Is PE5 (finally) Dead and Buried ?

[AllyCat]

Hi,

Personally, I still use Program Editor 5 quite often (and don't believe I'm alone). It's particularly useful to quickly read other people's .bas files, or to check code syntax when reading or posting to the forum, without the need to disrupt my work flow in PE6, or starting up another instance of PE6. A few days ago I checked that PE5 is still listed in the "Obsolete" section of the Downloads page, but sadly the PE5 entry now links directly to PE6.

Incidentally, I thought it might be useful to "associate" my PE5 to the .BAS file extension, to avoid wasting time in starting up another instance of PE6 (when double-clicking). But now (in Windows 10) it seems "impossible" to set up a File Association to a program of your own choice? All the methods (at least via Setup or Control Panel) now offer only a limited range of "Apps", or to "Look in the Windows Store". Is there still a way (rather than adding a .TXT extension and opening in Notepad, as I do now ) ?

Cheers, Alan.

 

[neiltechspec]

Still use 5.5 myself, haven’t ever installed 6, can’t see any benefit for what I do.
So, no windoze 10 issue for me.

 

[PhilHornby]

Is there still a way (rather than adding a .TXT extension and opening in Notepad, as I do now ) ?

Yes, it's all turned into a bit of 'black art'

You should still be able to do what you want, using the "Command Prompt (Admin)" aka CMD.exe. This still implements the olde-worlde pair of commands "ASSOC" and "FTYPE" (I never did understand why two programs were necessary).

The first one (ASSOC) will probably be set up something like this :-

C:\>assoc .bas
.bas=PICAXEEditor.BAS

and the second (FTYPE) refines this further, to point at the actual executable, so :-

C:\>ftype PICAXEEditor.BAS
PICAXEEditor.BAS="C:\Program Files (x86)\Revolution Education\PICAXE Editor\PicaxeEditor.exe" "%1"

So you can change .BAS files to open using the same association as .TXT files (which is Notepad.exe on my system) :-

C:\>assoc .txt
.txt=txtfile

C:\>ftype txtfile
txtfile=%SystemRoot%\system32\NOTEPAD.EXE %1

C:\>assoc .bas=txtfile
.bas=txtfile

Now .BAS files would use the same 'association' as .TXT and therefore open in Notepad.

I'm sure you'll be able to see how, with various combinations of "ASSOC" and/or "FTYPE", you can change the 'associated' program. (You might want one 'FTYPE' for PE5 and another for PE6).

NOTE:

When I tried this - working in a Command Prompt window - my .BAS file opened successfully in Notepad. When I invoked File Explorer, it also opened in Notepad. However, when I reset it back, File Explorer carried on using the new association. I had to right-click and use "Open With" and choose "Picaxe Editor" (which was still an option), in order to fully reset it.

No doubt the associations are stored somewhere in the registry and you could find and change them directly with Regedit.exe...

 

[Jack Burns]

A few days ago I checked that PE5 is still listed in the "Obsolete" section of the Downloads page, but sadly the PE5 entry now links directly to PE6.

I'm not sure if the PE5 download links were intentionally redirected to PE6, however PE5 can still be downloaded from the following links if anyone requires it...

Program Editor Installer (v5.5.5)
https://picaxe.com/downloads/bas805.exe

Patch (v5.5.5 to 5.5.6)
https://picaxe.com/downloads/progedit_555_to_556.zip

 

[kfjl]

PE5 was a nice surprise.
PE6 wasn't.
I still prefer axepad.

 

[AllyCat]

Hi,

Thanks Jack, that at least solves a problem (for now), should I need to reinstall PE5 again.

C:\>assoc .bas
.bas=PICAXEEditor.BAS

Thanks Phil. Hmm, I'm rather rusty now on what seem to be effectively "DOS" commands. (It's one of the reasons I really don't want to get involved with Linux.)

"PE5" seems to be in a file "progedit.exe", so I assumed that (when I'd got to a c:\> prompt) I need to type something like assoc .bas=progedit.bas and indeed assoc .bas seems to confirm that change. However, ftype progedit.bas just produces a response "File type 'progedit.bas' not found or no open command associated with it."

The progedit.exe file is in a folder named "Programming Editor" (instead of "Revolution Education") but trying to add that to the path (in the assoc command) seems to fail because of the space; do I have to put in a 20% or something ? Or do I need to add the path right back to the C:\ root (using ftype ?) ?

Cheers, Alan.

PS: Yes I try to make my programs also compatible with AxePad, but to me one of the great strengths of the Program Editor (5 or reluctantly 6) is the Simulator.

