Amiga MA Magazine 1998 #3/amigamamagazinepolishissue1998.iso/maksiu/lists/amoslist-0996.lzh/AMOSLIST/[e-mail]_Thu Sep 26 07:35:40 1996.msg

Internet Message Format | 1996-10-01 | 4KB

Received: from svcs1.digex.net (svcs1.digex.net [204.91.197.224]) by mail2.access.digex.net (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id HAA08387 for <[e-mail]>; Thu, 26 Sep 1996 07:35:38 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (from daemon@localhost) by svcs1.digex.net (8.7.6/8.7.3) id FAA27634 for amos-out; Thu, 26 Sep 1996 05:20:23 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from mail1.access.digex.net (mail1.access.digex.net [205.197.247.2]) by svcs1.digex.net (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id FAA27631 for <[e-mail]>; Thu, 26 Sep 1996 05:20:23 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from cpt6.stm.tudelft.nl (cpt6.stm.tudelft.nl [130.161.247.6]) by mail1.access.digex.net (8.7.6/8.7.3) with SMTP id FAA28000 for <[e-mail]>; Thu, 26 Sep 1996 05:20:18 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Received: by cpt6.stm.tudelft.nl
    (1.38.193.4/16.2) id AA02163; Thu, 26 Sep 1996 11:30:01 +0200
From: "Maarten D. de Jong" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Sell
To: [e-mail]
Date: Thu, 26 Sep 96 11:30:01 METDST
In-Reply-To: <[e-mail]>; from "mortenbo" at Sep 25, 96 9:57 pm
Mailer: Elm [revision: 70.85]
Status: RO
X-Status:

>
> Hellow!
>
> I am vodering if anybody is interested in bying:
>
>
> Amos The Creator
> Easy amos.
>
>
> Their're both comes in the Original packing with the
> manuals and are taken good care of.

Meaning they've been thrown out of the window dozens of times, with a heavy
truck with muddy tires squeezing them in the mud thereafter :-D?

But that was not what I wanted to ask. While reading a few messages about
AMOS not supporting AGA in the editor, and AMOS 3D requiring an 68000 plus
KS 1.3, why not build a new AMOS ourselves? There are a few pretty good
programmers on this list who are capable of the job... I was thinking of
a completely modular programming language. In its basic form it knows
nothing about print and screens and such -- it only knows about the syntaxis
and variable types. So things like if/then/else, for/next, while/wend,
repeat/until, proc/end proc, gosub/return, integers, floats, strings...
Rather like C in that respect. Now then. If you want to do something, you
choose one of the many 'extensions' available, and tag them to your program.
There would be an advanced string extension, a graphics extension, an
animation extension, etc. I am using extensions because that is one of the
few things I like about AMOS. In fact, you can think of the variables and
syntaxis as a 'kernel' extension which can be replaced and upgraded with
the same ease as the rest.
    It would be a language which needs compiling. However, this is done
automatically before you run the program, so you do not require a separate
compiler anymore. If you ever used Pascal for DOS, you know what I mean.
I have played around a bit with how the parser for programming languages
works, and believe me, it will save a *lot* of time if you compile your
programs.
    The thing would be written in C with perhaps a bit of assembly here
and there. Writing the entire thing in assembly is crazy: it's a sure way
of asking bugs to come and hide in your program -- especially with a
program the size of AMOS.

Has anyone had similar ideas?

Maarten

--
******************************************************************************
*    "Shell to DOS... Shell to DOS... DOS, do you copy? Shell to DOS..."     *
******************************************************************************