Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
1980gamer

AND or OR which is faster?

Recommended Posts

29 minutes ago, OLD CS1 said:

Truth, but at the same time, for better or for worse*, it allows people comfortable with a particular level of programming to write far more capable programs.

 

* There are plenty of good arguments, on both sides, on whether BASIC should have ever been used as a teaching tool or continue as a viable programming language.  Some people will say that something like Pascal is a better starter language, while others think C or C++, among other alternatives including assembler.  I have to admit that programming in BASIC got me locked into some bad habits, and Pascal was far better for me.  I moved on to 9900 and 6502 (more of the latter, honestly,) and have often lamented that my first TI programming book was not the Editor/Assembler.

I started with a K43 Teletype machine Computer and installed a Checkbook program that also printed out a kinda self invented spread sheet.

The program thus loading registers and add, subtract, multiply and divide numbers to print out a listing broken down by account.

Later I bought a TI99/4A and learned Basic, then XB, then Mini Memory and Assembly and finally moving to GPL as no one else was doing that.

Sticking with XB that should be easy to use and easy to program with that same old saying "KISS: KEEP IT SIMPLE STUPID"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, RXB said:

RXB has

CALL HGET(ROW,COL,16,A$) ! The 16 is number of bytes to read from screen into A$

this does exactly what 

CALL LINK("VREAD",0,16,A$,32,16,B$,64,16,C$,96,16,D$,128,16,E$)

does but in a single string variable.

Or you could use RXB 

CALL MOVES("V$",16,0,A$) ! Same result as CALL HGET but not specifically designed for this use as address is used instead of ROW,COL

 

If RXB was converted into XB256 it would eliminate a ton of these weird lines needed to created in emulation of XB or Basic.

RXB has been around since 1991 so not like it is not known or new as it is over 20 years old now.

Not to mention updated and debugged!

Hi Rich,

I think you missed a little bit.  The VREAD will do the same thing as HGET.

I specifically wanted it segmented into 5 parts / variables.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, 1980gamer said:

Hi Rich,

I think you missed a little bit.  The VREAD will do the same thing as HGET.

I specifically wanted it segmented into 5 parts / variables.

 

 

Yea XB has a routine for that too SEG$(A$,position,length)

B$=SEG$(A$,2,1) :: C$=SEG$(A$,3,1):: and so on.

An array would be a better fit with FOR / NEXT loop.

I do not understand the reason to make things much more complicated on purpose?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, RXB said:

I do not understand the reason to make things much more complicated on purpose?

SPEED. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, 1980gamer said:

SPEED. 

Hmmm then write it in ASSEMBLY why even bother with Basic or XB at all?

The point of XB or Basic is to be easy to read and use, but tailored to ease of reading and changes.

Basically all I see is making Basic or XB into C or Assembly defeating the point of even using XB.

You get the speed from them so what is the point as the only people that are going to use it are Assembly people.

Like using a Ferrari to drive in supermarket parking lot. Impressive but mostly silly.

 

Give me a hand with RXB that does exactly what is needed and is 100% backwards compatible and easy to  use.

Compiled Basic or XB is just that, compiled and not easy to change or debug. Again might as well use Assembly or C.

 

 

Edited by RXB

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That wasn't called for...

I play with TI extended basic.  Like I did when I was 11.

 

I can now compile these little musings and make them actually playable...

 

Why not try to squeeze as much as I can?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, 1980gamer said:

Then why have RXB?

 

Well people have been using it for 20 years can you say the same in 20 years for yours?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, 1980gamer said:

That wasn't called for...

I play with TI extended basic.  Like I did when I was 11.

 

I can now compile these little musings and make them actually playable...

 

Why not try to squeeze as much as I can?

 

 

I can see many enjoy compiled XB like XB256 but it does have limitations like instantly changing a line and not having to wait for it to be recompiled.

Like original XB or Super XB or XB 2.7 or XB3 or RXB do not have this problem.

