Slim FreeBasic installer for Windows

[jj2007]

I've put a modified version of the slim FreeBasic installer for Windows at http://www.jj2007.eu/SetupFreeBasic.zip
It is a 17.6 MB zip file with all the 4000+ files of FreeBASIC-1.07.3-win64 plus the FB manual and a program that enables Notepad to be used as a temporary "builder". deltarho[1859] has reported that this doesn't work on his Win10 Pro machine - I would be grateful for feedback where it works and where not.

@BasicCoder2: I see your point, but nonetheless I'd like to know if the 'builder' works as it should. I have added a para on using an IDE, as suggested by deltarho[1859], but I still believe that throwing a newbie into the wealth of menus and functions of a full-fledged IDE is not a good idea.

[BasicCoder2]

@jj2007

I still believe that throwing a newbie into the wealth of menus and functions of a full-fledged IDE is not a good idea.

Certainly there are complex editors designed to make life easy for the expert but confusing to a beginner.
FBIDE is not one of them.

However take it from me for a beginner example source code and the steps required to compile and run it from an editor is the way to go.

When I first learned some Java I used notepad and the command prompt. However I eventually found a very easy to use IDE JGRASP. Made writing java code fun again. However much later when I decided to do some more java programming they had "improved" the IDE making it useless to me, too complicated.

[deltarho[1859]]

That is unfortunate because the whole idea of the 'builder' is based on that.

Ah!

Microsoft, have been 'messing' with Notepad of late.

Put old versions of Notepad in your distribution and use them.

[jj2007]

That is unfortunate because the whole idea of the 'builder' is based on that.

Ah!

Microsoft, have been 'messing' with Notepad of late.

Put old versions of Notepad in your distribution and use them.

Just checked on my wife's Win10 machine, it works here. Perhaps they put an 'improved' Notepad in your Pro version.

Old versions of Notepad would be messy. At that point, I would just add another edit control to the 'builder' - perhaps 1k extra, instead of the 180kB of Notepad.exe; plus, I would have more control. Btw, I've added https to my site, can you see the image now?

[deltarho[1859]]

Btw, I've added https to my site, can you see the image now?

Well done!

I always could see the image - I use Firefox on both my PC and 'phone. I have Google Chrome on my 'phone as well, but the image was not visible - it is now. Google Chrome dominates the browser market. I wouldn't touch it with a forty-foot barge pole. My default search engine is now DuckDuckGo.

[robert]

Anyone mind if I move several posts over to the slim installer topic?

Good idea!

N00b jj2007 clicks Tools/Set compiler paths and gets a cryptic error message

Cryptic?

Having a Cpaths window with 'Select compiler' and one radio button would be something that no one in their right mind do.

Anyone who cannot understand "I need more than one set of compiler paths." should consider taking up gardening.

I will take up gardening, since in spite of my 35+ years of programming experience I was not able to understand the "Set compiler paths" error message. Thanks for the advice. Btw what is a "Cpaths window"?

Hi jj2007:

I'm with you.

WinFBE 2.2 is non-functional for a beginner.

"I need more than one set of compiler paths.", in my experience, ranks as the most useless error message I have ever seen. EVER !!!

I can imagine someone new to FreeBASIC thinking "Oh dear, this language is for cryptologists - I am out of here".

SetCompilerPathsII.exe falls well short of being helpful. I wouldn't touch it with a forty-foot barge pole.

Thanks to Xusinboy for explaining that the way to fix the problem is to change the settings in WinFBE\Settings\WinFBE.ini.

[deltarho[1859]]

Thanks to Xusinboy for explaining that the way to fix the problem is to change the settings in WinFBE\Settings\WinFBE.ini.

Do you expect a beginner to do that? Are you serious? Are you saying that is preferable to clicking a radio button?

I have written applications to encrypt an ini file to stop users from screwing things up. I have also written code to build a default ini file so if a user screws things up they can simply delete the ini file and a new one will be built.

