Re: A86: Re: odd thing

[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]

Re: A86: Re: odd thing




Garcia wrote:

> Yeah I wholeheartedly agree about not having to give out everything, because
> what's out there right now is sufficient to write games, which is what most
> people like.
>
> But how about documenting the "user hooks" you once mentioned.  It's kind of
> annoying to know that I could write some of those great "asap" plug-ins to
> do math stuff in ASM.  Believe it or not some people user calcs for calculus
> and stuff!!!  But so far nothing has been written or explained.  If the
> intent was to allow users their own plug-ins, we need info.  Nothing
> special, just maybe a quick text file, an snip of code to explain, and
> that's it.
>
> Things like:
>
> 1. All the asap/ plug-in stuff (installing/uninstalling) which leads to...
> 2. Menus and their structures and calls that display them (Im sure you don't
> program each menu to display itself....and its been shown on the list)
> 3. Writing your own functions (like that Stat Beta ..I love it)

You should explain to me a couple (just a couple) of the Stat Functions.  I
discovered how to create a function, but I can't read the parameters.  But if I
knew what some of the functions did...    ;-)

Or maybe there is a document you could direct me to?

>

> 4. Some more stuff on inputting (numbers and strings).
> 5. The user interrupt and the keyboard interrupt (does this exist?)
> 6. Every single call in the ROM!!! (Just kidding!)
>
> You could say that some of the stuff above has already been "hacked", but at
> expense of time.  I think that if you went ahead and just gave out some of
> this stuff, it would benefit TI, because of the increase in usbaility of the
> calc and consequently more support and programs for new users. (Kinda like
> id Software and Quake/Quake 2).
>
> Example....People (Jimmy Märdell) have already been talking about projects
> on symbolical differentiation.  Can you imagine being able to type this on
> the home screen:
>
> sDeriv("x^3+x+4",x)        ;"s"mbolic derive the expression with respect to
> x!!
>                                     ;And getting:    "3x^2+1"   (is that
> right)?
>
> Anyways, just my thoughts,
>
> Andres Garcia
> --------------------
> xrigel@q-net.net
>
> P.S. I wonder if I'll get a response from Pat?
References: