View Full Version : RFO BASIC! for Android


5thWiggle
06-06-2011, 02:38 PM
http://www.laughton.com/basic/index.html

For all those who like to do your own custom programs. Now the author has a procedure where you can create your own standalone APKs (BASIC! need not be installed on the device). Create and debug a program on your edge, then distribute to your friends.

emusan
06-06-2011, 02:46 PM
nice find, though I personally don't like basic all that much, I'm sure someone will find it useful.

5thWiggle
06-06-2011, 03:09 PM
Basic is pretty much my go-to language for quick and dirty programming. A lot of oldtimers like myself [pulls waistband up above bellybutton, adjusts dentures] learned it first (actually I learned Z80 and 6502 assembly first, basic was a godsend compared to that!), cause all the old 8 bit systems had an interpreter. I never really could learn to like C++ though I've use it. IMP Object Pascal rocks! :D

5thWiggle
06-06-2011, 03:22 PM
BTW, I haven't tried it yet, but if you like scripting languages (Python, Perl, Ruby) there is http://code.google.com/p/android-scripting/

emusan
06-06-2011, 04:53 PM
yeah, I've just started learning ruby... I started with C a few years ago in order to program some DS "homebrew", since then I've learned C++/Java and a little bit of AVR assembly(FUN stuff lol)(I also know bits and pieces of a lot more, including basic and RPL aka LISP without parentheses^^). I don't think its too bad given that I just graduated high school three days ago...

Michealj
06-06-2011, 10:43 PM
Congratulations Emusan. What's next?

Regards,
Micheal

emusan
06-06-2011, 10:58 PM
Congratulations Emusan. What's next?

Once I've got a good understanding of ruby, probably javascript and then probably college lol.

Filark
06-07-2011, 01:17 AM
Congratulations, Emusan! :)

Last_of_the_PEs
06-07-2011, 03:24 AM
Outstanding! I've been pining for the FOR NEXT LOOP for years. Sometimes QUICK is what you need, a lot more than fast or elegant. Of course, one can take it TOO FAR. I remember a guy who spent four years writing a database for the HP 70 & 90 series handhelds.

5thWiggle
06-07-2011, 08:35 AM
I don't think its too bad given that I just graduated high school three days ago...

Congrats!

Mark Rehorst
06-07-2011, 12:46 PM
Basic is pretty much my go-to language for quick and dirty programming. A lot of oldtimers like myself [pulls waistband up above bellybutton, adjusts dentures] learned it first (actually I learned Z80 and 6502 assembly first, basic was a godsend compared to that!), cause all the old 8 bit systems had an interpreter. I never really could learn to like C++ though I've use it. IMP Object Pascal rocks! :D

:offtopic:

I started programming in Fortran IV on TI Silent 700 terminals connected to a PDP11 at Marquette U when I was in high school ('75). I also had a Motorola 6800 demo or trainer that was programmed in machine language using toggle switches (1975-76). Next I had a PL1 class at Florida Tech U (now called UCF) where we had to punch cards and put them in a card reader to run a program. A little later (around '79 or '80) I was doing machine language programming on an RCA 1802 with some sort of crude video generator chip that I used to make an automatic morse code reader that would display 4 lines of text on a video monitor.

Also around 79 or 80 I had an assembly language programming class that had such a horrible instructor I managed to get a D. I retook the class (with the same instructor- ugh!) and ignored the lectures and studied on my own and got an A.

Lately (the last 10 years) I like PIC microcontrollers which I program in assembly for hobby projects. You can't beat the speed and efficiency of assembly language coding. One of these days I'll probably play with Arduino just because of their ubiquity.

Mark Rehorst
06-07-2011, 12:48 PM
I don't think its too bad given that I just graduated high school three days ago...


Yeah! Go!

MR

5thWiggle
06-07-2011, 01:10 PM
:offtopic:

I started off with a second hand MITS Altair 8800 ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Altair_8800 ) which I got for fixing the botched assembly job the guy made on it. Also had a Heathkit 3400 ( http://www.vintage-computer.com/heathkit3400.shtml ). Spent several summers repairing Sperry Univac U200 terminals. Made several apple][ clones. Sometimes I miss the old eight bit days.....

emusan
06-07-2011, 01:15 PM
Lately (the last 10 years) I like PIC microcontrollers which I program in assembly for hobby projects. You can't beat the speed and efficiency of assembly language coding. One of these days I'll probably play with Arduino just because of their ubiquity.

also :offtopic: (lol sorry to derail the thread)

I've been thinking of getting into PIC's as well, I've been using AVR's for awhile now, but it seems like a lot of people are moving to PIC(I'm also learning some ARM stuff with the new lauchpad that TI put out, $4.30 for a full dev'ing environment was too good to pass up. I don't really like Arduino, I think its a great developing environment for prototyping stuff, but people use it too often in finalized designs because they get too lazy to switch over to a normal uC, it leads people to thinking that they need to pay $30 for what they can get for $1-2.

