| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Tommy
Admin Team
Joined: 16 Nov 2002
Posts: 746
Location: The Netherlands
|
 Posted: Sun Jul 20, 2003 11:38 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| FreezingFire wrote: | Also another reason I'd like to see integrated executables is because right
now there is no way to just distribute a single executable to a user. A lot
of people actually have problems when they try to do something like burn
an executable that has been packed with other files to a CD, then they get
all sorts of problems. |
I agree with this. It is possible that a file packed with a program such as Alloy is
distributed on a CD-ROM. If the file was configured in such way, that the runtime
would be extracted to the current directory in such case, then that's end of story.
If it was not configured in that way, but instead the runtime would be extracted to
the Windows or Windows\System directory, then it's possible that the user doesn't have
sufficient permissions to write in that directory. Additionally, if all authors would configure
their executables to do exactly that, a big mess would be caused in the Windows\System
directory, which actually seems to be already happening.
Tommy |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
CodeScript
Moderator Team
Joined: 08 Jun 2003
Posts: 1060
Location: India
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 21, 2003 1:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
| jules wrote: | | Quote: | | I think(excuse me if i am wrong) this can be done even with dll, so that the exe stub extracts/loads the dll into memory and then starts the main exe part (or some thing similar). |
That's a pretty good description of what the VDS EXE stub does. It loads VDSRUN50.DLL then calls a function passing the compiled script as one of the parameters. So the whole script is executed in the context of the DLL and not the EXE. |
I was just talking about the VDSRUN50.DLL being contained in the stub or packed in other section(e.g. as a resource) of exe and extracted directly to memory and load/initialize it from there. This way the dll will not be written to disk at any point of time. Ofcourse this can be given as an option to people who want integrated exe if it can be done.I am not trying to repeat the same point. I was just trying to make myself more clear.I understand that the above thing is not at all an easy job and would require difficult coding may be in assembly.
If that is not possible then
Is it possible to make the exe to additionally check for the runtime in the system temp directory.
This may help exe bundling utilities like alloy to allow extraction of the dll to temp directory without the need for resolving the dependencies and solve many problems:
The exe bundling utility will check if the app directory is writable --> If not then the system directory --> if not the temp directory and extract it there.
(BTW I dont know if alloy already does that but i think unlikely since it is not permissible to modify vds compiled exe's unlike most other programming languages).
It's just my personal opinion so please don't take offence.
_________________
Regards
- CodeScript
 Give your application a professional look with the VDSGUI Extension |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
FreezingFire
Admin Team
Joined: 23 Jun 2002
Posts: 3508
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 29, 2003 4:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Has anyone ever taken a look at iBasic, http://www.pyxia.com/ ?
That has integrated executables. 
_________________
FreezingFire
VDSWORLD.com
Site Admin Team |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SnarlingSheep
Professional Member
Joined: 13 Mar 2001
Posts: 759
Location: Michigan
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 29, 2003 4:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| FreezingFire wrote: | Has anyone ever taken a look at iBasic, http://www.pyxia.com/ ?
That has integrated executables. |
Yup, it's a really good language. The Pro version that is coming out soon will have no runtime.
_________________
-Sheep
My pockets hurt... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CodeScript
Moderator Team
Joined: 08 Jun 2003
Posts: 1060
Location: India
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 29, 2003 5:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
True they have also implemented Direct X from the early versions itself and JPEG, GIF support are built in. I cannot say more here - that would be unfair probably but I *think* VDS should implement some of these to stay in the race. But I do agree that vds syntax has a shorter learing curve and Ibasic probably even longer than VB (earlier{first} version - I don't know currently)
My personal opinion - don't take offence/ban me from the forum etc. If somone seriously dislike then delete it. My intention is purely constructive.
_________________
Regards
- CodeScript
Give your application a professional look with the VDSGUI Extension
Last edited by CodeScript on Fri Aug 29, 2003 5:23 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SnarlingSheep
Professional Member
Joined: 13 Mar 2001
Posts: 759
Location: Michigan
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 29, 2003 5:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
IBasic came pretty easy for me and VB didn't look like it would at the time I started with IB so I don't think it's harder. Guess it depends on your programming style.
_________________
-Sheep
My pockets hurt... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CodeScript
Moderator Team
Joined: 08 Jun 2003
Posts: 1060
Location: India
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 29, 2003 5:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Once you know VB a little IB is very easy I think as the style is same.
I didn't know anyhting about VB when i tried IB.
_________________
Regards
- CodeScript
Give your application a professional look with the VDSGUI Extension |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
FreezingFire
Admin Team
Joined: 23 Jun 2002
Posts: 3508
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 29, 2003 5:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| CodeScript wrote: | | My personal opinion - don't take offence/ban me from the forum etc. If somone seriously dislike then delete it. My intention is purely constructive. |
That's what this discussion forum is for. Discussing things and personal
opinions. My opinion is that in the future of VDS I really wish VDS had
the features IBasic does, and I think VDS's language is maturing
enough to be able to handle this type of stuff. 
