Re: My Intro:
"barryp" wrote in message:
>> Well it's been said in here that you need to expand
>> the TI-99/4A in order to use assembly on it.
> With only the basic (pun intended) computer, you
> can only program using the included BASIC
> interpreter. You can, however, add modules for
> games, education, finance, programming, etc. in
> the same way as the Atari, Commodore or other
> machines do. I guess that I don't understand
> your question; if you're asking about writing
> assembly language programs, very few
> computer buyers do that no matter what
> machine we're talking about.
I guess what I'm trying to get at, is that I'm under
the impression that for someone to learn assembly
on the TI 99/4A is an assembler & upgrade (32k
expansion I thought it was). Commercial Game
companies who write their stuff in assembly (well
it would be in Binary - the language the computer
understands) would require those users to have
the approate upgrades. But I don't know, maybe
the majority of them used BASIC?
For an typical Amstrad CPC computer to support
assembly isn't all that complicated - all you need
is the assembler, but if your handy with your Z80
hexidecimal opcodes then a BASIC hex editor
would do!
Amstrad's BASIC also supports for
Machine Code in the form of PEEK, POKE, READ
(perhaps a few other commands) & DATA
statements (which contain the code).
Back then I guess most people would have used
BASIC & being happy with it. But I was more
concerned about the commercial game
companies which normally write something in
Assembly (for speed & size) & running those
programs on a basic TI 99/4A.
>> Amonst this it's said that you'd need the extended
>> BASIC as well.
> Extended Basic is to the original console Basic as
> IBM BASICA is to IBM ROM BASIC. (IOW, an
> extension) You pay the extra money and you
> get added functionality.
That was a limitation to the Amstrad's BASIC.
Basically speaking, the BASIC which came with
the Amstrad CPC464 was BASIC 1.0. On the
CPC664, CPC6128 & the Plus Machines BASIC
1.1 was used. This introduced extra commands
which mean't if any of those were used the
CPC464 would miss out. It wasn't great in terms
of expanding it either. There were companies
actually selling the BASIC 1.1 microchip in the
late '80s (before Amstrad put a stop to them
doing this) to CPC464 users. Unfortunately I'd
missed out! :-(
Now I have a CPC6128 & since then I
found a whole heap of programs (which I
got when I got the CPC6128) designed to
bring compatability in BASIC 1.1 programs
to BASIC 1.0 with a set of (Resident System
Extensions)! :-(
> Having Extended Basic is generally better than not
> having it but it's not required. Some programs
> require one, some require the other.
>> How are the TI-99/4A's in the states
>> & do they need this as well?
> There's basically one kind of TI-99/4A. Differences
> are cosmetic. They are everywhere, I have at
> least a dozen.
> However, there are many other TI computers.
Cheers.