HiSoft Basic v2 on a CT6X?

Discuss CT60/CT63, CTPCI, SuperVidel and EtherNAT hardware here.

Moderators: Mug UK, moondog/.tSCc., [ProToS], lp, Moderator Team

User avatar
FatRakoon
Atari Super Hero
Atari Super Hero
Posts: 895
Joined: Sun Mar 11, 2007 3:27 am
Location: Behind the grassy knoll
Contact:

HiSoft Basic v2 on a CT6X?

Postby FatRakoon » Fri Oct 12, 2007 10:51 pm

When I started to use the Falcon, I found out that mine does not have a CoPro because HBasic v2 comes up with the message :-

This program requires a Maths CoProcessor and a 68020 or higher to run.

Ok fine.

I shoved the CoPro from my TT into the Falcon to try it out and it still said it, so naturally the TT got the CoPro back and I tested HB2 on the TT again, and it ran fine.

I went back to HB2 on the Falcon, and it still says it.

Now, Im using the CT63 and I am still getting the message.

In Falcon mode, the messages are the same as before.
In CT63 mode, if I run the 68030 ( TT ) version of HBasic, it says that I need a CoPro and if I run the 68000 ( ST ) version it crashes with a load of reg dump info.

Is there any way I an get HiSoft Basic to run on my Falcon?

I know it can be done, but Im at a loss.
MSTE @ 16Mhz : 4MB+8MB : Magic & Jinnee
TT030 @ 32Mhz : 10+16MB : Magic & Jinnee
Falcon060 @ 95Mhz : 16+512MB : MiNT & Jinnee
More PCs than PC World has... Probably

joska
Hardware Guru
Hardware Guru
Posts: 3624
Joined: Tue Oct 30, 2007 2:55 pm
Location: Florø, Norway
Contact:

Re: HiSoft Basic v2 on a CT6X?

Postby joska » Tue Oct 30, 2007 7:19 pm

FatRakoon wrote:In Falcon mode, the messages are the same as before.
In CT63 mode, if I run the 68030 ( TT ) version of HBasic, it says that I need a CoPro and if I run the 68000 ( ST ) version it crashes with a load of reg dump info.


I'm not familar with the CT's firmware, but perhaps you need to run a FPU-emulator? On the Milan, Hades and Afterburner you need to run 68882.prg to be able to use any program that depends on a 68882.

Jo Even
Jo Even

Firebee - Falcon060 - Milan060 - Falcon040 - MIST - Mega ST - STM - STE - Amiga 600 - Sharp MZ700 - MSX - Amstrad CPC - C64

User avatar
FatRakoon
Atari Super Hero
Atari Super Hero
Posts: 895
Joined: Sun Mar 11, 2007 3:27 am
Location: Behind the grassy knoll
Contact:

Postby FatRakoon » Tue Oct 30, 2007 7:53 pm

Ok...

Erm, no, I dont run anything of the sort???

I will have a look for such a thing, to my knowledge I do not have?

Any chance you can EMail me a copy of yours, or perhaps provide a link, just in case I cannot find it myself?

Thanks.
MSTE @ 16Mhz : 4MB+8MB : Magic & Jinnee
TT030 @ 32Mhz : 10+16MB : Magic & Jinnee
Falcon060 @ 95Mhz : 16+512MB : MiNT & Jinnee
More PCs than PC World has... Probably

joska
Hardware Guru
Hardware Guru
Posts: 3624
Joined: Tue Oct 30, 2007 2:55 pm
Location: Florø, Norway
Contact:

Postby joska » Wed Oct 31, 2007 8:51 am

FatRakoon wrote:I will have a look for such a thing, to my knowledge I do not have?


I had a look at the CT60-specs at Rodolphe's web page now, and it looks like this emulator is already on your CT's flash. So you don't need to run a separate program.

Jo Even
Jo Even

Firebee - Falcon060 - Milan060 - Falcon040 - MIST - Mega ST - STM - STE - Amiga 600 - Sharp MZ700 - MSX - Amstrad CPC - C64

joska
Hardware Guru
Hardware Guru
Posts: 3624
Joined: Tue Oct 30, 2007 2:55 pm
Location: Florø, Norway
Contact:

Postby joska » Wed Oct 31, 2007 8:55 am

joska wrote:
FatRakoon wrote:I had a look at the CT60-specs at Rodolphe's web page now, and it looks like this emulator is already on your CT's flash. So you don't need to run a separate program.


