commodorejohn
Veteran Member
*boggle*
Well, I guess that makes my notes toward a TMS-99000 dynamic object-oriented system seem less implausible...Smalltalk in 16KB on a Z80? Holy cripes.
- VCF South West - June 14 - 16, Davidson-Gundy Alumni Center at University of Texas at Dallas
- VCF West - Aug 2 - 3, Computer History Museum, Mountain View, CA
- VCF Midwest - Sept 7 - 8 2024, Schaumburg, IL
- VCF SoCal - Mid February 2025, Location TBD, Southern CA
- VCF East - April 2025, Infoage Museum, Wall NJ
-
Please review our updated Terms and Rules here
What programming languages can 8-bit computers run besides BASIC?
- Thread starter punchy71
- Start date
Well, I guess that makes my notes toward a TMS-99000 dynamic object-oriented system seem less implausible...Smalltalk in 16KB on a Z80? Holy cripes.
Chuck(G)
25k Member
I think that many people not familiar with the old iron greatly underestimate what could be done with limited storage. I believe that the smallest version of System/360 DOS could be run in a 4K resident supervisor area. 64K was a very respectable size for, say, a Model 40 and could run a background and two foreground partitions. I believe that for the Model 40, 128K was the limit.
Even with the 8080-based systems, with the proper environment, it was possible to service multiple users on a floppy-based system. We ran 5 users, running a common BASIC runtime interpreting multiple users running what was essentially P-code applications. That included word processing and accounting (e.g. inventory, payroll, AP, AR, GL, etc).
Today's multi-gigabyte memories and GHz multicore CPUs for a single user really have me wondering about the efficiency of our modern code and applications.
Even with the 8080-based systems, with the proper environment, it was possible to service multiple users on a floppy-based system. We ran 5 users, running a common BASIC runtime interpreting multiple users running what was essentially P-code applications. That included word processing and accounting (e.g. inventory, payroll, AP, AR, GL, etc).
Today's multi-gigabyte memories and GHz multicore CPUs for a single user really have me wondering about the efficiency of our modern code and applications.
commodorejohn
Veteran Member
Oh, that's true enough. Still, considering that the Alto had 128KB/64KW of RAM, and even then the Smalltalk developers were working out ways to add virtual memory, it's pretty dang impressive to have got something like that into only 16KB. (Though ditching the GUI helped, I'm sure.)
Chuck(G)
25k Member
Bitmap graphics always adds code and memory. 
I worked with a guy who was commissioned by a CDC VP to do a COBOL compiler in a 4KW (12-bit) 6000-series PPU (He did it, by gum).
I worked with a guy who was commissioned by a CDC VP to do a COBOL compiler in a 4KW (12-bit) 6000-series PPU (He did it, by gum).
1944GPW
Veteran Member
Took a bit of googling but finally managed to find the authors' paper on Rosetta Smalltalk, with some screenshots: http://esug.org/data/HistoricalDocuments/Misc/RosettaSmalltalk.pdf
Scali
Veteran Member
A few years ago, I found a copy of PowerC for the Commodore 64.
And much to my surprise, it actually worked!
I managed to write and compile a Hello World entirely on a stock C64 with a single disk drive.
Amazing bit of code there. All the more because the C64 does not have a commandline interface, so they added a simple C-shell as well. You would first boot into this C-shell, and from there you could invoke things like an editor, a compiler and a linker. The limits of 64K meant that you basically had to put each function in a separate C file, because compiling more than a few dozen lines at a time isn't possible. But, since you could link multiple compiled object files together, you could still build larger programs.
It was also fun to see such an early C-dialect, lacking most of the ANSI C features and conventions that I've taken for granted.
But yes, it WAS possible to build C programs on an 8-bit machine, and as long as you had enough floppies, you could probably link quite sophisticated stuff together.
I was also amazed at just how small the resulting programs were. My earlier experiments with 80s '8-bit' C were with Turbo C and OpenWatcom C on 8088/MS-DOS. A Hello World would already be close to 10K. The C64 Hello World was less than 300 bytes I believe.
