I should probably have mentioned this a while ago, but as most of you can probably tell, I don't really have the type of free time that I used to have.  The progress on Axe Parser has therefore been very slow due to the huge amount of work and projects I have to do for school.  I'm usually up until after 2 am most nights just to finish all my assignments and prepare for midterms.  I really really want to work more on Axe but I just don't see myself having time in the next few weeks.  So just to let everyone know, the next time you will see an update will most likely be around thanksgiving weekend because I will finally have some free time then.  After that, I will probably release 1.0.0 during the winter break, hopefully before the new year.  (I can't believe its been almost a year since I started!)

So don't think I'm ignoring suggestions or bug concerns, I am still monitoring those frequently.  I just simply won't be able to add those features for a while so even if they were mentioned a long time ago, I'm keeping a list of all the things I need to change.  After 1.0.0 and all the axiom support is finalized, I am hoping that new commands requested will finally be simple enough for asm programmers to create the libraries themselves so you won't have to wait for these huge delays between updates to get new features.

Since this thread is about progress, I should probably mention what I plan on doing next.  If I decide to go ahead with "Axe 2.0" I am thinking it will be a computer compiler rather than an on-calc compiler.  It would be a variation of the language with much more traditional C-style syntax, but similar enough so that code written in Axe 1.0 can be directly converted into 2.0 with a built-in converter.  I feel that large programs will be so much easier to make on a computer than on the calculator itself and since the compiler doesn't have the limits of size and speed that the calculator has. Therefore, I can make many many more optimizations, friendlier editing, unlimited sized apps, no risk of memory loss, etc.

If I decide not to do that, then I will likely be working on either a game or some computer based software or maybe some secret project.

Best of luck on midterms.

As for your ideas on Axe 2.0, I'm cool with that so long as you don't completely stop development on an on-calc compiler. That's the main reason I use Axe.

Get some sleep!

an computer compiler sound cool, but the oncalc compiler is pretty handy too, so it would be nice if you dont stop with that after v1.0.0

Will the computer version be written in C,C++,Java, or something else? If it is C++ or Java, I would love to help. I am very accomplished in both of those languages, and have seemingly a lot more free time than you, Quigibo. If it is not in either of those languages, I would still be willing to help, I would just have to learn the language first. However, that probably wouldn't take as much time as it sounds (I'm a VERY fast learner). I would suggest using Java, as it is cross-platform, and so could be used by anyone who uses the Axe Parser. If you want to contact me, please email me.

Actually, I had thought of that as well. Using a combination of the routines source for Axe, and TASM's z80 table file, I think code could be compiled to assembly, hex, and machine code.

Interesting, I wish you good luck with school!

As for the on-computer compiler, it might be nice indeed. That said, as I like to code on-calc, I think I will probably stick to Axe 1.0.0, though. As someone mentionned, its on-calc-ness is the main reason why I use Axe.

If a computer compiler is done, it would be cool if somebody could port Axe to 68K and TI-Nspire calculators as well.

I would really find it sad when you won't continue on-calc programming support for Axe 2.0, but it would be very nice to be able to program in Axe ON-PC as well. Just like the others said before me.

Again I say, it wouldn't be to hard to do. Unless there were any changes to the parser itself, the program would only have to be written once. All the data and stuff would be kept externally so the program itself wouldn't have to be modified. Also, the program could be written in Java and compiled to native for the different platforms (yes this is possible, at least for Windows and Linux).