Author Topic: Features Wishlist (Read 693046 times)

Runer112 · « **Reply #2355 on:** June 08, 2011, 05:45:35 pm »

In response to Quigibo's responses:

1. Wait, you use 6-bit compression already? Why can I not make 4-character static pointers or labels then? Also, unless you define them to simply equal other characters, you're forgetting about the 30 GDB, Pic, and Str tokens.

2. Oops, totally forgot about the fact that it's already used for newline. Pi would be good then.

3. Yeah, I realize this could make the max symbols limit creep up quickly (See #5). But it would be a pretty nice feature nonetheless.

4. Okay, this wasn't even my idea and I didn't really care too much about seeing it implemented anyways.

5. I was actually thinking about using the swap sector myself, but for some reason decided against it. But now that I think about it again, it should definitely be possible to use that to store defines because they are, as you said, write-once data and should therefore work perfectly. And I know it's possible to use the swap sector as your own person write-once storage. That's how calc84maniac backs up all the contents of RAM before running TI-Boy, by copying it all to the swap sector. Having 64KB of define storage space would be incredible. You could scrap name compression, increase the character limit to 8, and still fit over 5,000 symbols! Nobody would ever run out!

Quigibo · « **Reply #2356 on:** June 08, 2011, 06:16:03 pm »

Quote from: Runer112 on June 08, 2011, 05:45:35 pm

Wait, you use 6-bit compression already? Why can I not make 4-character static pointers or labels then? Also, unless you define them to simply equal other characters, you're forgetting about the 30 GDB, Pic, and Str tokens.

The first character is either a "label", "label later", "GDB", "Pic", or "Str". Pi will be added to that list when I add that. The second character is either the first letter/number for labels, or the 0-9 for the Pic/Str/GDB. Then there are only 2 characters left after that. I see what you mean though, I could compress it more to get an extra character out of static pointers. But if I do #5, I won't have that problem.

EDIT: Also, if I use the swap sector, I could conceivably do the entire thing in one pass (including all those new pass features)

Runer112 · « **Reply #2357 on:** June 08, 2011, 06:29:05 pm »

Quote from: Quigibo on June 08, 2011, 06:16:03 pm

EDIT: Also, if I use the extra page, I could conceivably do the entire thing in one pass

You mean the extra RAM page? Or the swap sector? Because if you could do it with the swap sector that would be awesome because every calculator could use it. I figure you could use 1 16KB page to hold the defined constants and the remaining 3 pages to hold references waiting to be filled in.

calc84maniac · « **Reply #2358 on:** June 08, 2011, 06:29:30 pm »

Quote from: Quigibo on June 08, 2011, 06:16:03 pm

EDIT: Also, if I use the swap sector, I could conceivably do the entire thing in one pass (including all those new pass features)

How is that possible? Won't you need to have a 2nd pass to insert any previously unknown values?

Quigibo · « **Reply #2359 on:** June 08, 2011, 06:59:34 pm »

With that much space, I could just store a list of pointers to places that need replacements later and then replace them all once the values are known at the end of parsing.

Runer112 · « **Reply #2360 on:** June 08, 2011, 07:55:41 pm »

Super bonus 1.0.0 feature?

ztrumpet · « **Reply #2361 on:** June 08, 2011, 09:32:41 pm »

Quote from: Runer112 on June 08, 2011, 07:55:41 pm

Super bonus 1.0.0 feature?

Doooo it!

* ZTrumpet is employing peer pressure. And standing on a ladder whilst doing so.

Deep Toaster · « **Reply #2362 on:** June 08, 2011, 09:39:02 pm »

Quote from: Quigibo on June 08, 2011, 06:16:03 pm

EDIT: Also, if I use the swap sector, I could conceivably do the entire thing in one pass (including all those new pass features)

+++++++

That would be awesome. And fast.

EDIT: Which would be awesome.

ztrumpet · « **Reply #2363 on:** June 08, 2011, 09:40:53 pm »

Quote from: Deep Thought on June 08, 2011, 09:39:02 pm

That would be awesome. And fast.

EDIT: Which would be awesome.

And fast.