Btw the problem might be HiSoft Basic itself and the way it checks for a FPU. If you want you can mail me the necessary files to start HiSoft Basic and I could take a look at it in a disassembler.
Jo Even

Firebee - Falcon060 - Milan060 - Falcon040 - MIST - Mega ST - STM - STE - Amiga 600 - Sharp MZ700 - MSX - Amstrad CPC - C64

User avatar
FatRakoon
Atari Super Hero
Atari Super Hero
Posts: 895
Joined: Sun Mar 11, 2007 3:27 am
Location: Behind the grassy knoll
Contact:

Postby FatRakoon » Wed Oct 31, 2007 2:47 pm

I uploaded this ...

Should be all of HBasic v2.10 without any of my own projects.

http://www.fatrakoon.co.uk/hb2.zip

Its 903K ok?
MSTE @ 16Mhz : 4MB+8MB : Magic & Jinnee
TT030 @ 32Mhz : 10+16MB : Magic & Jinnee
Falcon060 @ 95Mhz : 16+512MB : MiNT & Jinnee
More PCs than PC World has... Probably

joska
Hardware Guru
Hardware Guru
Posts: 3624
Joined: Tue Oct 30, 2007 2:55 pm
Location: Florø, Norway
Contact:

Postby joska » Thu Nov 01, 2007 11:23 am

FatRakoon wrote:I uploaded this ...

Should be all of HBasic v2.10 without any of my own projects.


I tested it on my Aranym-setup last night, and it crashed Aranym itself when I tried to compile print "Hello world"... That's a first, I've never been able to crash Aranym before. Quite difficult to debug when it crash the "hardware"!

I did not test it on my Milan as it's not on-line yet, but hopefully it will be connected to the world sometime next week.

Btw. the editor was pretty nasty, it overwrote open menus with it's fake info line. I would suspect that this would not happen with MagiC, as MagiC doesn't have non-blocking menus like XaAES.
Jo Even

Firebee - Falcon060 - Milan060 - Falcon040 - MIST - Mega ST - STM - STE - Amiga 600 - Sharp MZ700 - MSX - Amstrad CPC - C64

User avatar
FatRakoon
Atari Super Hero
Atari Super Hero
Posts: 895
Joined: Sun Mar 11, 2007 3:27 am
Location: Behind the grassy knoll
Contact:

Postby FatRakoon » Thu Nov 01, 2007 12:07 pm

Interesting!

HBasics "Special" info line is certainly one of those hacks to display more useless junk for sure, but...

I have never had any issues with HBasic myself, on either my STs or my TTs no matter what O/S ( MiNT, Magic, MTOS, Geneva, or TOS ) and the only time I have ever had any issues at all... Has been on the Falcon.

This is why I cannot understand or rather perhaps could not understand, why so many people hate it? Its been flawless for me on everything I have used with it.

More recently, its just been a complete bugger, and thats only on the Falcon under 030 or 060.

I have gone back to the TT ( Running Magic 6.2 & Jinnee 2.5) to play about and its fine again.

FWIW, I used to use GEMulator as my Atari EMU ( ST only though ) and it ran HB2 just fine.
MSTE @ 16Mhz : 4MB+8MB : Magic & Jinnee
TT030 @ 32Mhz : 10+16MB : Magic & Jinnee
Falcon060 @ 95Mhz : 16+512MB : MiNT & Jinnee
More PCs than PC World has... Probably

joska
Hardware Guru
Hardware Guru
Posts: 3624
Joined: Tue Oct 30, 2007 2:55 pm
Location: Florø, Norway
Contact:

Postby joska » Thu Nov 01, 2007 2:10 pm

FatRakoon wrote:I have never had any issues with HBasic myself, on either my STs or my TTs no matter what O/S ( MiNT, Magic, MTOS, Geneva, or TOS ) and the only time I have ever had any issues at all... Has been on the Falcon.


...and there are apparently compatibility problems with either Aranym or the current FreeMiNT/XaAES. But as this problem sounds similar to the one you describe, it looks like the problem is Falcon specific as Aranym emulates a Falcon to a certain degree.

FatRakoon wrote:This is why I cannot understand or rather perhaps could not understand, why so many people hate it? Its been flawless for me on everything I have used with it.


I don't hate it, in fact I've been curious about it for several years. The reason is the neat AES/GEM-libraries that's available for it, and the fact that the combination of a "modern" BASIC and a good, high-level AES-library makes it easy to write simple applications really fast.

