Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Scripting In Commodore BASIC For Windows & Linux

Posted by kdawson on from the nostalgia-isn't-what-it-used-to-be dept.

SomeoneGotMyNick writes "Someone more nostalgic than I am, and with a lot of time on their hands, had created a scripting language based on Commodore BASIC for Mac OS X. They recently finished a version that works on Windows and Linux. You can pass the text of a BASIC program as a parameter to the program. I found it odd that it took 1.8 MB of source code to compile to an interpreter that used to fit in 8K of ROM space. If this ever becomes popular, perhaps we'll see Obfuscated CBM BASIC contests." In a simliar vein, in the comments someone points out what is essentially an open source AmigaOS Classic.

4 of 213 comments (clear)

  1. Re:TI Basic by jojisan · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Was that a stock 99-4A or did you have the extended memory cartridge?
    I really do miss call sprite...

    --
    <sig> I wish I had a </sig>
  2. 1.8 MB of source for 8K of ROM by sucker_muts · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I found it odd that it took 1.8 MB of source code to compile to an interpreter that used to fit in 8K of ROM space

    Don't forget that the commodore cpu was 8 bit and current cpu's are 32 or 64 bit: Most of the commands were 8 bit and their equivalents are bigger nowadays. That explains the 8KB of ROM

    And they did not need fancy memory protection stuff, they hacked straight into the hardware. No dll's, so's to use or API's to follow. Even if it is a lot assembly code, there are a lot more bytes in assembly source than in binary executables.

    Context, people, context! ;-)

    --
    Dependency hell? => /bin/there/done/that
  3. Re:Commodore BASIC by decipher_saint · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Compared to...?

    I'm actually quite curious what the differences would be that would make it a bad interpreter.

    C64 was my first exposure to programming (I was 8 when I got my hot little hands on it), and not having tried anything else from that particular era of home computing I don't have a yardstick to measure that sort of thing.

    So please, tell me more :-)

    --
    crazy dynamite monkey
  4. Re:Commodore BASIC by ACMENEWSLLC · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I learned BASIC on an Apple and then moved to the C16 then to a C128 with C64 embedded. I really enjoyed BASIC on the Commodore platform. I loved POKE and PEEK. The with my Super Snapshot card I could get into a pretty good machine language decompiler. From there I could create programs in the $c000 range, store them to a floppy, and sys them. I loved monitoring the raster ($d018 or somewhere close) and changing it's color when it's at various positions to create screenshots better than what the C64 normally allowed.

    I never have got as deep with the x86 platform.

    The thing I've found with most emulators is that this trickery just doesn't work right. A lot of it depended on the set Mhz rate of the hardware.

    I find it odd as many fanboys of the C64 as there are, why not embed one onto a USB dongle. The other end with a RS232C cord?
        Something like this http://www.vesalia.de/e_c64dtv%5B5732%5D.htm?slc=us ported for us programmer types.