CompuServe Messages

Well, there were several things. One was that I could not get gadgets and such to work reliably. However, that may be due to the memory management problems. EXTEND, the basic extender, has just announced a revision which they claim will work with both GFA and HiSoft, so perhaps that problem will be resolved. I also didn't much care for the editor. Although I do like the auto syntax, keyword caps, etc. features, the editor is difficult to work with and should be more Amiga-ized! I guess aside from that it's pretty good. I would have implemented different symbols for variable typing which would have been similar to other basics. They also desperately need a working conversion program. The one supplied only works for small programs, but cannot convert large ones. Oh, yes, the editor fails to recognize a couple of keywords when loading in a .LST file. The keywords are recognized in the .GFA file and the program will run, but there is a small bug there, which I communicated to them a while back. I was also disappointed that the compiler hasn't arrived. All these considered, GFA was a nice implementation. When they get the major problems straightened out, GFA will be a good basic language, provided they get the compiler for it. Unfortunately, I had to convert my stat program to HiSoft, and since that program is now fairly well developed I doubt I would want to re-convert to GFA. Course, HiSoft has its problems, too. I doesn't support the CON: device in the OPEN statement! A major screwup!! Neither HiSoft nor GFA could be truly considered finished products. They both need a lot of work. But when they both get their respective acts together, they will be welcomed replacements for AmigaBasic which is so bad that it isn't worthy of comment! Ultimately, these compilers need the sophistication of the CBasic compiler from the old CP/M machines. Now there was a great Basic compiler.