Mark Rehorst
06-08-2011, 02:27 PM
:offtopic:

Exactly my thinking on the Arduino. I see people using $50 circuit boards to do something as simple as read a phototransistor or CDS cell and then turn something on or off, without even programming any timers, delays, etc. I can appreciate that Arduino allows people with absolutely no knowledge of electronics to do things without a lot of effort, but come on, if you can learn to program an Arduino board you can learn enough about electronics to know when you need or don't need a uC.

ivanjt
06-08-2011, 04:10 PM
Continuing the off topic theme, I have to say that, in my experience, how people view projects is very dependant on how old they are. Those drought up in the digital age, for the most part, only think in digital answers whereas those of us that cut on teeth on electronics in the 50s tend to think in discrete components but have learned to use 'that which does the job best'.

There are, of course, exceptions as always in life.

if you can learn to program an Arduino board you can learn enough about electronics to know when you need or don't need a uC
You would think so Mark, but it isn't always so as my interviewing potential electronics engineers has shown.

KeithSink
06-09-2011, 01:55 PM
I'm currently developing my games in Monkey. It's a cross platform that supports HTML5, Android, iOS, Mac and PC. It's still early but updates are coming out regularly and the guy who writes it has a track record of compilers going back to the Amiga days. You can find more about it here: http://www.monkeycoder.co.nz/

mr_ed
06-09-2011, 02:23 PM
FORTH (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forth_%28programming_language%29) forever! :D

-- Ed

emusan
06-09-2011, 02:31 PM
lol brainf*ck (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brainfuck) for the WIN!!!!

Last_of_the_PEs
06-09-2011, 05:01 PM
Oh yeah, FORTH. We need a language still harnessed to arbitrary code page sizes dictated by ancient hardware! I liked the stack though -- got used to using it with HP calculators.

emusan
06-09-2011, 05:04 PM
Oh yeah, FORTH. We need a language still harnessed to arbitrary code page sizes dictated by ancient hardware! I liked the stack though -- got used to using it with HP calculators.

Couldn't you also use a number as a variable name? Might be something else though...

kennyminot
06-09-2011, 07:11 PM
:offtopic::offtopic:

I don't know what the hell you guys are talking about, but Mark's photo is SUPER CREEPY. That hand could do some serious tickling.

mr_ed
06-10-2011, 04:24 AM
I liked the stack though -- got used to using it with HP calculators.
I still remember the HP-35 with fondness. Crap. Where did those 40 years go?

BASIC, on the other hand, most strongly takes me back to Radio Shack's Color Computer (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TRS-80_Color_Computer) and Model 100 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TRS-80_Model_100).

-- Ed

Mark Rehorst
06-11-2011, 12:36 AM
:offtopic::offtopic:

I don't know what the hell you guys are talking about, but Mark's photo is SUPER CREEPY. That hand could do some serious tickling.

You can view/DL the full sized image here:
http://mark.rehorst.com/Bug_Photos/fractal_hands_c.jpg

MR

5thWiggle
06-13-2011, 09:03 AM
New version of RFO BASIC! out. V1.11 now supports user defined functions, and has a GrabUrl command which will load the source of a web page into a variable.

Last_of_the_PEs
06-13-2011, 07:00 PM
Does anyone know if you pass variables to functions by reference or explicitly? And if the function can alter the value of any variable or just those being passed? I'm not clear on how tightly this BASIC adheres to structured programming rules.

I wish there was code that used all these features that I could reverse-engineer. I learn best that way. No matter how the documentation is structured, there is invariably a dozen ways to form the syntax and only one works. Seeing it used successfully cuts out all the frustration.

5thWiggle
06-13-2011, 07:11 PM
From the help file on the website:

"More about function parameters and
variables.

All variables within an instantiation
of a function are private to that
instantiation of the function. A
variable in the main program named
v$ is not the same variable v$ within
a function. Furthermore, a variable named
v$ in an recursively called function is
not the same v$ in the calling function."

So vars must be passed by value, not reference and you can only modify vars within the function, and not affect vars in the main program.

Last_of_the_PEs
06-13-2011, 07:28 PM
Awwww. Too bad. Still, that's the difference between functions and procedures. I wonder if a function can return an array?

According to posts on the forum of that BASIC!, the gr.touch functions return a boolean, and coordinates, so they do multi-returns.