Re: A89: Re: Survey for the next version of PlusShell
[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: A89: Re: Survey for the next version of PlusShell
In a message dated 11/16/1998 10:52:41 PM Pacific Standard Time,
assets@eden.rutgers.edu writes:
> The problem is that big functions usually are very specialized; if there is
> a small difference in what the programmer needs and what is available, he
> must copy out the routine again ... most graphics routines are like this.
>
> The most important calls in util are the clear screen, getkey,
randomization
> and find pixel calls ... all of which are most likely in the rom.
> grayscale libraries represent the quintessence behind libraries, but if
> someone wants his interrupt to do something more than grayscale, he copies
> out the routine again.
> hexlib calls are probably in the rom; AAR they aren't common enough to
> warrant place in a library.
> Huffman, though the most common compression, is only best in a few cases
...
> it's most useful application would be to compress basic programs (text) or
> levels ... another scheme might be employed for graphics compression.
> graphlib: forget about about it .. this library might be useful to newbies
> trying out simple test routines
>
> Though you might think the hassel is trivial, but as a programmer, I
> personally don't like the idea of my program being dependent on external
> code in order to run ... for a calculator that requires a shell, libraries
> are acceptable because the program is already dependant on the shell; but
> for calculators that aren't, this is not acceptable. A program written for
> the 89 should work on every 89 (on every rom version) and not _only_ until
a
> new standard is introduced. Libraries defeat the purpose and elegance of
> built-in assembly support
>
> Finally, I seriously doubt that the makers of the current 89 asm games
> haven't received enormous amounts of email over their games & libraries
> problem (I've recieved emails myself, just because I've posted to this
> list). Libraries add an unneeded amount of complexity to assembly
> programming, with little benifit to offer back
>
>
> Aside, someone must have found the jump table used for ROM calls (if not,
> then we're stuck with ROM version specific programs when the next version
> comes out)
> so please: share your information!
In regard to the dislike of external code you mentioned, I don't think Windows
programmers would want to include the Windows code in their programs. every
programs would be about 50MB bigger! The size difference isn't that big on
the TI-89, however.
Some library functions do not defeat the purpose of built-in asm support, but
there are many of the functions in the TI ROM somewhere.
When TI releases the specs for the ROM, with all the functions, I beleive that
we will find many of the library functions obsolete. Linelib, for example,
will definitely become obsolete when we find the line function in TI's ROM.
It will also probably run more effeciently (one advantage of using TI's
functions instead of our own).Therefore, it is my opinion that until TI
releases the specs (if they ever do!), we should not agree on standard library
functions.
Daniel Imfeld