 

[AllyCat]

Hi,

Success! After re-reading Phil's post, I tried right-clicking a .BAS program in File Explorer, selected "Open With" and navigated to Progedit.exe. That did indeed open in PE5, and now when I use the Start > Settings > Apps > Choose default applications by file type method, then "Program Editor" (i.e. PE5) has been added to the list, so I could select it and now PE5 runs as default. Furthermore, "assoc .bas" does now elicit a response of ".bas=Programming Editor\progedit.bas" (but "ftype ....." fails because of the space).

Now just to hope that the link to PE5 gets re-instated in the Obsolete Downloads section .

Cheers, Alan.

 

[PhilHornby]

You may not have quite done what I envisaged - but, hey, if it's working ...

The progedit.exe file is in a folder named "Programming Editor" (instead of "Revolution Education") but trying to add that to the path (in the assoc command) seems to fail because of the space; do I have to put in a 20% or something ? Or do I need to add the path right back to the C:\ root (using ftype ?) ?

The association made by ASSOC is just an arbitrary string, rather than a filename. FTYPE takes a filename (in double-quotes if necessary), followed by placeholders for any command line parameters.

Some help on the two 'dos' commands (though I think they're actually from Windows NT!) :-

C:\>help assoc
Displays or modifies file extension associations

ASSOC [.ext[=[fileType]]]

  .ext      Specifies the file extension to associate the file type with
  fileType  Specifies the file type to associate with the file extension

Type ASSOC without parameters to display the current file associations.
If ASSOC is invoked with just a file extension, it displays the current
file association for that file extension.  Specify nothing for the file
type and the command will delete the association for the file extension.

C:\>help ftype
Displays or modifies file types used in file extension associations

FTYPE [fileType[=[openCommandString]]]

  fileType  Specifies the file type to examine or change
  openCommandString Specifies the open command to use when launching files
                    of this type.

Type FTYPE without parameters to display the current file types that
have open command strings defined.  FTYPE is invoked with just a file
type, it displays the current open command string for that file type.
Specify nothing for the open command string and the FTYPE command will
delete the open command string for the file type.  Within an open
command string %0 or %1 are substituted with the file name being
launched through the assocation.  %* gets all the parameters and %2
gets the 1st parameter, %3 the second, etc.  %~n gets all the remaining
parameters starting with the nth parameter, where n may be between 2 and 9,
inclusive.  For example:

    ASSOC .pl=PerlScript
    FTYPE PerlScript=perl.exe %1 %*

would allow you to invoke a Perl script as follows:

    script.pl 1 2 3

If you want to eliminate the need to type the extensions, then do the
following:

    set PATHEXT=.pl;%PATHEXT%

and the script could be invoked as follows:

    script 1 2 3

 

[erco]

Good to hear, I also remain an old school PE5 user. Old habits die hard.

But I'm teaching some Picaxe summer classes and wondering if I should be teaching PE6 to first timers. Decisions, decisions!

 

[papaof2]

On the same quad core, Win 10 64 bit computer, PE5 loads faster - I think that might be partly from spending less time looking for the AXE027 (or equivalent) and partly from the smaller program file being loaded. I have both but I'm more likely to use PE5 for designing my own or for testing programs or snippets from others.

 

[bpowell]

Meh, I don't even remember what PE5 looks like ... I've been running 6 since it came out. It works fine, runs on Win10/11 without issues (and on my Linux box for that matter) and seems to be a great tool.

As for the slow load time: I (Personally) have never had a situation where I need the editor to load in a certain time without consequences ... I click the URL, the program starts loading, and comes up in a matter of seconds ... if it took *minutes* to load, I'd probably be concerned, but it doesn't take any longer than any other app to come up.

@erco - If you're going to be teaching, I'd recommend teaching on the latest and greatest software. You'd want to give them experience on something they can go and download themselves...you wouldn't teach a Windows class on Windows XP, right? It was a fine OS, but it's retired.

 

[erco]

@erco - If you're going to be teaching, I'd recommend teaching on the latest and greatest software. You'd want to give them experience on something they can go and download themselves...you wouldn't teach a Windows class on Windows XP, right? It was a fine OS, but it's retired.

Yeah, I'm leaning that way.



Unless I can find a stash of Windows XP laptops before July!

 

[Flenser]

To paraphrase a quote by Charlton Heston:
"You can have my PE6 #include files and macros when you pry them from my cold, dead hands."

 

[radiosparks]

PE5 is alive and well.
Works great on a ACER ASPIRE ONE 32bit Netbook running ATOM N270 XP SP3 2GB RAM 500GB SSD.

I have original CD. I've compressed the CD to a zip and uploaded to the Netbook. (the laptop has no CD drive)
Thanks for the update link, nice to know.

 

[Billo]

I have both PE5 and PE6 running on different systems. They both do what I need them for and I'm comfortable either way.

 

[Lenp]

Here's a list of stuff I've wanted to post, and here it goes!