And much to my surprise, it actually worked!
I managed to write and compile a Hello World entirely on a stock C64 with a single disk drive.
Amazing bit of code there. All the more because the C64 does not have a commandline interface, so they added a simple C-shell as well. You would first boot into this C-shell, and from there you could invoke things like an editor, a compiler and a linker. The limits of 64K meant that you basically had to put each function in a separate C file, because compiling more than a few dozen lines at a time isn't possible. But, since you could link multiple compiled object files together, you could still build larger programs.
It was also fun to see such an early C-dialect, lacking most of the ANSI C features and conventions that I've taken for granted.
But yes, it WAS possible to build C programs on an 8-bit machine, and as long as you had enough floppies, you could probably link quite sophisticated stuff together.
I was also amazed at just how small the resulting programs were. My earlier experiments with 80s '8-bit' C were with Turbo C and OpenWatcom C on 8088/MS-DOS. A Hello World would already be close to 10K. The C64 Hello World was less than 300 bytes I believe.
CP/M User
Veteran Member
BCPL if you've got an Amstrad CPC. It only came out on Disc or ROM, which is handy in a way. Modula-2, LISP & apparently Prolog, as well as the usual range of popular languages (that others have mention) are also available. BASIC Compilers were also a popular tool for people looking to enhance BASIC programs. Z80 Assembly obviously being a Commercial Programmers language of choice (usually).
Some of those I mentioned run in CP/M and some Algol Compilers were also made in CP/M.
Some of those I mentioned run in CP/M and some Algol Compilers were also made in CP/M.
Chuck(G)
25k Member
I believe that Tiny C and Small C are in the SIMTEL20 library--it really doesn't take much to implement an integer C.
mmruzek
Experienced Member
PowerC is still out there and available for the IBM PC from Mix Software. For about $20 you get the software, but more importantly you get a really nice user manual that is very well done. It's how I learned to do C programming. Source code and some libraries are also available. Requires at least DOS 2.0. LOL
http://www.mixsoftware.com/product/powerc.htm
http://www.mixsoftware.com/product/powerc.htm
Tor
Veteran Member
There were Pascal ROMs for AIM-65.
CP/M User
Veteran Member
I'm curious to know more about PILOT. I acquired a version of Pilot that was written in BASIC that had 5 Single Letter Commands, but don't know anything about Nevada Pilot or the Atari version.
Were any Pilot Compiler programs ever written, or was it a language strictly written to learn to code from?
APL introduced array programming and influenced functional programming.
ALGOL refined both structured procedural programming and the discipline of language specification; the "Revised Report on the Algorithmic Language ALGOL 60" became a model for how later language specifications were written.
In the 1960s, Simula was the first language designed to support object-oriented programming; in the mid-1970s, Smalltalk followed with the first "purely" object-oriented language.
C was developed between 1969 and 1973 as a system programming language, and remains popular.
Prolog, designed in 1972, was the first logic programming language.
In 1978, ML built a polymorphic type system on top of Lisp, pioneering statically typed functional programming languages.
ALGOL refined both structured procedural programming and the discipline of language specification; the "Revised Report on the Algorithmic Language ALGOL 60" became a model for how later language specifications were written.
In the 1960s, Simula was the first language designed to support object-oriented programming; in the mid-1970s, Smalltalk followed with the first "purely" object-oriented language.
C was developed between 1969 and 1973 as a system programming language, and remains popular.
Prolog, designed in 1972, was the first logic programming language.
In 1978, ML built a polymorphic type system on top of Lisp, pioneering statically typed functional programming languages.
The TI-99/4A had ANSI BASIC (in console), TMS-9900 Assembly (GROM cartridge), Fortran, UCSD PASCAL (and the p-System to compile it), Pilot (two versions, one using the p-System and the other programmed in 9900 Assembly), Forth (and also FIG Forth, Wycove Forth, Turbo Forth, and fbForth), Logo (ROM/GROM Cartridge), the Powertran Cortex flavor of TI-990 Power BASIC (ROM cartridge), a Small c compiler (and later a more evolved C compiler that only ran on a Geneve 9640), the TI Graphics Programming Language (GPL) Assembler (used in GROM/GRAM applications), and a rudimentary LISP interpreter.
