TI BASIC as a scripting language on *nix/Windows

[+OLD CS1]

Has anyone ever noticed the TI BASIC language for scripting?  I assume there is something useful in this.

 

https://github.com/abbeyj/ti99basic

[RXB]

2 hours ago, OLD CS1 said:

Has anyone ever noticed the TI BASIC language for scripting?  I assume there is something useful in this.

 

https://github.com/abbeyj/ti99basic

Hmm RXB has had this feature since 2001 using a routine called CALL USER("DSK#.BATCHFILE")

RXB MEMORY MANAGER ROUTINES IN RXB 2020 - YouTube

 

Anything you can type into XB  can be done and as RXB is backwards compatible with TI Basic what can TI Basic do that XB can not?

(Other then EA support but that is another cart)

 

[+OLD CS1]

52 minutes ago, RXB said:

Hmm RXB has had this feature since 2001 using a routine called CALL USER("DSK#.BATCHFILE")

RXB MEMORY MANAGER ROUTINES IN RXB 2020 - YouTube

 

Anything you can type into XB  can be done and as RXB is backwards compatible with TI Basic what can TI Basic do that XB can not?

(Other then EA support but that is another cart)

 

So as not to turn this into a sub-convo in the thread, I will make only this comment: what I pointed to is an implementation of the TI BASIC language as a scripting language on *nix and Windows.  It is NOT running batches/scripts in TI BASIC in 99-land.

[RXB]

8 minutes ago, OLD CS1 said:

So as not to turn this into a sub-convo in the thread, I will make only this comment: what I pointed to is an implementation of the TI BASIC language as a scripting language on *nix and Windows.  It is NOT running batches/scripts in TI BASIC in 99-land.

It looks like C being called TI Basic and what can you do with it that I can not do with my CALL USER?

Just looking at GITHUB and I do not see the advantage?

And you are running a scripting language but then say it is not a scripting language, confused by this claim.

Could you explain what it is good for? I do not understand.

[wierd_w]

I would hazard a guess:

 

Use case 1)
Simple TI Basic games from the linux console (which would be useful for a number of applications, since the linux console can be done over a number of remote transports, allowing such games to be operated 'very very remotely'-- in a more community likely scenario-- TI Basic can be offloaded to the rPI in a tipi setup, using the integrated telnet to local host. I am not sure how that would be terribly helpful, but it might be. Some local TIBasic could be executed on raw iron, with some sub programs being offloaded.)

 

Use case 2)
A person on the go wants to develop some TIBasic software, but does not want to lug around a complete emulator.

[+OLD CS1]

It is meant to be a straight-up scripting language.  There is no screen, and it is actually missing file I/O.  It prints and inputs, only.  So, you could, if it were complete, use it like Rexx, Python, Perl, &c. on UNIX, WINDOWS, or OTHERs.  Again, NOT for use on the TI.

 

My thought is there might be some work in here of use to someone.

[jrhodes]

1 hour ago, OLD CS1 said:

It is meant to be a straight-up scripting language.  There is no screen, and it is actually missing file I/O.  It prints and inputs, only.  So, you could, if it were complete, use it like Rexx, Python, Perl, &c. on UNIX, WINDOWS, or OTHERs.  Again, NOT for use on the TI.

 

My thought is there might be some work in here of use to someone.

OLD CS1 George, i remember seeing this (and a C64 BASIC version too) over a year ago. It's kind of neat, but without file i/o it's just not really worth it to me.

(And no, i will not stop calling you George)

[RickyDean]

6 hours ago, OLD CS1 said:

Has anyone ever noticed the TI BASIC language for scripting?  I assume there is something useful in this.

 

https://github.com/abbeyj/ti99basic

Yeh.. if you search the forum, someone else had posted info on a time basic scripting language, about 2 years ago or so.

[+OLD CS1]

31 minutes ago, RickyDean said:

Yeh.. if you search the forum, someone else had posted info on a time basic scripting language, about 2 years ago or so.

Probably me.  Originally this was in @speccery's thread where it made a little more sense, but it started taking up a life of its own.

[+Ksarul]

14 hours ago, jrhodes said:

OLD CS1 George, i remember seeing this (and a C64 BASIC version too) over a year ago. It's kind of neat, but without file i/o it's just not really worth it to me.

(And no, i will not stop calling you George)

Just as long as you don't imply that he is George from the Chronicles of George. We don't need anyone "havening" problems around here.

[jrhodes]

21 minutes ago, Ksarul said:

Just as long as you don't imply that he is George from the Chronicles of George. We don't need anyone "havening" problems around here.

No the George i am implying is from a certain Looney Tunes cartoon called "The Abominable Snow Rabbit" ?

[+jedimatt42]

The real beauty to this isn't for end users...  There is something interesting in the architecture. It looks like a perl script was written to translate the TI GROMs  basic implementation into c code that calls a GPL interpreter layer. Genius. 

 

 

[+chue]

From what I could tell it takes the ROMs and GROMs and converts them into a format that is consumable by the compiler.  The architecture may be genius, but it sure is unreadable.. the bulk of it looks to also be (computer) generated code.

 

First few lines of what is generated from the TI ROM:

 

/* automatically generated from rom.bin */
const unsigned char rom[] = {
0x83, 0xE0, 0x00, 0x24, 0x83, 0xC0, 0x09, 0x00, 0x83, 0xC0, 0x0A, 0x92, 0x30, 0xAA, 0x04, 0x60,
0x02, 0xB2, 0x00, 0x08, 0x1E, 0x00, 0x04, 0x60, 0x00, 0x7A, 0x1E, 0x00, 0x04, 0x60, 0x00, 0x78,
...