free, twice as 
fast, plus now it can incorporate extensions in the executable. We should 
know as Q-Word is done this way thanks to George Gwilt).
Turbo IMHO was always a superior product and with TurboPTR you can build 
all the Pointer programs that your heart desires.
With all honesty, I find Qlib to be an easier compiler to use.  Now, both 
have their problem compared to a "real" compiler like C68.  Both require 
you to LOAD the program into SBASIC.

When I use Structured SuperBasic (which allows me to program with no line 
numbers). Qlib does the linking in of Config blocks using a few 
preprocessor commands.  Turbo requires the use of T_CONFIG program and 
Turbo with TurboPTR requires the use of line numbers and data statements.

Now, I have not used Qlib in a while and will alter my programming style to 
use Turbo, but it's kind of like changing from a QWERTY keyboard to a 
Dvorak keyboard.

I now favor Turbo because it is 100% freeware and pretty much open source.

Tim Swenson

Re: [ql-users] QLiberator

["Phoebus R. Dokos (Φοίβος Ρ. Ντόκος)"]

On Tue, 10 Feb 2004 23:08:57 -, thegilpins 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

Hi,

I'm being asked about the latest on QLiberator (latest version, where 
it's
available from, how much, what does it (not) work with, etc.)
Can anybody help me please?

John Gilpin.

Roy Wood or Jochen Merz. AFAIK they both carry it :-)

Phoebus

(But why would anyone want to get Q-Liberator when Turbo is free, twice as 
fast, plus now it can incorporate extensions in the executable. We should 
know as Q-Word is done this way thanks to George Gwilt).
Turbo IMHO was always a superior product and with TurboPTR you can build 
all the Pointer programs that your heart desires.

--
Visit the QL-FAQ at:  (Still uploading 
stuff!)
Visit the uQLX-win32 homepage at: 
Visit the uQLX-mac home page at: