#abasic gshape command
17 messages in this thread
David-
A further thought: My problem wasn't
so much with what GSHAPE <does>, but
with the fact that the book <say> a
mode can be specified in the syntax:
GSHAPE (x,y),<array%> [,<mode>]
where the "optional mode should be
an integer from 0 to 2, one of the
DRAWMODE values."
In fact when I try this I get
"Syntax error", if <anything> follows
the <array%> part of the command.
So I can't even experiment!
Dick Darling
*** There is a reply:
41962
Enter command, N for next
messange or <CR> for menu :
Correct, that bug in the MODE partof GSHAPE realy turned me off. Im use to the
command in other basics, and realy wanted to use it. But one real good thing is
the ability to draw off the screen (use negative and very large xs, and ys). I
did a 3-d perspecitve program with solid modeling using that. The AREA command
was a big help. I now have a house rotating on my Amiga screen. Pretty good
for a buggy basic, eh?
SpLiTiNfInItY
*** There is a reply:
42024
Enter command, N for next
message or <CR> for menu : n
Great idea! I've been usithe command all the time, including scrolling a
figure off the screen by repeated GSHAPES and I never thought of setting up
an entire picture off-screen. I can immediately think of a couple of possi-
ble uses in my application. Have you by any chance come up with a good way
to MIRROR or FLIP other than by using PIXEL and DRAW repeatedly which even on
the 68000 is pretty slow? Of course one way IS to do it offscreen as you've
just described, and bring the picture on all at once, but there would still
be a waiting period which I'd like to avoid. Thanks a lot for your comments.
Dick Darling
*** There is a reply:
42050
Enter command, N for next
message or <CR> for menu : n
I dont think the SuperBitMap is realy larger than the screen (in ABasic) its
just that the routines clip at the edges and dont give you illegal quantity
errors for exceading the limits. That I realy love.
Of course if you use C, you will have pretty much total control over the
system. Have you tried that yet, Im playing with it, and it's fast, real fast.
SpLiTiNfInItY
*** There is a reply:
42054
Enter command, N for next
message or <CR> for menu : n
C will be a new experience for me. I
have a LOT of Basic and Fortran and
SOME Pascal, Forth and 6502 assembly
, but for some reason I think of C
with some trepidation. I have one
application that I'm working on right
now that I HAVE to get done in about
2 weeks, and I chose to try it on the
Amiga in ABasiC. I haven't even had
time to learn anything but the barest
essentials of the DOS.
The only time I have a problem with the
speed of ABasiC is with hires screens
with depths of 4 or more.
Dick Darling
Enter command, N for next
message or <CR> for menu : n
Well C also gives you TOTAL control and an "air-tight" program. But if you
have some PASCAL experience, then C will not be a problem, they are almost
identical in "nature", but differe in power and "readability".
SpLiTiNfInItY
Enter command, N for next
message or <CR> for menu : n
You gotta be kidding–"air tight"? I've never seen a language other than
assembler that so readily lets you crash the system (well, maybe FORTH). <grin>
-LDM-
Enter command, N for next
message or <CR> for menu : n
Any language that is compiled gives you the ability to make the program air
tight. Inturpreted languages sometimes make this an option, but it's fudged at
best. Because they are compiled the resulting code is in machine language,
which goes for PASCAL, C, and Assembler (plus a lot more).
SpLiTiNfInItY
Enter command, N for next
message or <CR> for menu : n
That's assuming the compiler works correctly. Most C compilers I have seen are
full of internal bugs. I am hoping that the Aztec one for the Amiga is
relatively bug-free. Look at AmigaDOS and Abasic. I'll lay heavy odds they are
both written in C. Airtight? My -ss.
Hay, the compilers work fine. Sometimes they give me bugs I can't explain,
and I curse the system, but later I find it was actualy a bug in the source
code: my own fault. V1.1 of intution is almost here, and it is going to be
*SHARP! A 1500 page manual, with oddles of examples. SpLiTiNfInItY
I sure hope it's good. I have been writing a pretty spiffy terminal program in
C on my Compupro 68000 system (with XMODEM, KERMIT, etc etc), which is in
"by-the-book" K & R C. Hopefully, I will be able to transport it fairly easily
to the Amiga. I have it all modularized so that only the I/O library should
need changing if the Amiga C is not a dialect.
-Larry Miller-
P.S. Do you have the PPN for Herr Volk at AEGIS? I wanted to send him some mail
but his latest messages had already scrolled off PCS-44 (takes only a day or
two).
C on a non- 8-bit machine is the language of choice. If you have done (or
understand) *any* assembly, C is a cinch to learn. It is a *standard* language
that passes parameters by address (not value).
All I/O is expected to be handled by the library for the given machine.
I once wrote a complex program for a VAX in C, then had to port it to the IBM
PC. Compiled the first time. And worked!
*kevin
*** There is a reply:
42276
Enter command, N for next
message or <CR> for menu : n
I wish C were as *standard* as you say. There are some pretty severe dialects
out there for PCs (Notably BDS). They don't even agree on what the argument
list is for such things as FREAD, etc. You were fortunate that the C compiler
you used on the PC followed the VAX syntax and conventions (which, being UNIX,
would probably be pretty orthodox K & R).
I confess I don't particularly like C (tho I use it). For example, in
your short statement "passes parameters by value" should add "except for arrays
and pointers". The language is loaded with little 'gotchas as is witnessed by
the fact that there are a number of books out which discuss trying to make C
self-consistent lexically.
True enough, things are getting better in this regard, but
historically, C (and its compilers) have been one of the most "crash prone"
high level languages ever. I have on several occasions done massive hardware
changes for military gear for clients who were absolutely terrified at the idea
of making even small changes to a (finally) working C application in a VAX
environment.
-LDM-
*** There is a reply:
42286
Enter command, N for next
message or <CR> for menu : n
Larry, I share your feelings about C, both as a language to program with, and
in regard to its supposed 'transportability'. COMAL is probably the most
portable language I have ever seen, and one of the easiest to learn. It is also
a powerful language, structured without being overly restrictive, and, at least
as implemented on the 64, IBM, and various minis, such as the PDPs and VAXen, a
positively joyous environment to do some serious programming.
I won't really consider the Amiga "complete' until I can get COMAL for it.
Regards, Larry.
Enter command, N for next
message or <CR> for menu : n
Oh, COMAL is really a language? Can't say I ever heard of it (please, no itch–
I really don't need Yet Another Language!).
Cheers. Pray for Amiga software.
-Larry-
Really!
It stands for COMmon ALgorithmic language, and has all the ease of BASIC
combined with the power of PACAL, and is implemented on many machines. I can
only agree with you about not needing YAL… Once I have COMAL on a machine,
neither do I.
REPEAT
READ_DL4_PCS116
UNTIL CONVINCED
Regards, Larry. <grin>
I'm going to try it (C). I'm just not looking forward to it on a machine
whose DOS still doesn't know which end is up (and neither do I). Dick Darling