I think there's a STRONG advantage to keeping things in the program (ala "set") and not outside (ala env variables and command line switches). Right now there's a WONDERFUL bit of beauty in that a bB program is self-contained...you can cut and paste and go. Not only would external controls spoil that, but it's just one more thing to provoke dozens of "I tried to compile this but it doesn't work", like [stella] would get with the "-f3" argument DASM usually needs...(gee, who would miss that? *whistles tunelessly*)
The set syntax seems very reasonable. There's no crime in doing an initial sweep through the source to get any that you need before the main work begins.
Atari 2600 BASIC compiler is here!
|
Posted Fri Sep 23, 2005 10:53 AM
|
|
A GameMaker type program is a GREAT idea, as an additional option for creating games - but you said it, the one flaw the original had was that it forced you to use a joystick to select commands. If that were simply an option, and you could type in a regular text editor, or drop to lower level code, that would be the best development tool / environment. I guess my point is, giving people more options to code at the level they want can only be a good thing.
Random Terrain, on Mon Jul 11, 2005 5:26 AM, said: attendo, on Mon Jul 11, 2005 4:00 AM, said: It was a pain to do with the joystick, going up and down the list and selecting commands. But your program was listed there on the screen separately as if you typed it in. If someone did an updated version for the PC (totally non-Atari related) I would expect to be able to type in commands and select them from a list at the side (or top or bottom) using the mouse. Kiss that old joystick goodbye. Leave that for playing games. |
|

Sign In
Register
Help


MultiQuote
