Ken for some reason I did not get your note, but I saw it in John's
response.

Are you sure?
If the program attempts to execute the hidden BASIC lines as BASIC, as you
demonstrate, then codes <32 will kick off major problems.  I believe I
confirmed that this AM by manually changing a line to include low codes.

But I could be wrong ;) -- I rarely feel the need to question you Ken, so
go easy on me!  ;)



On 6/5/18, Ken Pettit <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Hey Steve,
> >
> > A minor edit to your summary.  For the hidden lines, you don't need to
> > avoid codes < 32 decimal, other than 00h, quote and comma as identified,
> > though they are harder to edit if you do use codes < 32.
> >
> > Ken
> >
> > On 6/5/18 4:31 AM, Stephen Adolph wrote:
> >> so, As a summary, I think this is what is new here:
> >>
> >> * Ken has demonstrated that XIP ML can be embedded in a basic program
> >> that can run anywhere
> >> * John has illuminated the fact that there are hidden basic lines
> >> * by using hidden lines, one can create a very compact hybrid ML/BASIC
> >> program that can safely be edited in BASIC
> >> * hidden lines can be executed in BASIC or not
> >> *****if not executed then RAW ML can be embedded - avoid code 00
> >> *****if executed
> >> ***********hide the ML in strings - avoid " and codes <32 decimal
> >> ***********hide the ML in data structures - avoid comma, and <32 decimal
> >>
> >>
> >> We've already had Basic with embedded ML, we've just never had it with
> >> next to no overhead - both in time and memory - and with the ability
> >> to run in place WITHOUT absolute addressing.
> >>
> >>
> >>
>

Reply via email to