General Category > Programming

From MaXaM to OrGamS. A journey towards sanity.

<< < (2/3) > >>

GUNHED:

--- Quote from: m_dr_m on 12:26, 02 June 21 ---IIUC, that's just the absence of AMSDOS header that you need.

--- End quote ---
Yes!


--- Quote from: m_dr_m on 12:26, 02 June 21 ---
So basically, it would be more generic to allow: SAVE "toto.ico" ASCII
akin to BASIC's save"roger",a

--- End quote ---

See, this is where the problems start. There is no reason not to use the ".COM" for headerless files.
Why to change it to ".ico"? Just for the sake of itself?
If you want people coming over from Maxam to the great Orgams - then please make it easy! :) :) :)

Stay compatible where you can!  :) :) :)


--- Quote from: m_dr_m on 12:26, 02 June 21 ---I'm not fond of ".com" hack, but to ease migration, we could trigger an error or warning in this case:

line 42: Must specify ASCII or BIN for ".COM" files
     SAVE "DOT.COM"

--- End quote ---

Sorry, TBH if I get a bunch of that errors then I just stop migrating and use what I always used. Just for a lack of time.

Hope this helps. You got an awesome product, but try to put yourself in perspective of somebody who would love to use Orgams - just as long as this is not too hard.  :) :) :)

m_dr_m:
No, not replacing .COM by .ICO! That was just an exemple.


You said yourself:

--- Quote ---It also allows to add some custom header to your file.
--- End quote ---


So I picked an exemple of file which wouldn't be necessarily a .COM.



--- Quote ---[size=0px]There is no reason not to use the ".COM" for headerless files.[/size]

--- End quote ---


I can see several reasons :)
 * The headerless property and the name of the extension should be unrelated. We are not on MSDOS.
 * I don't like "magical" behaviours and things that happen in inconsistent ways.


Again, my point is not to replace ".COM", but to be consistent, predictable, legible and beautiful.


--- Quote ---[/size][size=0px]If you want people coming over from Maxam to the great Orgams - then please make it easy![/size]

[/size]
--- End quote ---

[/size]Fair, but backward compatibility sucks. Especially if it ends up being unused.[size=78%]
[/size]I've tried to make it easy (e.g. Maxam syntax is automatically converted, even on the fly when editing, so finger memory isn't an issue).[size=78%]
[/size]But I haven't seen any Maxam user migrating.[size=78%]











GUNHED:
It's not being backward compatible. It's more about sticking to established standards. Look at the chaos we have on mass storage now, we have five DOS for FAT32 on CPC now - that's crazy!

Of course it's great to add new things to a modern assembler. However saving something as ".COM" usually doesn't want to have a header in CPC world.  ;)

Good luck with the project anyway, I'll have a look at it again when I finished some actual projects.

m_dr_m:
Cool! What are those projects?


If you wish, send me one of your source, so I can showcase a migration.
It's always very satisfying to go from 2 minutes assembling to 2 seconds.

GUNHED:

--- Quote from: m_dr_m on 10:46, 04 June 21 ---Cool! What are those projects?
If you wish, send me one of your source, so I can showcase a migration.
It's always very satisfying to go from 2 minutes assembling to 2 seconds.

--- End quote ---
Right now, I do improve the software for the LambdaSpeak FS, that's a ROM providing RSX commands to deal with the LFS expansion. The newest update is always on my homepage (see link in my signature). Of course I do provide source code for that too. However, there's no artificial header.
Sources with artificial headers (including an icon for example) can be found there too, just look for source code for FutureOS applications.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page

Go to full version
Powered by SMFPacks Media Embedder
Powered by SMFPacks Alerts Pro Mod
Powered by SMFPacks Mentions Pro Mod