FNXBasic

What are the differences between Rapid-Q and FnxBasic?

Currently I noticed three differences: different icon, a "manifest" inside of produced exes and a lean towards Spanish language (comparing RQ`s lean towards french ;D).

It`s like a car, it are two complete different cars with different engines but in both you can drive.
try this in both:

dim a as string
dim c as integer
dim d as double
d=timer
for c=1 to 1000000
a=a+"ok"
next c
showmessage str$(timer-d)+"seconds needed"

subs need not to be declared in fnxbasic and can be befor and after the call.
best regards

I see. I need to study examples a bit more.

If you need an IDE, take a look into this:
rapidq.phatcode.net/FreeQ/

It`s best what current RQ veterans could make and it`s open-source and what not, so you can port it over and save time, if you`d like.

Ah, I forgot to ask! Is fnxcompiler.exe based on RC.exe?
I mean, how did you rewrite it, do you have (RC.exe`s) compiler`s source code?

It has nothing to do with rapidq, the interpreter is compiled machinecode from my program in delphi 7.0 and the compiler is in fact the interpreter with the bytcode of the compiler. In other way the fnxbasic compiler and editor are also written in fnxbasic.
best regards

I just wanted to add that William Yu did not release his RapidQ source code to the public.

On google there is a link to his "I`m Sorry" post
search:
William Yu : I`m sorry ... - Rapid-Q Inside - Sites - Google

In it he explains why he did not.  ;)

What is more, there are resemblences, but the compiler is certainly different. I made the following test

Dim i As Integer,k As Integer
Dim t As double
t=Timer
k=0
For i=1 To 10000000
k=k+1
Next i
Print Timer-t
Do
Loop Until Inkey$ <> ""
End

and found fnxbasic at least 13-14 times faster than RapidQ!