Live data from Hacker News

The Applesoft Compiler (TASC): We have the source code, in a sense

devblogs.microsoft.com

31–32 of 32 posts

Re: The Applesoft Compiler (TASC): We have the source code, in a sense

#31
post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> All three passes were written largely in Applesoft Wouldn't this explain it? But it seems odd that they wouldn't at least save a LUT relating the shortened and expanded variable name.

> But it seems odd that they wouldn't at least save a LUT relating the shortened and expanded variable name. BASIC implementations based on Microsoft BASIC store tokenized program lines. A keyword takes 1 byte. Comments, variable names, spaces between tokens, etc take up memory on a character-by-character basis. I didn't use Apple BASIC, but I spent too much time on various flavors of Commodore BASIC which shared thi…

Sure, I meant saving that LUT somewhere else for future reference

Re: The Applesoft Compiler (TASC): We have the source code, in a sense

#32
post #15

I tried this compiler out back in the day and found the benefits, at least with the AppleSoft programs I had access to (mostly MECC titles) were fairly negligible. What rarely popped up, however, were show-stopper errors — programs would compile & run. That was nice.

>I tried this compiler out back in the day and found the benefits, at least with the AppleSoft programs I had access to (mostly MECC titles) were fairly negligible. I suppose that a compiler wouldn't do much to make something like the original BASIC The Oregon Trail feel much faster; I think the sailing-on-a-raft part wasn't added until the 1985 version, which likely was not written in Applesoft. >What rarely popped…

I had good luck accelerating my Applesoft programs with TASC but I was surely a terrible programmer back then.
Post reply on HN