Discussion
Maybe I will write my own Tiny BASIC _anyway_.
I just love assembly language, and if i don't write a Tiny BASIC I will have to find another project.
I had a discussion with someone here a few months ago about a kind of meta-BASIC, where there is a RUN program that is editable on the fly.
cc @xChaos , I believe it was you who mentioned the concept.
@dirtycommo I am sorry, I am probably better at fantasizing features, then implementing them.
It was not just about "RUN"... it was just simple idea, how to make Basic backward-comptible with line numbering and minimal syntax and still be able to keep more names programs in RAM. It is heavily Python inspired, but also somehow following the 1980's programming mindset. And it is more Bash, than Python, in the end :-)
Keeping more simple programs at the RAM at the same time is not entirely against BASIC paradigm. I remeber you could launch the part of code by using GOTO directly from commandline, instead of RUN. The RUN was just idea for "default program name"...
I would probably implement by somehow defining different line numbering offsets... you can never really use 65535 lines with 64 KB RAM, so there is definitely way to store more BASIC programs at once, without really making sings complicated. Let's say you can assign 4-6 bits for "program number" and 10-12 bits for line numbers. Then you would need very small "program directory", where each named program could be just called as new BASIC instruction (recursive calls would be killer feature, but probably not easy? :-). Calling would be like GOSUB without GOSUB. The global vs. local variables... that would be the hard part.
I am not really sure, what it would be good for... but in real 8bit world, fixed BASIC meant, that graphics instructions and math functions were eating precious RAM even when you did not want to use graphics mode or floating point math at all. My approach would make the BASIC somehow modular... of course, in pure type-in scenario, it is still hard, but at least you don't have to clear the program each time you need to write new one...
@dirtycommo it's a shame, that I am not good in ASM amd can't do it myself, but really, the idea is to take Forth "words", but keep the implementation in primitive, but human readable format, ie. BASIC.
I don't evrn want to start about local and global variables and argument lists and so, because it would be complex and inevitably different from any existing BASIc dialects of 1970's and 1980's. I don't even suggest, ig the program names/usetlr defined keywords should be limited to 8 or 16 characters or not limited at all. All I am saying is:
EDIT <name> ... would set the default program name for adding or replacing numbered lines.
LIST <name> ... would list the lines in given program name
CLR or CLEAR or DELETE <name> would obviously delete just the program of given name (I am no longer really sure, but there was command to clear all BASIC lines from memory, sometimes with conflicting syntax with clear screen command)
Just typing <name> <enter> would invoke program name (let's consider the command lines arguments or default program name only later...)
This wouls create tiny "filesystem" if flash ROM is available...
@dirtycommo Just do it. Write your own, or port an existing one to a new CPU. It's fun 😄
Install bonfire.cafe
Get the full app experience
