Am Dienstag, den 17.01.2006, 00:04 +0100 schrieb Groepaz: > a) those "modern" basic dialects are a lot more structured than basic v2, and > dont allow for as horrible spaghetti constructs I dont consider V2 a good basic, even when it got released there where much better ones. And regarding those spaghetti constructs, its mostly the fault of the editor. But even C= can learn, look at V7, now thats a rather good 8-bit linenumber basic. Besides that, you can do much worse code in ASM ;) We definitly need a 65xx asm obfuscate compo *g* > b) performance and memory efficiency is not an issue at all on a modern win32 > box. Comes to the project. A TES:Oblivion for example can use every cycle a modern x86 and a modern gfx-chip can provide. But i dont think you would write such things in Basic anyway, even if FreeBasic is ~70% to 80% the speed of gcc. And you should consider that not everyone can afford a brand new box. I know of people who still sit on a 1,2ghz 256 mb machine. > i'm sure that if you write a float lib it will be accepted :=) (however, > performance would suck, noone with a brain uses floats on a 1mhz machine > unless its really really necessary) If i could buy the time.... ;) Ill come back when my current project for the Hobbytronic is done and someone provides me a skeleton template. Greets, BastetFurry ---------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list send mail to majordomo@musoftware.de with the string "unsubscribe cc65" in the body(!) of the mail.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 2006-01-17 00:25:41 CET