I did not try to run just the compiler. It that works (and if HB2 actually has a separate compiler) then it would be possible to use qed, Interface and Chatwin to get a modern IDE for HiSoft BASIC.

I will set up my TT some time during the next few weeks, when it's up and running again (it has a broken PSU and a broken keyboard which must be replaced) I will certainly give HB2 a second chance.
Jo Even

Firebee - Falcon060 - Milan060 - Falcon040 - MIST - Mega ST - STM - STE - Amiga 600 - Sharp MZ700 - MSX - Amstrad CPC - C64

User avatar
FatRakoon
Atari Super Hero
Atari Super Hero
Posts: 895
Joined: Sun Mar 11, 2007 3:27 am
Location: Behind the grassy knoll
Contact:

Postby FatRakoon » Thu Nov 01, 2007 2:47 pm

Yes, HB an give very quick results

I started Atari programming on STOS. Even though I had FirST Basic with my ST, I just didnt like it at all.

Sure, I knew Pascal, Cobol, and Assembly, but, coming from the Commodore 8 Bits, I still needed line numbers with Basic. I was simply not able to comprehend structured code in Basic... It just wasnt how Basic was???

I was ok in Assembly, Pasal etc and using structures, but Basic had line numbers or it wasnt basic... So, STOS was the way forward.

I only moved to First Basic because I wanted to try GEM Programming.

PowerBasic was the natural progression from there due to Price of HBasic and I only needed to compile my FB code, which at the time was very basic indeed.

STReview gave away HB1 and the jump from FB to PB was good. The jump from PB to HB1 was huge... and by the time I chewed my way through HB1, I knew a lot abotu 68K assembly and I had to write my own libraries to make HB faster, and now, with the libraries I have written, some of the apps I was working on before my accident were actualyl starting to show just how you can write fast stuff in Basic... It was faster than some of my C code ( Which is bad at best Ill admit ) but thats because it called so much on the custom libraries I had written.

Hey, hang on sorry...Im going on arent I?

Ok, yeah, HB stand along compiler? - I will have a look at whether that will do its job or not, and have another look.

I have tried the new GFA and its just not at all what I would consider any cop at all... I dont want to use it and I suppose this is a big factor for me... Its such a shame that I find HBasic so much vastly superior that I would rather do without than to suffer GFA Basic... Thats really sad, but thats just how it is Im afraid.
MSTE @ 16Mhz : 4MB+8MB : Magic & Jinnee
TT030 @ 32Mhz : 10+16MB : Magic & Jinnee
Falcon060 @ 95Mhz : 16+512MB : MiNT & Jinnee
More PCs than PC World has... Probably

User avatar
simonsunnyboy
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 4848
Joined: Wed Oct 23, 2002 4:36 pm
Location: Friedrichshafen, Germany
Contact:

Postby simonsunnyboy » Thu Nov 01, 2007 3:31 pm

Being ok with PASCAL actually contradicts a distaste of GFABASIC. GFABASIC is like PASCAL just leaving its strict typing, unneeded BEGIN...END and sucky forward declaration out.
Simon Sunnyboy/Paradize - http://paradize.atari.org/ - STOT: http://www.npoi.de/stot/

Stay cool, stay Atari!

1x2600jr, 1x1040STFm, 1x1040STE 4MB+TOS2.06+SatanDisk, 1xF030 14MB+FPU+NetUS-Bee

Jabber: simonsunnyboy@atari-jabber.org

User avatar
FatRakoon
Atari Super Hero
Atari Super Hero
Posts: 895
Joined: Sun Mar 11, 2007 3:27 am
Location: Behind the grassy knoll
Contact:

Postby FatRakoon » Thu Nov 01, 2007 3:53 pm

HeHe... Yeah, I know.

But I was also referring to the whole LINE-NUMBERS thing rather than GFA v HB in that post... Structured code exists in every language except BASIC, and I am happy with that, but to try to write code in BASIC and not use line numbers was an Alien concept to me.

Hence the need to go with STOS first.

We are talking about 15 or so years ago now though...
MSTE @ 16Mhz : 4MB+8MB : Magic & Jinnee
TT030 @ 32Mhz : 10+16MB : Magic & Jinnee
Falcon060 @ 95Mhz : 16+512MB : MiNT & Jinnee
More PCs than PC World has... Probably

User avatar
lp
Fuji Shaped Bastard
Fuji Shaped Bastard
Posts: 2251
Joined: Wed Nov 12, 2003 11:09 pm
Location: GFA Headquarters
Contact:

Postby lp » Sun Nov 25, 2007 8:27 am

FatRakoon wrote:I have tried the new GFA and its just not at all what I would consider any cop at all... I dont want to use it and I suppose this is a big factor for me... Its such a shame that I find HBasic so much vastly superior that I would rather do without than to suffer GFA Basic... Thats really sad, but thats just how it is Im afraid.