 

Yes you can squeeze more speed out of it and the resulting program is faster and more efficient but not really XB or Basic anymore as that is why

no on includes the source code as it gets so crazy complicated it becomes only readable to Assembly programmers. Thus not even really XB or Basic anymore.

 

Think of it like a car, a Hybrid is not the same as a classic car anymore then a jet car is the same as a electric car. Calling it classic is a real stretch.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not really.

 

I do everything in XB and love being able to add things from XB256.  When I need scrolling etc.  Awesome.

 

I compile very rarely.  Overdrive gives you a pretty good idea if you are on the right track.  In fact, I typically have to slow down parts of the program because the compiled is to fast.

I usually put sound in these areas to slow execution and get a little something out of it.

 

I will move away from this method and use delay to slow it down and sound lists going forward.  Though I am awful at sound effects and music,  I can fumble through a music book and make a mess!

13 minutes ago, RXB said:

Think of it like a car, a Hybrid is not the same as a classic car anymore then a jet car is the same as a electric car. Calling it classic is a real stretch.

  Hmm, with this logic we shouldn't even use extended basic.

 

I don't know about RXB, can I use commands from RXB and give it to someone that only has XB or Mini Memory? 

I can.  If not... And I don't know the answer...  I would argue that my method is closer to CLASSIC TI than RXB is.  Again,  I don't know how easy it is to share RXB apps?

 

I like a lot of the things you have done.  I like you replacing GPL with Assembly etc.  I see you are adding some of the XB256 into RXB.

I follow what you do.  It just doesn't do what I want to do.   I like baked potato, but I want mashed.  What can I say.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, RXB said:

I can see many enjoy compiled XB like XB256 but it does have limitations like instantly changing a line and not having to wait for it to be recompiled.

Like original XB or Super XB or XB 2.7 or XB3 or RXB do not have this problem.

 

Yes you can squeeze more speed out of it and the resulting program is faster and more efficient but not really XB or Basic anymore as that is why

no on includes the source code as it gets so crazy complicated it becomes only readable to Assembly programmers. Thus not even really XB or Basic anymore.

 

Think of it like a car, a Hybrid is not the same as a classic car anymore then a jet car is the same as a electric car. Calling it classic is a real stretch.

Compiling a language designed to be interpreted always requires adapting language in some way. 

XB is so slow however it has driven people to go with compiling and tolerating the extra work.

"There no such thing as free lunch" is true with computers for sure.

 

As my grandfather used to sing after a few bottles of the amber liquid:

😢

"Gone are the days when free lunches went with beer.

 These memories still fill my eyes with tears..."

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The extra work is a few clicks (enters).

Losing floats was my only adjustment and it wasn't really an adjustment. 

 

Oh, early on...  No else in if then.  But that is a non issue now.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, 1980gamer said:

The extra work is a few clicks (enters).

Losing floats was my only adjustment and it wasn't really an adjustment. 

 

Oh, early on...  No else in if then.  But that is a non issue now.

 

Not too bad then. I didn't know about the loss of ELSE. 

Wonder why. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, TheBF said:

Not too bad then. I didn't know about the loss of ELSE. 

Wonder why. 

It started life as a TI BASIC compiler which has limited IF THEN ELSE capabilities. It took a while to add the XB style IF THEN ELSE. That is what 1980gamer is referring to.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, senior_falcon said:

It started life as a TI BASIC compiler which has limited IF THEN ELSE capabilities. It took a while to add the XB style IF THEN ELSE. That is what 1980gamer is referring to.

Ah so not the complete absence of ELSE but rather XB enhancements. 

Thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So I have implemented the VREAD in place of GCHAR.

OMG!  Night and day!

 

I will build a little demo to compare the two either tonight or over the weekend.

I may have to go back and visit a few other old games I was never happy with.

 

Thanks for pointing me in the right direction... As always.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...