From: olsone@aix02.ecs.rpi.edu (Erik G. Olson)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ti
Subject: TI developing: what's up, what's in, what's out there?
Summary: Tools are neat. MDOS is exciting.
Date: 21 Aug 92 03:01:10 GMT
Organization: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy NY

Recently something changed overnight. It was just one of those
status things: "we" bought MDOS. Products will be made later...

What I'm wondering about tonight is just that: making products.
My favorite way to write a program is to pull out Funnelweb 3.5 and
chug away at my assembler source code (sans comments-- it takes
up less disk space and cuts those loading times.) NOT. 

So what tools exist for developers today?

Somebody once expressed the idea that the Geneve would be a platform
from which to more easily write 4A programs. Has anything come of this?
Surely it is a better platform to base tools on. I think Paul Charlton's
GenProg is the overwhelming example in that category.

Those who have 80-column cards and other capabilities in common with
the 9640 are a potential market for a package written for the Geneve 
but which also scales down a little. (I daresay a larger market; there are
800 registered Geneve owners--  so I heard from Beery Miller-- and
at least a few hundred 80-column cards of various kinds, although I
can't even begin to know for sure how many.)

But never mind the flashy user hardware platforms. I'm interested in 
the flashy developer platforms. There was Al Beard's 99ASM, which 
ran on a PC to assemble 9900 source into loadable object code. I
thought that was a pretty neat accomplishment. I'm still holding
out for some kind of compiler that can put out TI executables from
another platform. 

I hear there is a full-C compiler now that runs on a TI. A lot of
programs came out as a result of Clint Pulley's "small-c" c99. Full C is
desirable among, well, programmers, because in these days when we can
be wooed to other platforms we take some features as the bare necessities.
(Where do you think Charles Earl went? Actually, I hear he was a PC 
consultant long before he got a TI.) Having a full-C compiler over 
something less (say, plain old assembly; actually, GenAsm macros make it 
rather delightful) means the difference between a fun programming project 
and a chore that isn't so viable. Or maybe those people (like, Barry 
Boone) who have put out products recently don't let that get to them. 
If I may pretend you are reading this, Barry, am I right in suspecting 
that you made SoundFX rather than some more useful product because it was 
a heck of a lot of fun to just do it? I don't believe people can write 
programs just because people "need their brains." What's in it for me?
(What do you think was on Paul Charlton's mind when Lou Philips wanted 
his brain?) 

Anyway, enough of my ramblings. What can you buy these days? Has anyone
taken a shot at the integrated source editor/compiler environment?
The kind that compiles without unloading your source and pops you back to
edit specific lines with errors? (A modest sketch.) I could dream on..
Maybe one of those is doable with a cross-platform arrangement, where
the PC or whatever uploads the object code to the TI, and assists in a
debugging role too. 

OK, no more ramblings.. Someone tell me what you prefer, or what's out 
there: editors, languages, debugging tools, that kind of thing.

P.S. I really do prefer Funnelweb 3.5 over 4.1. (Why do you think I
still own a TI?)
-- 
Erik G. Olson          =+ There was Virtue in the world before there was
olsone@rpi.edu         =+ Orthodoxy in it.
                       =+ --The Independent Whig (as quoted by John Adams)