[Coco] BASIC compiler for Rainbow IDE ?

[Stephen H. Fischer]

>From what I understand, the Urbane processor program reads in another 
>enhanced BASIC program and turns it into a standard BASIC program, am I 
>correct?
Yes. My comment was to insure that you were not going to just mimic DECB.

I was very sad when I realized what a giant change in the CoCo World Urbane 
would have made if I or someone else had done it in the beginning.

The two character names and line numbers are a huge drawback, one that I did 
not realize until I was deep into Urbane coding.

I had the TSC FLEX Basic Preprocessor before I got my first CoCo 2.

So the Idea was available before the first CoCo. I can understand my 
failure, I cannot understand the failure of others.

A Compiler was my understanding what you were planning.

Another post suggested using the DECB interpreter as a starting point.

I was thinking about creating a DECB to Urbane translator doing this.

I wonder if the BASIC09 disassembly might be a starting point.

Stephen H. Fischer

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Roger Taylor" <operator at coco3.com>
To: "CoCoList for Color Computer Enthusiasts" <coco at maltedmedia.com>
Sent: Wednesday, May 14, 2008 10:27 PM
Subject: Re: [Coco] BASIC compiler for Rainbow IDE ?


> At 11:29 PM 5/14/2008, you wrote:
>>Roger, my understanding of what you are planning to do is unclear.
>>
>>In any case, please review what I did with "Urbane".
>>
>>Just the two additions of longer unique variable names and line numbers 
>>not required makes DECB a much better language.
>>
>>As there was no messages to me about "Urbane" (NONE), I did not follow up 
>>with what I realized could be done.
>>
>>This was despite the large number of downloads. You reset the counters at 
>>one point so I have no real understanding as to their real numbers.
>>
>>Stephen H. Fischer
>>
>>P.S. I think that I have on a disk somewhere a DECB like compiler that may 
>>be similar to what you are planning.
>
>
> I'm speaking of a BASIC to machine language compiler with 6809 or 6309 
> support.  Not just standard CoCo BASIC could be compiled but that with 
> longer variable names, no line numbers, labeled lines, etc.
>
> From what I understand, the Urbane processor program reads in another 
> enhanced BASIC program and turns it into a standard BASIC program, am I 
> correct?  So our two systems are completely different.  The end result is 
> still a BASIC program, which is great, but a compiler would turn it into 
> optimized machine code.
>
> My versions of CLS, PCLS, PRINT, HPRINT, LINE, HLINE, HDRAW, etc. would be 
> a LOT faster than what BASIC can do.  It will be almost like coding in raw 
> assembly.  I'm first going to set up CCASM procedures that mimick many of 
> the commands, and go from there.  An assembler naturally will turn the 
> compiled .asm file(s) into LOADMable binaries.
>
> I aim to produce stand-alone programs that only include commands that are 
> used, and no ROM calls will be made.
>
>
>
> --
> Coco mailing list
> Coco at maltedmedia.com
> http://five.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/coco
>