Jump to content

Casey

Members
  • Content Count

    410
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

286 Excellent

About Casey

  • Rank
    Moonsweeper

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. If you read contemporary discussions of these 8-bit machines, the Commodore and Atari machines have what was called a full screen editor. What we think of today as a full screen editor with search and replace is not what they were referring to back in the day. The Coco has an EDIT command. It’s actually very full featured.
  2. I’m the same way. I like my cartridges to run from the FG99, but my BASIC programs to run from the TIPI. A remarkable number of the cartridges that would use a storage device also have no problem using the TIPI for that. The only one that does not that I’ve run into so far is Video Chess, which will only save/load from cassette.
  3. Yes, the Commodore screen editor worked just like that. You could put the cursor anywhere on any line, make a change, and it would take it. In the context of its time, that was what you’d call a full screen editor. Other computers used an EDIT command (TI, TRS-80 Color Computer, I’m sure others). Some used keyboard sequences to pick up characters (Apple). The full screen editor was much simpler than all that.
  4. The original Dartmouth BASIC (where BASIC was developed) ran on a time sharing system and it’s command for retrieving programs from storage was OLD (opposite of NEW as @mizapf noted above). There’s some history of BASIC here - another OS command will be familiar to us as well: https://www.dartmouth.edu/basicfifty/commands.html
  5. I know all of the Commodore 8-bit machines have the full screen editor. Ataris also have that I believe.
  6. I would vote for Commodore BASIC 7.0 and TI Extended BASIC. However, I wonder if the results of your question won’t just be the ones we have fond memories of using when they were contemporary. Certainly that was the case for my answers
  7. Has there ever been a mechanism to take a TI BASIC program and convert it to GROM as documented in the Software Development System manual available to the masses? And how many modules were released that were created this way, do we know? It’s a very interesting concept to me.
  8. Matt, One very minor issue I’ve encountered both before and after 2.0: TIPICFG doesn’t like my WiFi SSID because it has spaces in it. It will let me type it in, but it truncates it after the first space. I was able to get around this by editing PI.CONFIG from TI BASIC and it displays fine on TIPICFG after that and it works fine with the SSID with the spaces. I just can’t input it in TIPICFG successfully. For everyone else so inclined, I did attempt to upgrade my Raspbian stretch to buster in place, mainly just to see if it would work at all. I had saved off all my disk images from the TIPI prior to doing so just in case I bricked my install. The upgrade worked, but the TIPI was not happy after I did that (any access to the TIPI just caused the TI to hand with the TIPI access light stuck on). I then re-flashed my SD card with the 2.0 image and all is well. I was able to upgrade to 2.1 using the touch command provided above, so all seems ok. Thanks!!
  9. I no longer have it, but I had a 99/8 for a time that had a dead-end on the side port connector (there were no actual pins there). It did have the p-system intact (but was obviously not useful since the only peripheral I had was the cassette recorder). Mine also had Extended BASIC II.
  10. I wish I still had the 99/8 I had many many years ago, but times were tough back then. What I’d like to have, if money were no object (and they existed) is the beige sidecar speech synthesizer and hex bus adapter, along with the full complement of the Hex Bus peripherals to plug into my 99/4A.
  11. Interesting. TI BASIC and TI Extended BASIC both change the reference to 32767, so you did make it better
  12. No, this is not at all what he means. What he means is: >100 IF A=1 THEN 200 >110 END >RESEQUENCE >LIST 100 IF A=1 THEN 32767 110 END He isn’t asking the interpreter to magically turn direct statements into program lines. He’s asking for something else. (I’m not sure what the solution is to this - it’s hard for an interpreter to know what you intended, but maybe a message in the output of RESEQUENCE?)
  13. You may never do it, but I would argue that 100 IF EOF(1) THEN CLOSE #1 or 100 IF NOT EOF(1) THEN INPUT #1:A$ makes more sense logically than: 100 IF EOF(1)=-1 THEN CLOSE #1 (The resequence thing where you or someone wants the computer to magically add direct statements to a program is a whole separate bit of nonsense.)
  14. The only problem with this is something like this: 100 OPEN #1:”CS1”,OUTPUT,INTERNAL,VARIABLE 110 FOR I=1 TO 10 120 PRINT #1:I 130 NEXT I 140 CLOSE #1 This produces 10 leader tones while the tape is in the record mode the entire time it is writing. I mean I get why you’d write one out at the beginning of the file, but not at the beginning of each record.
  15. Someone please correct me if I’m wrong because I’m not near my TI to try it, but several things I think they could have done better/different involved the cassette I/O. 1. Allow for named files/programs on cassette. Commodore and Radio Shack supported this. 2. Why does each record printed to cassette have the leader tone? The cartridges that allow for saving data to cassette don’t work this way (I suspect they save in program image format) but TI BASIC programs all produce lots of leader tones, making file processing even slower. 3. Cassette I/O has no EOF detection. Again, Commodore BASiC could do this.
×
×
  • Create New...