|
|
Post by Vladik on May 22, 2005 15:27:41 GMT -5
Should there be built in TIGCC?
I think so.
TI should develop a refined version of TIGCC and integrate it into the hardware. This would lower the mount of BASIC programs and it would improve game speed by a great amount.
That was a short rant.
Any thoughts on this subject?
|
|
|
|
Post by bcherry on May 22, 2005 22:23:27 GMT -5
No, there should not be, because in order to run any sort of decent compiler, the calculators would need faster processors and a lot more memory, which would mean they would cost more. There is nothing wrong with doing it on the computer. What might be kind of nice is a C editor program so you can work on TIGCC programs on your calc during class, and then transfer them to your computer for compilation, but trying to compile on-calc would fail miserably.
|
|
|
|
Post by Vladik on May 26, 2005 18:06:15 GMT -5
Yes, but what would be the point of having a TIGCC editor if you cannot test your program?
But you must agree with me on the point that some sort of a compiler is necessary.
As somebody in ticalc.org stated, TI-BASIC can be made more efficient (I forget how).
And processors are getting faster and easier to mass-produce each day.
The same goes for the required additional memory...
|
|
|
|
Post by bcherry on May 26, 2005 18:19:59 GMT -5
you should not have to recompile and test every step of the way. I usually write huge amounts of code before I test it, and a on-calc editor would have been handy before i got my new laptop, which i like very much!
|
|
|
|
Post by Vladik on May 26, 2005 19:57:11 GMT -5
Yes, but recompiling and testing can help sometimes...
|
|
|
|
Post by Pure on May 27, 2005 21:53:59 GMT -5
but not ON-CALC!!!
|
|
|
|
Post by Vladik on May 28, 2005 21:28:46 GMT -5
Why not?
|
|
|
|
Post by bcherry on May 28, 2005 22:38:29 GMT -5
because as I said it would take FOREVER to generate a decent compiled output. Sure you could do small programs with no problem, but the only real advantage of on-calc tigcc would come to very large long term projects that need a lot of work, and those would never be compilable on the calc, plus you could not run the compression routines or do any meaningful sort of debugging, and with the source and compiled output and the mid-way files (.o, .asm, etc) you would need a LOT of space to do it anyways. It is not something that is currently feasible.
|
|
|
|
Post by Vladik on Jun 4, 2005 20:24:53 GMT -5
Of course not on CURRENT calculators. I'm talking about models in the future-say after a decade?
|
|
|
|
Post by bfr on Jun 4, 2005 20:28:30 GMT -5
By then they either are going to be known as suoercalculators, computers, or technical s**t.
|
|
|
|
Post by Vladik on Jun 4, 2005 20:33:16 GMT -5
|
|
