Author Topic: Features Wishlist (Read 691933 times)

Freyaday · « **Reply #2370 on:** June 09, 2011, 12:23:15 am »

Well, ok then, but I'd like to see all the commands be able to be drawn to any buffer, because only the pt-commands can currently be done so, and It'd be so amazing to have the ability to send the rest of them to any buffer imaginable.

Runer112 · « **Reply #2371 on:** June 09, 2011, 12:28:19 am »

I voted no on the recent poll, in large part because I don't see any great alternatives, whether they are easily accessible or not. If you're worried about defines that start with lowercase b, you can always just add a rule that defines cannot start with a lowercase b. I doubt anybody would even know that such a rule exists if you did add it, because I think the chances of somebody making a define that starts with a lowercase b are pretty low.

However, if someone can suggest a decent alternative to the lowercase b, I might be willing to change my vote.

Freyaday · « **Reply #2372 on:** June 09, 2011, 12:30:39 am »

Runer112 · « **Reply #2373 on:** June 09, 2011, 12:31:52 am »

I think pi is going to be used for a feature I suggested, hopefully coming up in 1.0.

Anyway pi doesn't seem like a very intuitive binary indicator, at least to me.

Quigibo · « **Reply #2374 on:** June 09, 2011, 12:45:52 am »

Well I was thinking of changing an existing token to the percent sign, like assembly. Probably the "Sci" token in the mode menu [mode]{right}[enter] which is the same amount of clicks away as [alpha][alpha]{B}.

Runer112 · « **Reply #2375 on:** June 09, 2011, 12:53:28 am »

Eh, it's not a terribly intuitive base token, but I guess there aren't many other available options.

Hot_Dog · « **Reply #2376 on:** June 09, 2011, 10:32:59 am »

Pi may not be the most intuitive, but it is certainly easy to access. Just two clicks away as opposed to looking through menus or even the catalog.

aeTIos · « **Reply #2377 on:** June 09, 2011, 10:36:23 am »

also... pinary xD

Runer112 · « **Reply #2378 on:** June 09, 2011, 04:48:11 pm »

I think Quigibo and I both agree that π would be a good token for the following feature, as it is quickly accessible and will probably be used far more often than binary numbers.

Quote from: Runer112 on June 08, 2011, 12:06:35 pm

Second, could static pointers and constants not require the first token to be a GDB, Pic, or Str token? I see this as being most easily implemented by allowing define references to be prefixed with an easily accessible token like π, which would dictate that what follows is a define and not a variable. Some sample code of old and new static pointers coexisting:
Code: [Select]
"appvTILEMAP"→πAPV "Not enough RAM!"→Str0E !If GetCalc(πAPV,4096)→M Disp Str0E getKeyʳ Return End

Quigibo · « **Reply #2379 on:** June 09, 2011, 06:05:23 pm »

Actually, Runer, pi is free now. Here is my layout currently for custom variables:

L₁+2->^oMyVar 9001->MyVar ^oMyVar->A MyVar->A

So I am totally avoiding the "var" and "pi" tokens in favor of a much more intuitive and simple use of existing symbols. I figure since writing AB doesn't make sense in a program to load the value of A and then the value of B, I might as well use that as a multi-character variable without needing a prefix. Also the dereferencing token makes a lot of sense here since you are assigning the location of a variable, or the value of a constant.

Runer112 · « **Reply #2380 on:** June 09, 2011, 06:07:30 pm »

Ah okay, that's great. I was going to suggest that originally, but figured the variable problem would make it too hard to implement.

calc84maniac · « **Reply #2381 on:** June 09, 2011, 06:20:15 pm »

Would it be possible to chain variable declarations, like:
L₁->^oMyVar1+2->^oMyVar2+1->^oMyVar3

Would make it a lot easier to change the size of a variable or add/remove variables during development.

Quigibo · « **Reply #2382 on:** June 09, 2011, 06:36:34 pm »

Quote from: calc84maniac on June 09, 2011, 06:20:15 pm

Would it be possible to chain variable declarations, like:
L₁->^oMyVar1+2->^oMyVar2+1->^oMyVar3

Would make it a lot easier to change the size of a variable or add/remove variables during development.

Ooo! That's a cool idea. You can definitely chain them line-to-line but I'll see if I can add it all on the same line.

TIfanx1999 · « **Reply #2383 on:** June 09, 2011, 06:42:44 pm »

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.

Just wanted to ask, but would this be compatible with the TI-83+ as well? Cross compatibility for all models should be a primary concern IMHO.

calc84maniac · « **Reply #2384 on:** June 09, 2011, 06:45:14 pm »

Quote from: Quigibo on June 09, 2011, 06:36:34 pm

Quote from: calc84maniac on June 09, 2011, 06:20:15 pm
Would it be possible to chain variable declarations, like:
L₁->^oMyVar1+2->^oMyVar2+1->^oMyVar3

Would make it a lot easier to change the size of a variable or add/remove variables during development.

Ooo! That's a cool idea. You can definitely chain them line-to-line but I'll see if I can add it all on the same line.

Also, would it be possible to define 1-byte variables, which automatically use the byte load/store operations? Maybe even be able to define as unsigned/signed as well.

Author Topic: Features Wishlist (Read 691933 times)

Freyaday

Re: Features Wishlist

Runer112

Re: Features Wishlist

Freyaday

Re: Features Wishlist

Runer112

Re: Features Wishlist

Quigibo

Re: Features Wishlist

Runer112

Re: Features Wishlist

Hot_Dog

Re: Features Wishlist

aeTIos

Re: Features Wishlist

Runer112

Re: Features Wishlist

Quigibo

Re: Features Wishlist

Runer112

Re: Features Wishlist

calc84maniac

Re: Features Wishlist

Quigibo

Re: Features Wishlist

TIfanx1999

Re: Features Wishlist

calc84maniac

Re: Features Wishlist