By no means am I an expert programmer, but I've been cranking code since DOS Basic, and don't care for PE6. The idea behind the Picaxe is simple and quick. I feel PE6 goes the wrong way, too much bloat. Until PE5 is no longer supported on the operating system I use, I'm hooked!

I feel likewise about the 'glorious' Arduino. If you just need a bunch of I/O and the Picaxe firmware can support your needs, when ever would someone get married to an Arduino? They constantly have 'Newer and Better flavors, have way too much bloat, are many times larger and cost a lot more.

I have many Picaxe chips, running in custom products, and I keep a spare programmed chip on hand, but, never have needed one.

And lastly, is there any replacement for the BAS800 programmer that has apparently been discontinued?

Thanks all, and keep 'clicking'

 

[lbenson]

I feel PE6 goes the wrong way, too much bloat.

Unless you happen to need the additional memory it enabled. For me, it arrived at the exact time that I had run out of options with PE5, and still had more work to do on my project.

And it has lots of other good features. Too bad the claim that it would be easlier to update than PE5 has not resulted in those updates.

 

[bpowell]

... when ever would someone get married to an Arduino? They constantly have 'Newer and Better flavors, have way too much bloat, are many times larger and cost a lot more.

I think you're mixing a lot of things up here ...

"Arduino" is simply a brand ... Arduino's primary products are the development boards, and the programming IDE. Behind the IDE Arduino utilizes several libraries which abstract the hardware away from the end-user / programmer.

Really, there's not much of a difference between these Arduino boards, and PICAXE with it's project boards. Both are just brand-names ... they're products (development boards for instance) which have a micro-controller on them ... PICAXE boards use a PIC chip, and Arduino boards use an ATMega chip. Both have developed their own programming environment, both utilize code (whether on the device itself, or in the programming environment) to abstract the hardware away from the user.

They constantly have 'Newer and Better flavors,

You say that like it's a bad thing, it's not. Each new Arduino development board can still make use of the existing IDE and toolchain. There's almost zero change to the end-user except for the changes / features of the physical board.

[Arduino] have way too much bloat

It's true. The abstraction layer comes with a cost ... code that could run in under 100 words may compile out to several hundred words once the abstraction is accounted for. However, this is true for both Arduino AND PICAXE. Don't forget, the interpreter code is on the PICAXE chip, and is required for your code to run ... is this "Bloat"?

[Arduino] are many times larger ...

I think you're comparing the size of an Arduino board against the size of a PICAXE chip ... this is not an apples-to-apples comparison. Try comparing the size of a PICAXE project board to the size of an Arduino (and remember, there are dozens of models of "Arduino" boards in a variety of sizes...) I think you'll find your statement is false.

[Arduino] cost a lot more

Again, I think you're comparing an Arduino board to a PICAXE chip ... and that is a false comparison. Again, compare a PICAXE project board (with the PICAXE) to an Arduino board. Oddly enough, I see on Aliexpress you can buy a clone Arduino Uno with free shipping for less than the cost of a single PICAXE 08M2 chip... So again, your statement is false.

Some items to consider in favor of Arduino are:

• The programming libraries are all open-source; you can use, discard, modify as you see fit for your projects
• There is no proprietary code loaded onto the ATMega chip itself.
• The Optiboot (or other compatible) bootloader can be programmed to a raw ATMega chip by the user with a $5 programmer (or, with another Arduino)
• Executing code does not go through an interpreter, so does not suffer that processing penalty
• Arduino has a larger community, and a larger selection of sample code to learn from

Don't get me wrong, I love my PICAXE chips ... I'd say 8 times out of 10, a PICAXE will work just fine for any project I'm working on ... but those other 2 times, I need to go to either Arduino, or raw PIC / raw ATMega.

You can't really say one brand is better than the other; Arduino has it's place in the eco system, as does PICAXE. But I felt I should clear up some of your statements.

 

[AllyCat]

Hi,

Regular readers may notice that I have changed the Title slightly because PE5 was completely "buried" (hidden) via the direct menu structure. It's still not accessible via the "Program Editor" download link, nor the "Site Map", but the link from the "Downloads" page has been repaired and now points to the bas805.exe file. But it's clear from this thread that there are still many loyal users who refuse to allow PE5 to Lay Down and Die.

Of course PE6 does offer some significant enhancements; for me it's MACROs, the improved Terminal Emulator, correct emulation of RANDOM and perhaps soon I will have an application that does need the additional Program and Table Memory Slot available in most M2s. But PE5 is my first stop to use with the forum; it allows me to quickly check Syntax and maybe Simulate a code snippet or more, in a second "Instance" of a/the Program Editor, without disrupting the PICaxe type and File Paths, etc. that I'm using in my own PE6 project(s).

Cheers, Alan.