Microsoft really should go back and look into open sourcing more of their really old tools. Get versions of MASM, QuickBasic, VisualBasic (the DOS version, of course), and so forth out there.

There's a lot to learn from these old tools and it'd be nice to have this stuff opened up for tinkerers on ancient platforms. It's not like MS is going to make any money off any of this anymore, nor is it viable for use on a modern platform even with substantial effort.

I have some CDs from a computer magazine (in the 2000s) which provided you code archives even back to 90s (including good old QB stuffs).

FBC easily compile lots of them. Well, too bad still no macOS support.

Did you check whether these are available on Internet Archive already?

The magazine I meant is Mikrodata. It's an Indonesian IT magazine, which was was closed few years ago. Until 2000-ish, the magazines came with CDs which has code archives from practically all Mikrodata contributors.

I started learning programming in 2002 with VB, so it felt kinda amusing looking at 90s DOS stuffs (Turbo Pascal 7, QB, TASM) etc

Looks like the Internet Archive has no content from this magazine as of yet! It may be that they have it archived privately and it's just hidden from public view, but you may want to write to Jason Scott https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jason_Scott (who works on the Software section at the Internet Archive) about getting this stuff backed up and archived properly for the foreseeable future. As an official archive and library, the Internet Archive is one entity that can keep copies of rare and fragile content safely backed up (and CD coverdiscs from old Indonesian magazines definitely qualify) without being restricted by copyright laws as most other people and organizations might be.

Old discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38730966 (105 points | Dec 2023 | 70 comments)

This one emulates GW-BASIC as PC-BASIC so old BASIC programs for the IBM PC DOS systems can run on modern systems: https://robhagemans.github.io/pcbasic/

FreeBASIC is like Microsoft's QuickBASIC.

More BASIC Languages: https://www.thefreecountry.com/compilers/basic.shtml

It really isn't - from the docs themselves:

  FreeBASIC gives you the FreeBASIC compiler program (fbc or fbc.exe),
  plus the tools and libraries used by it. fbc is a command line program
  that takes FreeBASIC source code files (*.bas) and compiles them into
  executables.  In the combined standalone packages for windows, the main
  executable is named fbc32.exe (for 32-bit) and fbc64.exe (for 64-bit)

The magic of QuickBasic was that it was an editor, interpreter, and help system all rolled up into a single EXE file. Punch F5 and watch your BAS file execute line-by-line.

A magic also available in Turbo BASIC.

Ironically Borland gave up competing against Microsoft on BASIC tooling, while Microsoft gave up competing against Borland on Pascal tooling (Quick Pascal).

Both products where short lived, Microsoft killed Quick Pascal quite quickly, while Borland sold Turbo BASIC, which became Power BASIC.

PowerBASIC is dead; the website no longer works. The old PowerBASIC for DOS abandonware can be found here: https://winworldpc.com/product/powerbasic/3x

It is a DOS 16-bit program.

Yeah, I lost track of where it went back in Windows 9X days.

Real BASIC seemed the only alternative to VB that was somehow still market relevant.

Wasn't QBasic the interpreter as opposed to QuickBasic the compiler?

It's been a long time, but my impression was that QuickBASIC had an interpreter and the ability to compile. Then later on, Microsoft bundled a more limited version called QBasic with later versions of MS DOS which lacked the compiler.

But all of them (QBasic, QuickBASIC, Microsoft PDS, and even Visual Basic for DOS which almost nobody remembers sadly) had the editor, interpretative execution, and built-in help.

This matches my memory. When I got my dad's old work computer with QuickBASIC on it, and I discovered the compiler, and could write programs other people could "just run", I felt like a real programmer for the first time.

Yet you were even before that, the moment you made programs work at all.

I remember VB-DOS, and fondly too. It was magical. I think I used it even before VB3.

Yes that was the case, by the time Visual Basic 5 came to be, its compiler was based on Visual C++ backend.

All this brings back fond memories of my first programming foray, an ASCII game in QBASIC from Mars and Back: Computer Programming Handbook by Andrew J. Read. So much fun, so much frustration.

This is what I recall too. QuickBasic was perhaps BASIC's answer to Turbo Pascal, a relatively lightweight but usable text based IDE. I knew some happy users.

No, the answer was Quick Pascal, however Microsoft didn't really cared that much about it.

https://winworldpc.com/product/quickbasic/45 for a look at QuickBASIC 4.5 abandonware; they also had QuickC and QuickPascal.

No, QuickBasic was both an interpreter and a compiler. QBasic was just an interpreter.

