Re: [stella] BAStella Language Reference V0.000000001

Subject: Re: [stella] BAStella Language Reference V0.000000001
From: "Roger Williams" <mer02@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 24 Nov 2001 06:41:47 -0800
From: <erik@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >OTOH I'm already thinking of having BAStella output a .bin that
> >displays an error message when an error occurs for this reason...
> >I could just have it output a compilable source (hell, it could be
> >composed of .byte statements.  Hmmmmm.)
> That'd be too clunky IMO; just have BAStella report the error.

Problem is, if you are using a batch or script tool to fall through
from the editor to BAStella, then through DASM if necessary,
and then to Z26, the error flashes by and is lost.  You have to
break out of the script and examine the .LST file.  I do think on
reflection that letting DASM compile the error is off the map.
Really it shouldn't be dependant on DASM at all.  It will be
outputting a small enough subset of DASM's capabilities that
the internal assembler can be much simpler than DASM.

> BTW, are you envisioning this as a full-blown IDE or a command-line
> tool?

Command line, like DASM only with human-readable
error reporting.

> I have a hard time believing that multiplication would be an infrequent
> operation, in that it would only occur on some frames.  You'll need
> either some wizardly optimization for this, or a warning that you can't
> use very many multiplications per frame.

Looking back through the archive, whenever the topic of
a compiled language comes up I see a recurring thread --
"it would have to constantly output too-slow warnings."
Well, BAStella doesn't have to do that; its too-slow
warning is that it RUNS TOO SLOW.  It doesn't crash or
make the screen jump, it just does what you expect a
computer to do when your code is too bloated.  Then
you do what's been done since 1979, you go to the
"optimization tips" section of the .doc and #1 is "beware
of * and /, consider using a table."

> The interactive IDE that corrects code as you write was an invaluable
> advance for QuickBasic and I can't live without it in VB.  Why in the
> is this not yet present in C compilers TWELVE YEARS LATER? </rant>

How would it know when you've moved off the line?
The whole program is just a stream of characters after all...

--Roger Williams

Archives (includes files) at
Unsub & more at

Current Thread