basic directly to assembly

necro · Post by **necro** » Sat 26 Mar, 2005 3:25 am

this is an interesting idea...I doubt it been thought of befor

ok, probably not, but it has NEVER been done as of yet. Why isn't their a program to convert basic code into a faster asm program.

It would be a very handy thing for basic programmers (like myself) who's progs lack the speed to do everything they want. Often I find my programs limmited, not by size but by speed...and something like this would be the fastest (thoug MLC does sound very neat.) And it would only make since as either an app or computer utility. A program like this that could use external asm libs for basic and allready converted basic code.

Spengo · Post by **Spengo** » Sat 26 Mar, 2005 3:42 am

There isn't? I thought there WAS already one of those. Granted it's probably a bunch of macros and is just about the slowest and worst written asm you've ever laid eyes on, but it's probably still faster than BASIC.

Jim e · Post by **Jim e** » Sat 26 Mar, 2005 3:45 am

*sigh*
You can't convert basic to assembly because basic is interpreted by z80 assembly there would no gain in speed and the size would shoot up to increddible levels. 7 or 8 bytes in basic could means hundreds in asm.

But as far as speeding things up, one thought had crossed my mind.
Parsing takes a long time in basic and can slow things down. If we were to preparse the basic code into faster interpreted code.

basicly like this

( ( 2 + A ) ^ 3 * ( 4 - B ) ^ 4 ) - 10 -> C

The calc would have to figure what to do first, that wasted time.
what if we convert it to some thing like this

Add( 2 , A ) -> temp1
Power( temp1 , 3 ) -> temp1
Sub( 4 , B ) -> temp2
Power( temp2 , 4 ) -> temp2
Mult( temp1 , temp2 ) -> temp1
Sub( temp1 , 10 ) -> C

Using a stack may even speed it up more but it was just a thought I had. Alot still has to be considered.

Gambit · Post by **Gambit** » Sat 26 Mar, 2005 4:16 am

I remember RadicalSoft having made a new "language" that did something like this... EZAsm, IIRC. Of course, I've never used it, so I don't know...

Post by **kv83** » Sat 26 Mar, 2005 3:09 pm

Gambit wrote:I remember RadicalSoft having made a new "language" that did something like this... EZAsm, IIRC. Of course, I've never used it, so I don't know...

EZAsm... yup, I even created a simple tic-tac-toe with it... But it's not really basic when you write it... and the output is very, very big

DarkerLine · Post by **DarkerLine** » Sat 26 Mar, 2005 4:49 pm

If you find yourself limited by speed in basic, it's best to either learn Asm or learn optimization.

the_unknown_one · Post by **the_unknown_one** » Sat 26 Mar, 2005 5:31 pm

Or use an ASM lib (EBL)!

koolmansam375 · Post by **koolmansam375** » Sat 26 Mar, 2005 6:06 pm

im sure leo kuda (kuda leo?) would suggest you use his FastRPL. I dunno much about it tho.

DarkerLine · Post by **DarkerLine** » Sat 26 Mar, 2005 6:23 pm

the_unknown_one wrote:Or use an ASM lib (EBL)!

How that alternative slipped my mind I don't know.

dysfunction · Post by **dysfunction** » Sun 27 Mar, 2005 7:46 pm

koolmansam375 wrote:im sure leo kuda (kuda leo?) would suggest you use his FastRPL. I dunno much about it tho.

And we would suggest you use our MLC (when its released for 83 of course).

necro · Post by **necro** » Thu 31 Mar, 2005 2:51 pm

the "when it is released of course" part is the problem (and there seems to be conflict about wether or not archiving/unarchiving progams will be included)

Post by **Patori** » Sat 02 Apr, 2005 10:44 pm

bah... *sighs*

Post by **tr1p1ea** » Sun 03 Apr, 2005 7:56 am

I honestly dont know how many times such a program has been suggested

.

MaxCoderz

basic directly to assembly

basic directly to assembly

...

Re: ...