Is 80col possible in RXB or other ebasic?

[aftyde]

Hi All,

 

Just wondering - would make writing basic code so much easier.

 

Cheers, Arthur...

[Omega-TI]

Yeah! I could get into that, even if it was just in text entry mode.

[+Ksarul]

The only one I'm sure supports 80 Columns is ABASIC for the Geneve. You could set up a Geneve in MAME and do your input there, using only the standard Extended BASIC keywords, as it is a superset of TI Extended BASIC, and then your saved program would be easily transferred to a /4A.

[+mizapf]

If you are already involving disk images (by using an emulation), it would be easier to import text as BASIC into an image, e.g. with the "Import from text editor" or "Create new Text or BASIC file" in TIImageTool. That way you could use any comfortable text editor on the PC, like vi.

[Opry99er]

^^This is a good solution. TI Image Tool is an awesome tool.

 

Another method (along the same lines) is to use Notepad++ to code, then copy and paste into Classic99. You can use LIST "CLIP" from the command line in Classic99 to list your entire code to your clipboard (and then a direct paste into the editor).

 

You could also use Fred Kaal's TI99Dir to extract/copy the XB code from an existing program and paste it into your PC based editor.

[+InsaneMultitasker]

As Ksarul points out the Geneve's Advanced BASIC has a native 80 column mode.

 

I will say that I sometimes found programming long lines much more "challenging" in 80 column mode because of how much more you could see. While that may seem counter-intuitive, everything is smaller and you see nearly three times the amount of code while editing.

 

I do not recall if Myarc's Extended BASIC II for the TI had an 80 column mode.

[Shift838]

I agree with InsaneM, the more code I can see the harder it is to debug a line for me anyway.

[+Ksarul]

Myarc's XB II for the TI did not go to 80 columns, but it did have a 40-column mode. There was a mod to it that allowed it to run on the Geneve that worked in 80 columns, but it was seriously buggy. . .and wouldn't run on a /4A (we tested it BITD).

[+mizapf]

Another method (along the same lines) is to use Notepad++ to code [...]

 

Of course, those methods are also good ways to achieve it, thanks for adding them. My message may sound a bit like self-praising, but it is not intended to be; I just know the features of my own tools best, so I guess it is at me to say what it can do or not.

[aftyde]

It seems that with all the development on RXB that F18A support might be something to put high on the list. I've been trying to get my hands on a Mechatronics or SNUG EVPC2 card for quite a while; no bueno... fairly happy with the F18A in my other system. For development I tend to use Classic99. Being able to paste code into the Pascal editor for example is a win.

[Opry99er]

 

Of course, those methods are also good ways to achieve it, thanks for adding them. My message may sound a bit like self-praising, but it is not intended to be; I just know the features of my own tools best, so I guess it is at me to say what it can do or not.

 

Image Tool has drastically enhanced my TI experience. If your post sounded self-praising (which I do not think it did), it was well deserved and certainly relevant. It is more of a one-stop-shop than the methods I described, but I rarely develop using disk images, so I mentioned the other.

[aftyde]

Image Tool has drastically enhanced my TI experience. If your post sounded self-praising (which I do not think it did), it was well deserved and certainly relevant. It is more of a one-stop-shop than the methods I described, but I rarely develop using disk images, so I mentioned the other.

 

Agreed - also worth mentioning that with Lotharek drives - the combination of disk images and HDX means you can do all sorts of cool things on the real iron and then upload the disk images directly for manipulation in Image Tool or Classic99. Would still love to see 80 col support on the HW in an extB environment. For me - editing in a text editor and then pasting it into an emulator is hard. Meaning - when it comes to programming basic I like the interactive nature of the interpreter. Of course, when it comes to pascal it's much easier to paste into Classic99 - and, I would guess there is no hope in updating the 1984 UCSD Pascal IV system...

[Omega-TI]

 

... when it comes to programming basic I like the interactive nature...

 

Me too! Basically because I'm always making a typo or screwing something up that needs debugging. Having 80 columns would sure make it easier to see what's going on. Not enough stuff gets on the same screen, or it wraps down which makes it harder to follow what you've done, especially after one comes back to a program after an 'extended' break.

[Asmusr]

Not that I do much BASIC programming, but if Rich implemented 80 columns editing in RXB it would be a strong incentive for switching to his BASIC version. But it's not as easy as one might think. For instance, the name table grows from 768 bytes to 1920 bytes and you would need a 6 pixel wide character set that you could switch to when editing. And once you got into editing in 80 column I guess you would also like to run programs in 80 columns mode, which means a number of commands would have to be changed.

[Omega-TI]

....but if Rich implemented 80 columns editing in RXB it would be a strong incentive for switching to his BASIC version.

 

Currently, BASIC is the only trick this old dog knows when it comes to languages.

I've never had any incentive to switch or be loyal to any one BASIC over another, as long as it ran everything that TIXB did, I was good with it. I admit, having a few extra goodies in the toolbox would be nice, but HELL YES, 80 column capability would be a very nice niche for any XB to fill, and about the only thing that would make me a loyal, fawning rabidly zealous convert.