Yes--the 16-bit machine with all of the limitations of an 8-bit machine, otherwise known as the TI-99/4A. I have most of one of the early 99/4 prototypes (rescued from a scrapper who extracted it from the case and threw away everything except the mother board). It was very different physically from the final version. . .but still with the same general operating architecture.
My favorites for TRS-80 (Model 1 & 3):
1. Tiny Pascal on cassette. This was by Chen-Yuen, the same as the BYTE articles. My first other language. I was excited because it was only $29 in the Radio Shack catalog, instead of $99 to $199 for other languages. The Model 1 tape even had the source code for the interpreter itself. (In Pascal, self-hosting, not in Basic as the Byte article did.)
2. MuSimp. What's that? It was marketed as MuMath, a symbolic math package from the Soft Warehouse. But the base was really a list interpreter like Lisp but with FAR easier syntax. Linked lists that could be commands or data or both, and even the operator characters (+, -, [, {, etc.) were rewritable functions. It even had maps/associative arrays as Get and Put. In 1980! For only $75! (TRS-80 version.) I've been playing with in emulators, and only now realizing what could have been done with it. You could write easily an interpreter for any another language in it. If I were sent back in time, this is the one I would go for.
1. Tiny Pascal on cassette. This was by Chen-Yuen, the same as the BYTE articles. My first other language. I was excited because it was only $29 in the Radio Shack catalog, instead of $99 to $199 for other languages. The Model 1 tape even had the source code for the interpreter itself. (In Pascal, self-hosting, not in Basic as the Byte article did.)
2. MuSimp. What's that? It was marketed as MuMath, a symbolic math package from the Soft Warehouse. But the base was really a list interpreter like Lisp but with FAR easier syntax. Linked lists that could be commands or data or both, and even the operator characters (+, -, [, {, etc.) were rewritable functions. It even had maps/associative arrays as Get and Put. In 1980! For only $75! (TRS-80 version.) I've been playing with in emulators, and only now realizing what could have been done with it. You could write easily an interpreter for any another language in it. If I were sent back in time, this is the one I would go for.
mister35mm
New Member
A short list of programming languages available for many 8bit computers
A short list of programming languages available for many 8bit computers
Compiled BASIC CBASIC
COMAL
PASCAL
FORTRAN
'C'
'BCPL'
LISP
PILOT
PROLOG
FORTH < Excellent and runs on just about anything.
ACTION!
LOGO
COBOL
DBASE2
Redcode
PL/1
BURP - POWERTRAN PSI-COMP80 The scientific computer, wireless world magazine.
Plus there are a few language made for specific machines/processors/operating systems, like FOCAL which was written for the DEC PDP-8 but might have implementations on later machines, or emulated on popular platforms like the Raspberry Pi.
Check out:- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_programming_languages
A short list of programming languages available for many 8bit computers
Compiled BASIC CBASIC
COMAL
PASCAL
FORTRAN
'C'
'BCPL'
LISP
PILOT
PROLOG
FORTH < Excellent and runs on just about anything.
ACTION!
LOGO
COBOL
DBASE2
Redcode
PL/1
BURP - POWERTRAN PSI-COMP80 The scientific computer, wireless world magazine.
Plus there are a few language made for specific machines/processors/operating systems, like FOCAL which was written for the DEC PDP-8 but might have implementations on later machines, or emulated on popular platforms like the Raspberry Pi.
Check out:- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_programming_languages
CP/M User
Veteran Member
No Algol ?
Which one?
krebizfan
Veteran Member
Algol had problems. The Liverpool Software Gazette issue 3 explains some of the issues of getting Algol-68C running on a Z-80. Article starts on page 52 and can be downloaded http://www.80bus.co.uk/pages/magazines.htm
Action! was a sort-of Algol-68 subset for 6502 machines, notably the Atari line. I don't see any successful efforts to get a full Algol implementation running on a 8-bit system.