3 ms·

I've used the QB64 for a few projects that extended old stuff I had done. But I've had some stability issues with the interface and applications. That was a f

I've used the QB64 for a few projects that extended old stuff I had done. But I've had some stability issues with the interface and applications. That was a few sub-versions so that may have been fixed. I've had really good luck with FreeBasic. It supports classic QBasic as well as a lot more new commands, libraies, and is more modernized. You can also compile Windows, DOS, and Linux binaries. The drawback is that it doesn't have it's own GUI and is a bit harder to set up. https://www.freebasic.net/ https://www.freebasic.net/

_sdegutis 9y ago
My experience with FreeBasic was about 15 years ago so things may have changed, but it had Allegro or SDL built in and was very easy to use to make little video games.
versteegen 9y ago
As a heavy FreeBASIC user for 13 years, I like to describe it as a subset of C++98 with BASIC syntax and decent builtin strings. Unlike C++ it compiles very quickly, and if you want faster code, it can emit C code and compile via gcc. the very nice fbfrog tool automatically translates C headers to FB headers, so you can use almost any C-compatible library and do almost anything you can do in C. Using it like C is not necessary a good idea. Compared to all other BASIC dialects I've tried (which doesn't include VB), it seems better engineered. Compared to C, the main drawback is the immaturity of the compiler, and error messages are often poor.