In the WinFBE Tools folder is drWinFBE_Tools.chm. That was written to help the beginner to the expert. For some reason, Paul Squires does not mention its existence.

Your post, robert, is so critical of WinFBE 2.2.0 and my plugin it makes me think that an ulterior motive is at play.

No doubt you will come back with all guns blazing. I hope so because that is when people often trip themselves up, and we find out what is really winding them up.

[robert]

Thanks to Xusinboy for explaining that the way to fix the problem is to change the settings in WinFBE\Settings\WinFBE.ini.

Do you expect a beginner to do that? Are you serious? Are you saying that is preferable to clicking a radio button?

I have written applications to encrypt an ini file to stop users from screwing things up. I have also written code to build a default ini file so if a user screws things up they can simply delete the ini file and a new one will be built.

In the WinFBE Tools folder is drWinFBE_Tools.chm. That was written to help the beginner to the expert. For some reason, Paul Squires does not mention its existence.

Your post, robert, is so critical of WinFBE 2.2.0 and my plugin it makes me think that an ulterior motive is at play.

No doubt you will come back with all guns blazing. I hope so because that is when people often trip themselves up, and we find out what is really winding them up.

Hi David:

I do not see a Radio Button. All I see is

"I need more than one set of compiler paths."

As a beginner, I would expect some information about how to solve this problem.

Without solving the problem WinFBE is useless.

Assuming the beginner is omniscient, and so knows that the

"I need more than one set of compiler paths."

error message means that they should find and read the drWinFBE_Tools.chm file.

Do you expect a beginner to locate the compilers, correctly format and write up a SetCompilerPathsII.ini and place it correctly?

My criticism is not of WinFBE, but of this totally inadequate error message. Jochen's "Cryptic" description is absolutely accurate. Any meaning that the message may have had is completely obscured and hidden.

"I need ....", has reminded me of Microsoft Bob and Clippy but obviously is exponentially less useful.

[deltarho[1859]]

Hi robert

From drWinFBE_Tools.chm

SetCompilerPathsII requires a choice of at least two gcc compilers so may be of little interest to many FreeBASIC users.

SetCompilerPathsII is 'installed' from WinFBE 2.1.5 and executed from 'Tools>User Tools...'. However, if only one gcc toolchain is available then a message is displayed: "I need more than one set of compiler paths"

I have asked Paul Squires to mention drWinFBE_Tools.chm but he has not done it.

WinFBE now comes with gcc 5.2, originally gcc 8.1. The gcc toolchains 8.3 and 9.2 are available at WinFBE Version 1.9.4 in Assets. The availability of 8.3 and 9.2 never got mentioned again from 1.9.5 and above. I have mentioned that to Paul.

Paul is a great Windows programmer, but leaves a lot to be desired on the marketing front.

Do you expect a beginner to locate the compilers, correctly format and write up a SetCompilerPathsII.ini and place it correctly?

Yes I do - drWinFBE_Tools.chm explains how to go about that in no uncertain terms.

Except for locating the compilers. I should explain how to get others from the News forum. drWinFBE_Tools.chm needs editing by removing the reference to 8.3 and 9.2. WinFBE Version 2.2.0 now only has old versions of fbc using gcc 5.2.

From Paul's github entry.

Previous upload for version 2.1.9 did not include GCC toolchain for 32-bit FBC.

Paul learnt that from me - I emailed him.

On Jul 06, 2021 Paul wrote:

Hi all, I intend to update the bundled FBC toolchain once CodeJeff and the developers touch up some of the small issues from the latest compiler release and release an update.

FBC version 1.08.1 was released on Jul 09, 2021. The WinFBE package has not been updated.

On Jul 06, 2021 I wrote:

Hi Paul, you are the boss, but if I were you, I'd bundle 9.3SJLJ and 5.2. Of course, with just 9.3SJLJ it is easy enough to add 5.2, but I can imagine some members 'up in arms' at the extra work and some will have sleepless nights at the thought of using 9.3SJLJ.

