• Axe Parser 5 1
Currently:  
« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 85 86 [87] 88 89 ... 149   Go Down

Author Topic: Axe Parser  (Read 554248 times)

0 Members and 11 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline DJ Omnimaga

  • Clacualters are teh gr33t
  • CoT Emeritus
  • LV15 Omnimagician (Next: --)
  • *
  • Posts: 55943
  • Rating: +3154/-232
  • CodeWalrus founder & retired Omnimaga founder
    • View Profile
    • Dream of Omnimaga Music
Re: Axe Parser
« Reply #1290 on: October 01, 2010, 09:45:16 am »
Ah right. Thanks for the clarification :)
Logged

Offline yoman82

  • LV3 Member (Next: 100)
  • ***
  • Posts: 71
  • Rating: +1/-1
    • View Profile
Re: Axe Parser
« Reply #1291 on: October 01, 2010, 05:12:36 pm »
Has there ever been any consideration of inline basic? It was brought up before, and I think it be awesome, however historically basic-asm conversion has been... well, nonexistant.
Logged

Offline Runer112

  • Project Author
  • LV11 Super Veteran (Next: 3000)
  • ***********
  • Posts: 2289
  • Rating: +639/-31
    • View Profile
Re: Axe Parser
« Reply #1292 on: October 01, 2010, 05:18:33 pm »
Why would you want inline basic? Axe can pretty much do everything basic can, and more, all faster and better. And what do you mean by "basic-asm conversion?" That's pretty much what Axe is already.
« Last Edit: October 01, 2010, 05:25:48 pm by Runer112 »
Logged

Offline DJ Omnimaga

  • Clacualters are teh gr33t
  • CoT Emeritus
  • LV15 Omnimagician (Next: --)
  • *
  • Posts: 55943
  • Rating: +3154/-232
  • CodeWalrus founder & retired Omnimaga founder
    • View Profile
    • Dream of Omnimaga Music
Re: Axe Parser
« Reply #1293 on: October 01, 2010, 05:53:24 pm »
He probably just wants to use the same syntax as in TI-BASIC to not have to learn everything, but I am not certain this would be easy to implement. Or maybe he just wants to be able to use some math functions from BASIC inside his axe programs?

IMHO the best solution would be to use multiple sub-programs and make your program or game an hybrid of Axe executables and BASIC programs, like some larger BASIC games that are split in multiple files to save space.

An advantage to using BASIC code would be the smaller file size and getting rid of the 8 KB executable code limit, but then you will have portions of your program that will be much slower.
Logged

Offline Deep Toaster

  • So much to do, so much time, so little motivation
  • Administrator
  • LV13 Extreme Addict (Next: 9001)
  • *************
  • Posts: 8217
  • Rating: +758/-15
    • View Profile
    • ClrHome
Re: Axe Parser
« Reply #1294 on: October 01, 2010, 10:25:31 pm »
Quote from: calc84maniac on September 30, 2010, 12:36:58 pm
I think he meant mixing subroutines and data.

Huh? That wouldn't work, though, because subroutines are runnable and might simply be a label as part of the main program. If it were moved into the data, that would cause a lot of programs x.x
Logged



Offline calcdude84se

  • Needs Motivation
  • LV11 Super Veteran (Next: 3000)
  • ***********
  • Posts: 2272
  • Rating: +78/-13
  • Wondering where their free time went...
    • View Profile
Re: Axe Parser
« Reply #1295 on: October 01, 2010, 11:06:23 pm »
"Subroutines", to my knowledge, does not mean Axe code, but rather the routines used by individual commands, like DispGraphr
Logged
"People think computers will keep them from making mistakes. They're wrong. With computers you make mistakes faster."
-Adam Osborne
Spoiler For "PartesOS links":
I'll put it online when it does something.

Offline Deep Toaster

  • So much to do, so much time, so little motivation
  • Administrator
  • LV13 Extreme Addict (Next: 9001)
  • *************
  • Posts: 8217
  • Rating: +758/-15
    • View Profile
    • ClrHome
Re: Axe Parser
« Reply #1296 on: October 01, 2010, 11:08:52 pm »
Ohh, I see. Okay, I see the problem now.