_________________
FreezingFire
VDSWORLD.com
Site Admin Team |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Skit3000
Admin Team
Joined: 11 May 2002
Posts: 2166
Location: The Netherlands
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CodeScript
Moderator Team
Joined: 08 Jun 2003
Posts: 1060
Location: India
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 29, 2003 5:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Does this ever happen  
I think toooo.. much of wishful thinking - based on the way this post has been going
_________________
Regards
- CodeScript
Give your application a professional look with the VDSGUI Extension |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jules
Professional Member
Joined: 14 Sep 2001
Posts: 1043
Location: Cumbria, UK
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 29, 2003 6:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| CodeScript wrote: | True they have also implemented Direct X from the early versions itself and JPEG, GIF support are built in. I cannot say more here - that would be unfair probably but I *think* VDS should implement some of these to stay in the race. But I do agree that vds syntax has a shorter learing curve and Ibasic probably even longer than VB (earlier{first} version - I don't know currently)
My personal opinion - don't take offence/ban me from the forum etc. If somone seriously dislike then delete it. My intention is purely constructive. |
From the look of it iBasic is aimed more at games and multimedia stuff. VDS was aimed more at utilities and serious stuff, because that's my background. Of course, Commercial Research might decide to take it in that direction if they wanted. I think the problem is, the more sophisticated the facilities you want, the harder it is to do with VDS syntax. If you make VDS as hard to master as Basic, Pascal etc, to cope with all this then you've lost the point of it, really. (In my personal opinion.)
_________________
The Tech Pro
www.tech-pro.net |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
vdsalchemist
Admin Team
Joined: 23 Oct 2001
Posts: 1448
Location: Florida, USA
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 29, 2003 6:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| jules wrote: |
From the look of it iBasic is aimed more at games and multimedia stuff. VDS was aimed more at utilities and serious stuff, because that's my background. Of course, Commercial Research might decide to take it in that direction if they wanted. I think the problem is, the more sophisticated the facilities you want, the harder it is to do with VDS syntax. If you make VDS as hard to master as Basic, Pascal etc, to cope with all this then you've lost the point of it, really. (In my personal opinion.) |
I couldn't agree more Jules... iBasic has some neat things that it can do but at what price. Not money but learning curve  it is not VDS. While it is these sophisticated facilities would put more burden on the VDS programmer to learn more it is not impossible to add them to the VDS language but I for one would not want that to be part of the base syntax of VDS. I would rather the VDS language grow in the direction of stability and better foundation syntax like I see with VDS 5 where not as many elements were added but more syntax for including external libraries and such... We as VDS programmers should now be able to start adding these other features we see in these other languages ourselves and let the language of VDS grow in the directions it's going in now.
For instance most of us consider Assembly, Pascal, C/C++, or SQL as being powerful languages but yet no where in those languages are there any dialog code not even a simple message box. They have very few keywords but yet they can do anything with a little work on the part of the programmer. That is what I would like to see more of in VDS. Better math functions... BinFile needs to be faster...
_________________
Home of
Give VDS a new purpose!
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
FreezingFire
Admin Team
Joined: 23 Jun 2002
Posts: 3508
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 29, 2003 8:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I don't think VDS has the capability to do anything such as DirectX
without any sort of external DLL. I didn't think this could be done
in VDS 5 directly. But I agree Mindpower, that I will be satisfied if
the language can be re-used to make elements for itself or do things
such as DirectX directly.
_________________
FreezingFire
VDSWORLD.com
Site Admin Team |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SnarlingSheep
Professional Member
Joined: 13 Mar 2001
Posts: 759
Location: Michigan
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 30, 2003 2:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
| jules wrote: |
From the look of it iBasic is aimed more at games and multimedia stuff. VDS was aimed more at utilities and serious stuff, because that's my background. |
Few users on the IBasic forums use it for it's game/multimedia abilities. It is used more widely for it's advanced abilities.
DirectX/3D are more a bonus toy for most users.
_________________
-Sheep
My pockets hurt... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jules
Professional Member
Joined: 14 Sep 2001
Posts: 1043
Location: Cumbria, UK
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 30, 2003 8:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | I couldn't agree more Jules... iBasic has some neat things that it can do but at what price. Not money but learning curve
[snip] |
Nice to have someone agree with me for a change! I think ease of getting started is one of the key benefits of VDS. If it becomes as complex as Basic/Pascal/C++ whatever then people might reasonably feel why not learn Basic/Pascal/C++ in the first place?
I also really feel that some things are best done as extensions. That allows the possibility to have multiple ways of doing things.
A good example would be TCP/IP capability. If this were integrated into VDS it would have to be a basic general purpose capability able to be used for all things, but which might be quite complicated to do, say, POP3 mail. By putting TCP/IP in an extension it allows the possibility of alternative TCP/IP implementations that can offer a choice between flexibility for many different tasks or ease of use for some specific things. I think DirectX falls in the same sort of category. There is no reason why someone couldn't develop a VDS gaming DLL if it was felt that enough people wanted to develop games using VDS.
_________________
The Tech Pro
www.tech-pro.net |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
@vdsworld