So, you can see I have had an uphill struggle to get new WinFBE users all they need, and have all but given up trying. Please remember that I am a user of WinFBE and not the author.

I will have a look at drWinFBE_Tools.chm so that it makes sense today. If I do anything, I will not mention it in the WinFBE thread, but start a separate thread in FB's forum. I can rely on David Roberts, but not Paul Squires. Sorry, Paul but I am not known for taking prisoners as you no doubt know from the PowerBASIC forums - you joined in 2000, and I joined in 2003.

[robert]

Hi robert

From drWinFBE_Tools.chm

SetCompilerPathsII requires a choice of at least two gcc compilers so may be of little interest to many FreeBASIC users.

SetCompilerPathsII is 'installed' from WinFBE 2.1.5 and executed from 'Tools>User Tools...'. However, if only one gcc toolchain is available then a message is displayed: "I need more than one set of compiler paths"

I have asked Paul Squires to mention drWinFBE_Tools.chm but he has not done it.

WinFBE now comes with gcc 5.2, originally gcc 8.1. The gcc toolchains 8.3 and 9.2 are available at WinFBE Version 1.9.4 in Assets. The availability of 8.3 and 9.2 never got mentioned again from 1.9.5 and above. I have mentioned that to Paul.

Paul is a great Windows programmer, but leaves a lot to be desired on the marketing front.

Do you expect a beginner to locate the compilers, correctly format and write up a SetCompilerPathsII.ini and place it correctly?

Yes I do - drWinFBE_Tools.chm explains how to go about that in no uncertain terms.

Except for locating the compilers. I should explain how to get others from the News forum. drWinFBE_Tools.chm needs editing by removing the reference to 8.3 and 9.2. WinFBE Version 2.2.0 now only has old versions of fbc using gcc 5.2.

From Paul's github entry.

Previous upload for version 2.1.9 did not include GCC toolchain for 32-bit FBC.

Paul learnt that from me - I emailed him.

On Jul 06, 2021 Paul wrote:

Hi all, I intend to update the bundled FBC toolchain once CodeJeff and the developers touch up some of the small issues from the latest compiler release and release an update.

FBC version 1.08.1 was released on Jul 09, 2021. The WinFBE package has not been updated.

On Jul 06, 2021 I wrote:

Hi Paul, you are the boss, but if I were you, I'd bundle 9.3SJLJ and 5.2. Of course, with just 9.3SJLJ it is easy enough to add 5.2, but I can imagine some members 'up in arms' at the extra work and some will have sleepless nights at the thought of using 9.3SJLJ.

So, you can see I have had an uphill struggle to get new WinFBE users all they need, and have all but given up trying. Please remember that I am a user of WinFBE and not the author.

I will have a look at drWinFBE_Tools.chm so that it makes sense today. If I do anything, I will not mention it in the WinFBE thread, but start a separate thread in FB's forum. I can rely on David Roberts, but not Paul Squires. Sorry, Paul but I am not known for taking prisoners as you no doubt know from the PowerBASIC forums - you joined in 2000, and I joined in 2003.

Hi David:

Thank you for your comprehensive reply.

Perhaps when you update SetCompilerPathsII, along with the

"I need more than one set of compiler paths."

message you could refer the user to the Help file.

[deltarho[1859]]

you could refer the user to the Help file

Excellent idea.

drWinFBE_Tools.chm is being updated. It recommends deleting the toolchain that comes with WinFBE 2.2.0 and provides a link to download the latest default toolchain. In fact, we go straight to SOURCEFORGE from the Help file and get the five-second countdown. It also recommends downloading the latest gcc 5.2 toolchain. If they do that, then they will not see "I need more than one set of compiler paths".

I have both gcc 9.3 and 5.2 but have not needed 5.2. I also have 8.3, 10.3, and 12.0 because I am an adventurous soul. 9.3 and 5.2 should more than satisfy 99.9% of members. That leaves nine members dissatisfied.