Maybe Axe could put the subroutines before the data, and count them separately?
Logged



Offline calcdude84se

  • Needs Motivation
  • LV11 Super Veteran (Next: 3000)
  • ***********
  • Posts: 2272
  • Rating: +78/-13
  • Wondering where their free time went...
    • View Profile
Re: Axe Parser
« Reply #1297 on: October 01, 2010, 11:16:22 pm »
The only problem with that is it would require a more complex, slower compiler. :(
Logged
"People think computers will keep them from making mistakes. They're wrong. With computers you make mistakes faster."
-Adam Osborne
Spoiler For "PartesOS links":
I'll put it online when it does something.

Offline DJ Omnimaga

  • Clacualters are teh gr33t
  • CoT Emeritus
  • LV15 Omnimagician (Next: --)
  • *
  • Posts: 55943
  • Rating: +3154/-232
  • CodeWalrus founder & retired Omnimaga founder
    • View Profile
    • Dream of Omnimaga Music
Re: Axe Parser
« Reply #1298 on: October 01, 2010, 11:42:52 pm »
How much slower? Would it be like 1 minute compiling per 10 KB?
Logged

Offline Raylin

  • Godslayer
  • LV10 31337 u53r (Next: 2000)
  • **********
  • Posts: 1392
  • Rating: +83/-25
  • I am a certifiable squirrel ninja.
    • View Profile
    • Ray M. Perry
Re: Axe Parser
« Reply #1299 on: October 02, 2010, 02:24:19 am »
Question: Axe can copy data from archived appvars?
Logged
Bug me about my book.
Sarah: TI-83 Plus Silver Edition [OS 1.19]
Cassie: TI-86 [OS 1.XX]
Elizabeth: TI-81 [OS 1.XX]
Jehuty: TI-83 Plus Silver Edition [OS 1.19]
Tesla: CASIO Prizm



Offline Runer112

  • Project Author
  • LV11 Super Veteran (Next: 3000)
  • ***********
  • Posts: 2289
  • Rating: +639/-31
    • View Profile
Re: Axe Parser
« Reply #1300 on: October 02, 2010, 05:46:44 am »
Quote from: Raylin on October 02, 2010, 02:24:19 am
Question: Axe can copy data from archived appvars?

Answer: Yes.

Example:
Code: [Select]
If GetCalc("appvDATA",Y₁)
Copy(Y₁,L₁,256)
Else
.Appvar not found in archive
End
« Last Edit: October 02, 2010, 05:59:25 am by Runer112 »
Logged

Offline yoman82

  • LV3 Member (Next: 100)
  • ***
  • Posts: 71
  • Rating: +1/-1
    • View Profile
Re: Axe Parser
« Reply #1301 on: October 02, 2010, 10:50:02 am »
DJ- I'm talking about mainly making use of the TI BASIC math functions.
Logged

Offline DJ Omnimaga

  • Clacualters are teh gr33t
  • CoT Emeritus
  • LV15 Omnimagician (Next: --)
  • *
  • Posts: 55943
  • Rating: +3154/-232
  • CodeWalrus founder & retired Omnimaga founder
    • View Profile
    • Dream of Omnimaga Music
Re: Axe Parser
« Reply #1302 on: October 02, 2010, 10:55:58 am »
Ah ok. Unfortunately this seems like it would be something hard to do, especially running the BASIC interpreter in the middle of an Axe program. Maybe Quigibo could confirm if it would be easy or not
Logged

Offline shmibs

  • しらす丼
  • Administrator
  • LV11 Super Veteran (Next: 3000)
  • ***********
  • Posts: 2132
  • Rating: +281/-3
  • try to be ok, ok?
    • View Profile
    • shmibbles.me
Re: Axe Parser
« Reply #1303 on: October 02, 2010, 11:53:11 am »
un diquestion:
is there any fast/efficient way to Or one screen buffer over the other?
i'm trying to avoid a massive for( loop
Logged

Offline Runer112

  • Project Author
  • LV11 Super Veteran (Next: 3000)
  • ***********
  • Posts: 2289
  • Rating: +639/-31
    • View Profile
Re: Axe Parser
« Reply #1304 on: October 02, 2010, 12:14:28 pm »
That's pretty much the way to do it. You'd be surprised just how fast one massive For() loop that OR's the contents of both buffers is, though. I calculated that the following loop runs about 40 times per second at 6MHz:

Code: [Select]
Repeat getKey(15)
For(A,0,383)
.That ﹢ symbol is the 16-bit OR operator
{A*2+L₆}ʳ﹢{A*2+L₃}ʳ→{A*2+L₆}ʳ
End
C+1→C
End
« Last Edit: October 02, 2010, 12:26:09 pm by Runer112 »
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 85 86 [87] 88 89 ... 149   Go Up
« previous next »