The Cyber-Spy.Com Usenet Archive Feeds Directly
From The Open And Publicly Available Newsgroup
This Group And Thousands Of Others Are Available
On Most IS NNTP News Servers On Port 119.
Cyber-Spy.Com Is NOT Responsible For Any Topic,
Opinions Or Content Posted To This Or Any Other
Newsgroup. This Web Archive Of The Newsgroup And
Posts Are For Informational Purposes Only.
From: "John Jardine"
Subject: Re: Which basic compiler to buy?
Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 22:22:44 -0000
NNTP-Posting-Date: 10 Dec 2002 22:10:16 GMT
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
Frank Bemelman wrote in message
> "John Jardine" schreef in bericht
> > Stay clear of the C!. It's an obtuse and unfriendly language having
> > correspondance with good machine code routines.
> > It is only pre-eminent nowadays due to it being found to be so awkward
> > use that it was gladly taken up by the colleges and microsoft.
> > A normal PC prog' written in classical Basic (not the present C-Basics
> > VB) can be rewritten or 'broken down' line by line, statement by
> > and expanded to a sufficiently detailed level that can translate
> > across to a PIC or other micro's machine code . Essentially a Basic
> > programme is a line by line, condensed, idealised, equivalent of a
> > code programme.
> > Thus a PIC Basic compiler can be written to make use of this easy
> > correspondance between a Basic statement and it's machine code
> > and can be very efficient.
> > A 'C' programme and it's strange 'structuring' will not readily do this
> > the corresponding PIC 'C' compilers have to go round and round the
> > to try and provide the same PIC (or another micro) machine code
> > functionality.
> Who told you that? ;) Not that I'm against BASIC or any other language,
> use whatever works for you - but don't complain .
> Frank Bemelman
> (remove 'x' & .invalid when sending email)
As usual, learnt from experience ;-)
18 years ago had just built a (2k rom) Z80 based XY plotter. Needed to put
my (new to me) Breshenham line and circle drawing routines into Z80 machine
code. Was used to Sinclair Basic but told that 'C' was better and was where
the future lay and was joyous to be given a copy of Borland TurboC plus a
set of manuals. Very enthusiastic at this point and spent a month learning
C then wrote a master prog' that would do the Breshenham stuff (in
Then spent a further month trying to expand the prog' out to more simpler
Z80 machine code like statements. The final prog was becoming chaotic as the
'pretend' Z80 code was in effect having to try to simulate a C operating
system in addition to running the routines. Abandoned it and went back to
Basic. The Basic programme simulation and subsequent 'expansion' to near
machine code took a couple of evenings.
It's still a method I make use of for oddball PIC routines, even though I
wrote (and quickly discarded) a PIC Basic compiler to try and do this job
Compiler routines must have improved over the past few years so I'll
probably buy a PIC compiler at some point and yes ... it'll be a Pic Basic
Go Back To The Cyber-Spy.Com
Usenet Web Archive Index Of
The sci.electronics.design Newsgroup