This compiler offers alot - its worth a try. it has many libraries including cryptography.
ADW Modula-2
ADW Modula-2, © ADW Software is the successor of Stony Brook Modula-2, and is released as freeware.
ADW Modula-2 is for Windows only
ADW Modula-2 allows development of both 32- and 64-bits programs on the Windows platform.
No support is given, neither by ADW Software, nor by modula2.org.
Use the feedback form for your comments.
http://www.modula2.org/adwm2/
Download actual version 2.42 (http://www.modula2.org/adwm2/ADWm2.42.zip)
Win32 API (Samples) in ADW Modula (http://www.modula2.org/win32tutor/download/M2win32.zip)
Modula 2 generally looks good and i would always prefer it from C Coding.
It supports a number of Libraries: http://www.modula2.org/reference/isomodules/
The only thing i do not understand is, WHO really drives that project?
Following the Impressum, ADW Software leads to: http://www.pythagoras.net
but at that page there is no word from "ADW Software".
Actually there is no hint from who this software is, who really makes this thing?
The original Authors foreword is from "Gordon Dodrill - March 16, 1987".
The recommended site: http://www.modula2.org/tutor/index.php
seems to be down at this time.
when i posted, i copied the text from the site. i guess it will be up later on. the compiler is free to use and was formerly the Stony Brook Modula-2 compiler. it was sold to awd (including the creators??).
the compiler is nice, proven for a long time, comes with everything one needs, produces FAST/SMALL executables and is FREE!
The original creators are maintaining it.
The site works again.
New: ADW Modula-2
ADW Modula-2, the successor of Stony Brook Modula-2, has been released as freeware.
Most interestingly, ADW Modula-2 allows development of both 32- and 64-bits programs on the Windows platform.
You can download the installation package from the ADW Modula-2 page.
For more Modula-2 news, visit the Free Modula-2 pages. http://www.modula2.org/index.php
Who is really ADW?
Before using a tool i would like to know at least a bit about the creator.
Where is he from?
I do not like to use executables from unknown sources.
i don't know awd.
but i bought the the stony brook compiler ages ago (i think in 2000) and used it since. i was glad that they released the new 32/64 bit version and i use it since. it is excellent. there are some medical software companies that use it too.
i never found something disturbing yet - well one or other compiler glitch, but they repair them fast. i can only recommend the tool.
i found an old homepage with the following content (http://www.modula2.org/sb/indexw.html):
Stony Brook Software Home Page
Hi, My name is Norman Black and I develop the Stony Brook Modula-2 compiler. This web page is designed to be a temporary measure until an actual company web site is created. This site is hosted on my own personal web access account space. I have not tried to design this page to look interesting or slick. I quickly put this together just get a certain minimum amount of information available to those who might be interested.
For a quick listing of features, capabilities and pricing of our Modula-2 development system check out our Product Information page.
Build number 31 is the current Modula-2 maintenance release. Release Notes.
For those curious to learn a bit more about the Stony Brook development system we have the help files available here for study. These help files do not have any of the context sensitive help information available for the various dialogs in the programs, but enough information is present here to get a strong understanding of what the Stony Brook development system offers. These are the HTML variants of our help files.
Development Environment Help File
Debugger Help File
Compiler Extensions
Portable GUI modules. These modules provide a cross platform capable GUI interface. Windows, Unix and Macintosh.
WinShell - this is the base Windowing API encapsulation.
DlgShell - this module provides an interface for dialog boxes. It has capabilities for modal, modeless and tabbed dialogs.
BasicDialogs - common dialogs, ready to go.
TextWindows - this module is built on top of WinShell and provides a very high level interface for windows that will display text.
---------------------------------------
the compiler does support objects better then PB and has numerous modules such as COM, Crypto, GL etc.
Thats about the original author, but before i would use a system from AWT (anonymous) I would really need to know "who's behind" and why he links to a "Pythagoras software".
I like Modula 2 more the C, and would think of using it (so long PB does not have a 643 bit system), if somebody will provide me with relevant informations.
I normally do not use systems from unknhown sources.
Well I keep on using the compiler even not knowing AWD. But maybe there is another language option for you that you might like - http://dlang.org/download.html. I like that language very much, but only use it with 32 bit. There is an 64 bit compiler for it so https://bitbucket.org/goshawk/gdc/wiki/Home.
If you like C, I don't, then you have another optin with a lot of math stuff: http://www.cs.virginia.edu/~lcc-win32. it does have a 64 bit version too.
purebasic - which I tried - is out of the question for me. it is a toy and a lot of people have a problem with 'basic' per se.
But all in all, I think the Modula-2 compiler is the best choice, since it is proven and in real product use.
Is there a powerbasic 64 bit coming? It is kind of sad that there is not such a version. Everybody I know demands software versions of 32/64 bit.
Purebasic has the big advantage that i know the author and even have his personal mailadress.
I have had some mail conversations in the first month of PureBasic with him.
PureBasic is not sooo bad in my opinion, especially as i think they learned a lot in the last years, and made things better.