This is the 2nd post of this nature as you said something similar over at atari.org forum. Can you explain in detail why you feel HB is superior? Since my GFA editor is still in development, and not abandon ware I'm all ears when it comes to ideas. Adding features or changing features is not out of the question, since I do have the source code and I am the developer. :D

User avatar
FatRakoon
Atari Super Hero
Atari Super Hero
Posts: 895
Joined: Sun Mar 11, 2007 3:27 am
Location: Behind the grassy knoll
Contact:

Postby FatRakoon » Sun Nov 25, 2007 11:56 am

Hiya mate.

Ok, seriously, the main thing is the syntax.

Its got to be really down to that first and foremost.

I would have said tha screen layout, but since having a try of the new GFA IDE, I have found it to be a million times better than previously, so thats as well as good.

The syntax mate... No matter what you do there, without fully re-coding it, its not going to be like HB.

I also managed to write a ridiculous number of LIBraries for HB2 too, and these gave HB some serious power with a whole host of useful ( and even more not so usefull ) extra commands. Little thigns like this made HB for me, where GFA seemed to lack ( Or rather I never got into GFA enough to let me find out about it )

GFA Speed is superior to HBasic, I dont know anyone who can argue that one out, so I wont here either. I do like the GFA Speed and wish HB was somewhere close.

If its any use mate, I have robbed a copy of GFA and I have had a few plays and its a million times better than it ever was that I remember, but I grew up with HBasic, so its only really my own issues now. There is nothign wrong with GFA... This many users agaisnt HB and for GFA speaks volumes on that one, its just me.

I suppose I really need soem source code to look at perhaps... I have none to speak of, and so, I cannot see how others code, and if I could have some source code, I suppose Id be half way home perhaps?

Where can I get some?

I dont want anythign massive, just a few simple examples...

Oh wait... There is some stuff from my old GFA Packages IIRC?
MSTE @ 16Mhz : 4MB+8MB : Magic & Jinnee
TT030 @ 32Mhz : 10+16MB : Magic & Jinnee
Falcon060 @ 95Mhz : 16+512MB : MiNT & Jinnee
More PCs than PC World has... Probably

User avatar
PaulB
Fuji Shaped Bastard
Fuji Shaped Bastard
Posts: 2168
Joined: Tue Jun 11, 2002 10:56 pm
Location: You Kay

Postby PaulB » Sun Nov 25, 2007 12:59 pm

Well with Basic there's a lot of different flavours. Hisoft Basic, GFA, STOS, Fast, Omikron etc. and I could go on with the more lesser known variants. I think it's a question of which Basic you started with in the first place. For instance I just cannot get along with STOS with it's line numbers, the ability to jump out of a loop with a GOTO command which is insane to me.

I started with Power Basic, the lighter (and cheaper) version of Hisoft Basic and then bought GFA Basic 3.0 which I found did most of what I wanted. I put the reason for hating STOS so much down to the fact that I started out with versions of Basic that forced you to program correctly in a structured manner. When GFA 3.5 came out I switched completely to GFA as I loved the folding procedures and functions not to mention indented code that made it so much more readable.

On a side note. As I was still on pocket money at the time I never aquired the full version of Hisoft Basic until it was released on a cover disc lol.

User avatar
FatRakoon
Atari Super Hero
Atari Super Hero
Posts: 895
Joined: Sun Mar 11, 2007 3:27 am
Location: Behind the grassy knoll
Contact:

Postby FatRakoon » Sun Nov 25, 2007 2:21 pm

OH MY GOD!!!

I just wrote a massive reply, but I clocked on close????

FFS!

Anyway, the basic I started with, came out long before the Atari was even on the scene. When I got my first Atari, it came with STOS which I kind of liked and I got into that, but then I evolved towards First Basic, then Power Basic and then HiSoft Basic 1 then 2... The F,P,H progression was only natural.

I stuck with HBasic mainly because of the massive ammount of Library coding I had done with DevPac 2 then 3.

I tried so much to use GFABasic v2 and then of course v3 but by thie time, I had been using a TT and it was not until v3.6 ( Forgive me on this, but Im not a GFA user as I say ) that GFA was able to run on the 030?