Edit: I actually think it would compile at about the same speed. Regardless, it'd still be awesome.

Quigibo · « **Reply #2364 on:** June 08, 2011, 10:14:18 pm »

I guess the only side effect is that you can't run the Axe app when your batteries are low, but that's no big deal. I'll try to get this done by next release. Looks like label/variable names will be up to 7 characters long now and will allow ~2000 variables + labels per program (up from 3 characters and 150 of each right now). This would also allow me to put all data after subroutines and allow forward declaration of ANY static pointer/constant. It'll be quite an epic release indeed if I get this working. Not to mention tons of optimizations I've already made that will affect nearly every program.

Get excited.

Darl181 · « **Reply #2365 on:** June 08, 2011, 10:25:36 pm »

Win.
Will it be possible to use lowercase letters?

Deep Toaster · « **Reply #2366 on:** June 09, 2011, 12:03:26 am »

Quote from: Quigibo on June 08, 2011, 10:14:18 pm

I guess the only side effect is that you can't run the Axe app when your batteries are low, but that's no big deal. I'll try to get this done by next release. Looks like label/variable names will be up to 7 characters long now and will allow ~2000 variables + labels per program (up from 3 characters and 150 of each right now). This would also allow me to put all data after subroutines and allow forward declaration of ANY static pointer/constant. It'll be quite an epic release indeed if I get this working. Not to mention tons of optimizations I've already made that will affect nearly every program.

Get excited.

1.0's gonna be a huge leap forward, wow.

Runer112 · « **Reply #2367 on:** June 09, 2011, 12:05:11 am »

I'm glad I made those suggestions, it sounds like parsing is going to get a major upgrade.

Freyaday · « **Reply #2368 on:** June 09, 2011, 12:08:34 am »

Quote from: Quigibo on June 08, 2011, 10:14:18 pm

I guess the only side effect is that you can't run the Axe app when your batteries are low, but that's no big deal. I'll try to get this done by next release. Looks like label/variable names will be up to 7 characters long now and will allow ~2000 variables + labels per program (up from 3 characters and 150 of each right now). This would also allow me to put all data after subroutines and allow forward declaration of ANY static pointer/constant. It'll be quite an epic release indeed if I get this working. Not to mention tons of optimizations I've already made that will affect nearly every program.

Get excited.

WinWInWInWInWInINWINWINIWNINWINIWNINWINWINIWNIWNINWINWINWINWINWINIWNIWNINWINOInhfzaruiognbvlasgbjlhuihnuiwehn!!!!AAAAAHAHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHAAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAAAAAQA!

* Freyaday got too excited

But seriously: All of the drawing commands->buffer
Inverse drawing commands, and perhaps a new syntax:
drawing-command(All the necessary arguments, list of buffers onto which to draw this awesomeness)
^Would be AWESOME

Runer112 · « **Reply #2369 on:** June 09, 2011, 12:18:54 am »

Inverse/white drawing for commands that currently cannot might be nice. However, I'm not sure how being able to provide a whole list of buffers to apply a command to would be useful. I can't see why you'd want to apply the command to any more than two buffers in the first place, and if so, you can easily do something like:

Code: [Select]

Pt-On(expression→r₁,expression→r₂,expression→r₃)
Pt-On(r₁,r₂,r₃)ʳ

Because of how arguments are loaded and read, it wouldn't even be possible to optimize this much by combining the two into "one" command. Also, this is sort of a weird request in general, because the syntax style of applying a command to a list of buffers is strange.

Author Topic: Features Wishlist (Read 693046 times)

Runer112

Re: Features Wishlist

Quigibo

Re: Features Wishlist

Runer112

Re: Features Wishlist

calc84maniac

Re: Features Wishlist

Quigibo

Re: Features Wishlist

Runer112

Re: Features Wishlist

ztrumpet

Re: Features Wishlist

Deep Toaster

Re: Features Wishlist

ztrumpet

Re: Features Wishlist

Quigibo

Re: Features Wishlist

Darl181

Re: Features Wishlist

Deep Toaster

Re: Features Wishlist

Runer112

Re: Features Wishlist

Freyaday

Re: Features Wishlist

Runer112

Re: Features Wishlist