The Axe Pages

[meishe91]

Well until I learn some more about Axe all I could do is do edits of what others write (and such) and I could re-list the commands with more descriptions and like a sample syntax maybe, if you want something like that. Hope I can help some other way soon too.

[Quigibo]

I made a template for the user's guide using my own graphics and style.  It looks pretty good I think so far.  I attached a sample of it.

Anyone else want to write an article?

[DJ Omnimaga]

Wow I like the title page. Me thinks that for the on-calc title screen, the logo should probably be similar to the Axe parser text in the pdf. For the rest, I like it too, altough I would maybe reduce the table of content text, page text and the top text size a little bit (ATM it would be pretty great if for example it was for a small instruction booklet, but on the PC, people who print this will most likely print each page so they take one sheet of paper each, meaning the text doesn't really need to be as big to be easy to read.

[meishe91]

That looks really cool.

[Quigibo]

Has anyone used BBC Basic?  I'm doing a comparison between the languages.  What is it usually used for?  Same with xLib/Celtic.  Are they normally targeted for game development or do most people use them for other things.

[DJ Omnimaga]

BBC Basic is mostly aimed toward game dev. It is meant as an alternative to BASIC and ASM that is easier than ASM but faster than BASIC. Certain commands are slower but other stuff is much faster. I never used it much, though, but I know Builderboy did. Here are some games that were alerady made with it: http://www.ticalc.org/pub/83plus/bbcbasic/

It's interpreted, btw. The good things I hear about it are that the language is not too hard to learn and is fast, but that the inline programming editor is a major hassle to use. Basically, you may be best at using the PC editor included, which is more user-friendly, than the on-calc one. I do not think the language is as fast as Axe Parser since BBC Basic is not compiled, but it's still quite fast. It's also finished, IIRC. This review pretty much sums it up. http://www.ticalc.org/archives/files/fileinfo/416/41608.html

For xLIB/Celtic, you can do a lot of stuff you could do in ASM, except much slower. Both are mainly aimed toward game development, but Celtic III can also be used for file management (or even basic shells). Both are ASM libs used to add new functions to BASIC programs.

[Quigibo]

I'll just update everyone on the status of the Axe Pages.

I've finished writing most of the articles.  There are still a lot of gaps, and the tutorial already assumes you know BASIC, but I think I've covered all of the more complicated stuff.  Another thing I won't have time for in this build is the detailed command list.  For now, you'll just have to use the old list.

I'm pretty sure I'm still on track to release tonight.

[SirCmpwn]

the tutorial already assumes you know BASIC

^sounds like you already wrote a tutorial
Would you still like me to write a tutorial/sample program article like you asked before?

[DJ Omnimaga]

I understand. Detailled command list will take a while because most will require examples with static screenshots (for visual people) of before and after running a code example using the command. As long as the current list is included it should be fine. Also I recommend continuing including the current command list even after the large one will be done, for both people who cannot install any PDF viewer and for tl;dr people.

Don't bother about explaining TI-BASIC stuff in details. Just specify in the tutorial that it's recommended that you know how TI-BASIC commands and boolean logic works, and explain the differences (alerady done for the most part in text files, right?). From what I saw in your available commands, it appears that just the TI-83 Plus guidebook would be enough, and anyone who have the 82 or 83 guidebook instead should be quickly familiar with Axe Parser too, since the languages are similar.

[Hot_Dog]

If, in the future, you need to create pdfs for more than just documents, there's some free pdf printers out there...meaning you "print a file" and it is saved to a pdf.  For instance, the one I use is called "Bullzip", and I can't even begin to tell you how reliable it is.

[DJ Omnimaga]

I never heard of that one. I always used OpenOffice PDF converter. However, in some cases, the image locations were altered or there were some missing ones. But again, when I tried it was a MS Word 97 doc opened in OOo 2.x then converted to PDF so it was at risk to screw up.

In the days where I still went to college we used a very reliable program to do this on Mac Os that used a "print to pdf" option but I totally forgot how it's called.

[Quigibo]

the tutorial already assumes you know BASIC

^sounds like you already wrote a tutorial
Would you still like me to write a tutorial/sample program article like you asked before?

I was about to, but I haven't actually yet.  If you think you can finish it soon today, then go ahead, if not, I'll be able to handle it.

[SirCmpwn]

Probably not gonna happen today.  Go for it.

[kalan_vod]

I never heard of that one. I always used OpenOffice PDF converter. However, in some cases, the image locations were altered or there were some missing ones. But again, when I tried it was a MS Word 97 doc opened in OOo 2.x then converted to PDF so it was at risk to screw up.

In the days where I still went to college we used a very reliable program to do this on Mac Os that used a "print to pdf" option but I totally forgot how it's called.

CutePDF does this very well

[DJ Omnimaga]

Thanks ^^

I like PDF format because Adobe Reader, which is free, is easy to find, unlike MS Word viewer (also free but hard to find) and the format is more compatible accross versions. I can open most 2010 PDFs with a 2003 version of Adobe Acrobat Reader. I'll just get warned that some functionalities will be missing. With Word, compatibility is broken every version.

HTML is great too but it's much more tedious to edit