While you are right that they present it as some kind of gamebasic actually.
My problem is the Syntax that is too much C-like for my taste.
I do not understand the way how they work with dynamic string.
In PowerBasic its so easy.
PowerBasic is a Dreambasic from the syntax. It has all things needed and its fast.
Yes, i also hope there will be a 64 bit compiler from PowerBasic.
Having said this, the Modual with its libraies also looks quite interesting.
However for commercial products you need to know who is behind, at least thats my opinion.
i didn't mean to say that purebasic is really bad - that it isn't.
yep, it takes to get used to the c-like syntax and there is a lot i don't like either, but it is commonly used. take a look at d-language. it has dynamic strings and arrays etc.. It is lacking gui, database etc however.
as for awd - well drop them a line and ask. maybe it will get you to use a nice language with a lot of libraries.
I had a bit time today and took a closer look.
Behind the Modula 2 is:
ADW SOFTWARE
Osseven 12
2350 Vosselaar, BELGIUM
Tel: +32 14 61 32 70
FAX: +32 14 61 82 15
www.pyethagoras.net
Fons De Wolf
fons.dw@pythagoras.net
and also
Mies Peeraer
mies@pythagoras.net
It seems that they use the compiler to drive their own bussiness which is to programm additions for CAD Systems.
Knowing that there is a known bussiness person behind the system,
i think that i can recommend the system as a 64 bit Alternative.
The Compiler has a lot of options, and its visible that they have put a lot of time into it.
Modula 2 is well know for its very strikt Type- and range-checking, which may reduce debugging time for complex projects.
This is all also true for ADW Modula 2.
All of these checikings can be turned on and off in the compiler settings, to prevent speed penalties in the final executable.
I took a closer look today. Generally the "How to" is a bit unique.
It takes some time just to undestand how you can get a filecompiling and running.
However, i like the Debugger, it shows the source code line AND the ASM side-by-side.
This way you can see if things compile like you want it.
See attched picture.
i am glad to hear that you kind of like it.
i use it all the time, there are tons of source codes and libraries, it has all the things that PB has and LOTS more. take a look at the modules (classes, windowing, dialogs crypt etc.). best of all - it is easy to interface dll's for all the things you like, such as db's, pdf ... .
it is very easy to write bug free code - the compiler is proven for many, many years and so are the libraries (modules). it is fun to work with. btw, one can easily use many of the free pascal sources with minor modifications.
i am not employed by them - neither am i a customer of their product!
Richard, I would possibly use it, if there would not be Powerbasic.
While the quality of the product seems to be very good, i could not really manage to test it in depth.
Also i did not understand the insigt completely, for example - how to really manage libraries.
Using PB is for me just the most simple method, because i know all the "buttons" and rules already.
I know the strengths and weaknesses. As long as Bob keeps it upodated, i have no plans to switch my compiler.
But, as there is no PB x64 at this time,
do you have a template for a 64 bit hook-DLL?
We can not do that with PB currently, but I'd like to use it for x64 code.
And ... in case you want to post more code-samples for x64 Modula here, i can give you some space in my Sub-Forum for that.
here is some source code. please make sure to look at the modules that the Compiler Comes with one commercial dll i had to delete, but i left the definitions and mod files.
maybe the code helps someone or you .http://www.jose.it-berater.org/smfforum/Smileys/emotions/smiley.gif
best regards
richard
Thanks, Rick.
You can anytime post more Info on the ADW Modula here, as I like this system.
you are welcome.
the libs and dlls are 64bit - forgot to mention.
it would be nice to have something like firefly for that Compiler. i'd buy it instantly.
Yes, the surface is the weaker part.
I like the Debugger!
so do i, but the best thing is the compiler's stability - virtually no compiler bugs.
AWD: .... But as I said before, real errors are very rare. Maybe one a year and mostly for exceptional cases.
I will tell you when i have really used it for something.
I am the one who finds the hidden bugs.
Because i make the things the others do not do.
You sure hate C theo! :) I've seen you mention that so many times!
I really don't think its as bad as a lot of PB'ers make it out to be. Once one gets used to it, one finds it has a certain compelling logic and beauty to it. And it seems to me the benifits outweigh the downsides by quite a bit, for example, 64 bit versions are easily available for free, lots of documentation, certain continuity, etc.
However, I have to admit, I suffer from more than my share of things I hate - some perhaps unreasonably. Not so much in C but in C++. For example, I truely hate everything to do with templates in C++. I feel they make the most confusing and ugly, indecipherable code. All of modern C++ has gone that route however, to my dismay. So I'm not saying I don't understand. :)
Fred I do NOT "HATE" whatever. Even my worst enemies are in fact challenges, nothing to hate.
Besides that every programmer has some programming style coming from earliere days.
I am a BASCI Programmer, and i have used PASCAL before. So i know and like Modula.
If there would not be anything else i would also take a closer look on C.
But not as long as there is the smallest piece of life in my PB. :-)
Its not AGAINST C here, its just my personal taste.
You have a good right for your personal taste.
We also will not eat the same stuff when wego to restaurant.