This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - TC01
Pages: 1 ... 17 18 [19] 20 21 ... 24
271
« on: July 29, 2010, 06:54:49 pm »
It's a pun on "Triple A", type of battery, and "tr1p1ea", username of community member.
I can't bother to look through to see if these have been mentioned, but anyway:
461. You bought a TI-73 just to port your 83+ programs to it.
462. You bought a TI-80 just to see if you can hack it for assembly.
462. You bought a TI-81 just to try out the assembly hacks.
272
« on: July 29, 2010, 06:02:26 pm »
It seems that one good thing TI did was to make the calcs durable.
So true, except of course the TI-80  (Lot of people at school had those and when they felt on the floor, it didn't take much for the screen to break)
But I would say that the TI-80 is TI's worst graphing calculator anyway, with it's small screen, simpler mathematics (I think- it was the middle school calculator, wasn't it?), lack of a link port, and assembly support. By comparison, even the TI-81 is much better (especially now that it's been hacked for assembly).
273
« on: July 29, 2010, 10:27:16 am »
Interesting. Those who want to make 83+ BASIC games but mostly have access to a 68k should definitively find this useful 
Just make sure to convert the program there aren't too many dependencies to install, though. I heard some people complain about how a software used a different Python version than another and I remember having troubles with GTK too, with two softwares using different versions, forcing me to install/uninstall them back and forth, depending of which software I needed
Yes, I find it rather annoying that Python 3.x broke backward compatibility (or at least partially), since I program in Python 2.x. I did get BinPac8x to work, however, under Python 2.x (at least, I think I did), and posted on Cemetech the changes that I made. For Windows users, I'm considering using py2exe to package the programs an executable rather than a Python script. Then no installation of Python is necessary- but users would have to install this first as I don't have the rights to distribute a required DLL. Well, technically speaking, I might have the rights if the DLL was included in Visual Studio 2010, but it doesn't appear to be.
274
« on: July 29, 2010, 10:00:38 am »
TI-Connect for Mac's pretty advanced, though (it has a lot more features than the Windows version, and group files at least work ). Don't know anything about this, though...
Yeah, doesn't it actually have a TI-Basic program editor? I really don't get why that's only part of the Mac version.
275
« on: July 28, 2010, 09:50:46 pm »
An update: I've began some more serious work on the Python end of things.
I've written a single script that calls functions in two other modules- KermMartian's binpac8x to actually make the 8xp file, and parse89, a module I wrote with functions for extracting data from an *.89* variable file.
It's not entirely finished and it needs to be tested, of course- and for that I need to finish changing the on-calc tokenizer over to using text files (I started it but didn't finish, which means that it doesn't work at present and can't produce test programs).
276
« on: July 28, 2010, 06:01:27 pm »
Has a calculator every been completely junked? BrandonW bricked a few, but he made a fix for that. The only thing I guess you could really screw up would be the LCD. Unless maybe you replaced 0000 with jp 0000.
I can think of a combination of hardware and software failure- your link port fails, and then you delete the OS. Dead calc, unless you can fix the link port.
277
« on: July 27, 2010, 11:00:49 pm »
Can you link the 83+ to the 84+ SE? Does that work?
Do you have the USB cable that comes with the 84+ SE (the mini-USB to USB cable)? Does that work?
Have you tried TI Connect? Did that work?
If you have the USB linking cable and that works, the problem is probably with your cable. If it doesn't work, I recommend trying TI Connect to see if the problem is with TiLP or with your calculators.
278
« on: July 27, 2010, 06:35:05 pm »
I find it amusing that Nelson Sousa is so adamantly against calculator gaming when he created one. It looks to be very simple, yes, and yes it's written in Basic, but even so- it's still a game. If I were a member of that group, I would definitely mention it the next time there was an argument.
279
« on: July 27, 2010, 06:33:07 pm »
Well done!
Does this mean that once OS 1.1 is installed, you could go back to, say, OS 1.3 (below 1.7) without running Nleash? Or would you need to run it again in order to change operating systems (to something below 1.7, that is)?
280
« on: July 27, 2010, 09:49:25 am »
Z80 TI-Basic: Intermediate-Advanced
68k TI-Basic: Beginner-Intermediate
Z80 Assembly: Beginner
C/C++: Beginner-Intermediate
Python: Intermediate-Advanced
Visual Basic: Intermediate-Advanced
BasicX: Intermediate
281
« on: July 26, 2010, 09:59:16 am »
My desktop runs both Windows 7 and Windows XP (although I rarely use XP on it anymore).
My laptop runs Windows XP.
282
« on: July 25, 2010, 11:05:28 pm »
...and now I have a memory leak. I know where it's coming but not how to fix it.
The tokenizePrgm() function (which is the core of my tokenizer code- it's essentially a main function called by the real main function in another file) creates a pointer to an array of NUM_TOKEN tokenInfo objects.
This array is passed to an initTokens() procedure, which builds tokenInfo objects based on data stored in three arrays (this will change, obviously, when I implement the token file). I dynamically allocate memory to the names of each of those tokens.
The tokens array is then passed to all functions that need to use it, and at the end, in tokenizePrgm() I free up the tokens array.
Unfortunately, I haven't freed up the memory I allocated to the tokenInfo.name part of each token. And if I try to do it by looping over each token and calling:
free(tokens[i].name);
I get an address error.
Is there any way I can free this memory, or is the only solution not to use dynamic memory allocation here?
283
« on: July 25, 2010, 10:31:42 pm »
And some actual progress- the program's now successfully (at least, I think it is- again, I don't have the PC end of things in order yet) tokenizing multi-line programs, and lines with multiple tokens. Nice. The only thing you need to realize is that the 85 and 86 stored untokenized code 
The way it works on the 89 is that tokenization happens when you exit the program editor- when you enter the program editor everything is untokenized into raw text (so you can type out all raw commands). Is this the way it works on the 85 and 86? If it is, then there's no problem. But I'm going to focus on 83+/84+ for the time being.
284
« on: July 25, 2010, 10:22:07 pm »
68k C programs have options for a set of "program comments" at the top, which are accessed by "some shells", according to the documentation. One of those is a 16 by 16 icon (either black and white or grayscale).
Not sure what 89 shells would use the icon, but at least it would be in the source code (of those few 68k programs developed on Omnimaga, that is). Maybe I'll put it in mine.
285
« on: July 25, 2010, 10:19:00 pm »
I've been posting more about this in the C Programming help topic than in this topic. Anyway, I've decided that I'm going to make the list of tokens be stored in an external text file on the calculator. Therefore, I could also make the dialog box prompt for choice of token file- which would mean this program could easily tokenize in 82, 83, 85, and 86 Basic as well (with some changes on the PC end of things in how the file is created). That might be even less useful, since I don't think there are many 82/83/85/86 Basic developers out there anymore, but I still think it's a cool thing to add.
Pages: 1 ... 17 18 [19] 20 21 ... 24
|
Show Posts