"Compiler". Even Visual Basic only compiled to p-code, which had to be interpreted at runtime. Not to fully native code.

That's why it always ran slower than Delphi.

VB6 (and IIRC 5 too) could compile to native, as seen in the compile options: https://imgur.com/a/v0QcbBU

P-code was still offered as an option because some wanted the smaller output binary sizes, and the build process was faster⁰.

Some incorrectly assume that the native option wasn't really fully compiled because the main supporting library (msvbvm60.dll) was still used¹, but this was for common library functions³ and the interpreter portion was not touched.

There were unofficial tools that would statically link your exe with the relevant VB runtime (and certain other libraries) but the use of those was rare.

----

[0] Though I don't think the build speed matter was actually significant for many, if any, workflows, even on really slow kit.

[1] Some didn't distribute it after a time, to reduce download sizes, as they were included with Windows so users already had them. Windows 7 (and maybe Vista?) included msvbvm60.dll and friends by default, and most XP and 98 installs² had it too as it came with Internet Explorer updates.

[2] though there was a compatibility break at one point that meant you needed to recompile with VB6sp6 if you hadn't included a local copy in your apps directory

[3] Much like many C programs don't have glibc statically linked into them, but work because it is practically ubiquitous on the systems they target.

Having to depend on msvbvm60.dll was hardly any different than msvcrt.dll, but try to explain that to most folks.

Wrong, starting with with Visual Basic 5, a proper compiler was introduced based on Visual C++ backend, in addition to the P-Code interpreter.

Additionally VB devs no longer needed to rely on C++ for ActiveX controls, aka OCX, the VBX replacement.

Both of these are incorrect.

Both QuickBASIC and the BASIC Professional Development System compiled to full native DOS code, and could make standalone EXE files.

VB finally gained this with VB 6 which could also make native EXE files.

QuickBasic produced a DOS .EXE file.

It didn't output p-code. You're confusing it with Visual Basic.

You are correct, and VB 6, the final version, at last included a native-code compiler as well.

> The magic of QuickBasic was that it was an editor, interpreter, and help system all rolled up into a single EXE file. Punch F5 and watch your BAS file execute line-by-line.

That's still how vscode works; F5 to debug and Ctrl-[Shift]-P like CtrlP.vim: https://code.visualstudio.com/docs/debugtest/debugging

FWICS,

The sorucoder.freebasic vscode extension has syntax highlighting: https://marketplace.visualstudio.com/items?itemName=sorucode...

There's also an QB64Official/vscode extension that has syntax highlighting and keyboard shortcuts: https://github.com/QB64Official/vscode

re: how qb64 and C-edit are like EDIT.COM, and GORILLA.BAS: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41410427

C-edit: https://github.com/velorek1/C-edit

I tried QB64 a couple years ago, but IIRC it's still compiled as opposed to interpretative, e.g. you can't Ctrl-Break and drop into the current executing line of BASIC code unless they've radically changed how it works.

Rather, QB was the pico8 of the 1990s. Convenient, self-contained, mysterious, quasi-powerful, in-app help menu for the entire language and API, and a few built-in demo games.

Kinda like any Forth. Even PForth has a bundled block editor and a rudimentary help system.

No, FBC is not like QuickBASIC: there's no IDE in FBC.

However, the QB64PE project does have an IDE. Some screenshots in this thread:

https://qb64phoenix.com/forum/showthread.php?tid=2469&pid=23...

> FreeBASIC is like Microsoft's QuickBASIC.

Except that it doesn't emulate Microsoft's QuickBASIC, or ... ?

It does support "-lang qb" which is designed to specifically limit FreeBASIC to a QuickBASIC compatible dialect.

And more specifically, "-lang qb" is more or less how FreeBASIC started out. The more modern dialects came later, and became the default, hence the addition of "-lang qb".

I really wonder why MS would not supper the whole BASIC legacy that anyway exists even without them.

Is there an ide with form designer like visual basic?

Not free, but this was one of my favorite things when learning to program. https://everybasic.info/lib/exe/fetch.php/basics/vbdos-3.png Visual Basic for DOS.

I think FBEdit was the closest to that, but like with most other languages, it never reached the same level of integration and quality because forms are simply not first-class citizens in FreeBASIC, unlike VB where the whole development process evoled around forms. You always need native GUI code or use a GUI library like GTK to achieve the same in FreeBASIC.

Not with FreeBASIC.

Others that do: Gambas, Xojo, RAD BASIC, Twin BASIC.