I just never got into GFA having been stuck on HB for too long.

I am perfectly fine with using or not using Line numbers. That does not bother me at all, however, at teh time, I did find the ide aof BASIC withotu Line numbers a little weird... Assembly / MC ? - yeah yeah, C? - Great, Pascal? - Fine, Cobol? - No poblem, Basic? - Oh, thats got line numbers hasnt it?

But, that soon went away.

FB, PB, HB you can use line numbers if you really had to and when I moved to FB for the first time, I did start using them to help me into it, but I soon did what I normally do with other languages and used labels instead.

Indenting code.

Yes, this is somethign I have done for a very long time... Even with the very old 8 bits like the Commodore 16 / 64 etc, I would use COLONS in Basic code... Some line numbers etc had a colon only to seperate the routines..

10 Print "WHAT"
20 :
25 REM The high end coding bit
30 : Print "What again and I will slap you"
40 : FOR L=1 to 10
50 : : Print "WHAT"
60 : NEXT L
70 :
80 PRINT "That does it"

And so on... This is what I had to do, just to have some kind of resemblance of structured code.

But, it was the best I could do at the time, and its vital for clean code.

Although that example is not a good advert for the words "CLEAN" and "CODE" but there you are.
MSTE @ 16Mhz : 4MB+8MB : Magic & Jinnee
TT030 @ 32Mhz : 10+16MB : Magic & Jinnee
Falcon060 @ 95Mhz : 16+512MB : MiNT & Jinnee
More PCs than PC World has... Probably

User avatar
lp
Fuji Shaped Bastard
Fuji Shaped Bastard
Posts: 2251
Joined: Wed Nov 12, 2003 11:09 pm
Location: GFA Headquarters
Contact:

Postby lp » Sun Nov 25, 2007 6:56 pm

>---####----
The syntax mate... No matter what you do there, without fully re-coding it, its not going to be like HB.

I also managed to write a ridiculous number of LIBraries for HB2 too, and these gave HB some serious power with a whole host of useful ( and even more not so usefull ) extra commands. Little thigns like this made HB for me, where GFA seemed to lack ( Or rather I never got into GFA enough to let me find out about it )
>---####----

GBE still offers interpreted mode to, hands down faster. No question there.

Ok, so this is more of a matter of years of using the same thing and not wanting to change. You have built up a large pile of HB code. I can understand that, I would not want to port all my stuff either. But I don't think that situation warrants the wording 'superior'. lol It's just not what you are used to. Trust me, GFA is capable but you would be faced with a lot of work since portions of the HB libraries are really just HB code. Those would need to be ported as well.

From what I can tell looking at the HB installation, since I do not have a proper manual, is that HB provided some commands that GFA might not have thru libraries or such. But what I discovered is these are not really commands, but pre-written HB listings. All of which could be ported if one really wanted to. Looking at the base command set, the actual commands in the languages, they are quite equal. Although HB lacks the INLINE command.

I've tried HB a few times, even recently. Have to say the only feature I like is INCLUDE. Which I have added to my editor as the current beta has INCLUDE now along with a host of new meta commands and conditional compiling options.

The PROC/FUNC folding simply rocks. Once you get used to this, it's a must have feature. I've even improved it. The original editor would only fold a sub routine if the cursor was on the first line of the PROC. My editor lets you fold subroutines regardless of where the cursor is.

Some gfa code can be found here:
http://www.bright.net/~gfabasic/html/download.htm#code

User avatar
lp
Fuji Shaped Bastard
Fuji Shaped Bastard
Posts: 2251
Joined: Wed Nov 12, 2003 11:09 pm
Location: GFA Headquarters
Contact:

Postby lp » Sun Nov 25, 2007 7:07 pm

>---####---
I stuck with HBasic mainly because of the massive ammount of Library coding I had done with DevPac 2 then 3.
>----###----

Oh, your libraries are asm, ah. Well I'm not saying you should move to GFA, but that does help to clarify your situation somewhat. Just so the readers know, GFA can call asm in several ways.

1) INLINE command, so long as it's PC relative code
2) Tell devpac to spit out an object file (*.o), then link it directly
3) Use the old DATA statement technique
4) I've seen asm stored in strings
5) build a prg, then pexec() like an overlay
6) other methods? could be, lol

#2 is my personal favorite, which is how I usually do it, as I also use Devpac v3.


Social Media

     

Return to “CT60 / CT63 Area”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron