Author Topic: [grammer] Problem with trigonometry  (Read 6171 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Hayleia

  • Programming Absol
  • Coder Of Tomorrow
  • LV12 Extreme Poster (Next: 5000)
  • ************
  • Posts: 3367
  • Rating: +393/-7
    • View Profile
Re: [grammer] Problem with trigonometry
« Reply #15 on: May 13, 2013, 01:18:16 pm »
Yeah, and ASM kills every other language, I already heard that song somewhere (also, not even since it has to have its own routines included in the prog, maybe more optimized than in Axe but still there).

There is not a language that is better than the others, there are advantages everywhere, but also drawbacks everywhere. Axe needs nothing to run but is "big". Grammer is "small" but needs the app to run. Basic is fast to write but slow to execute.
etc.

EDIT: And to clarify, the purpose of Axe Fusion was to result in smaller compiled programs. It was not intended to increase either compiling or execution speed.
Ah ? I thought it was about compiling speed. Yeah, can be useful too to have smaller progs if you have a lot of projects.
I own: 83+ ; 84+SE ; 76.fr ; CX CAS ; Prizm ; 84+CSE
Sorry if I answer with something that seems unrelated, English is not my primary language and I might not have understood well. Sorry if I make English mistakes too.

click here to know where you got your last +1s

Offline mdr1

  • LV6 Super Member (Next: 500)
  • ******
  • Posts: 303
  • Rating: +21/-2
    • View Profile
Re: [grammer] Problem with trigonometry
« Reply #16 on: May 13, 2013, 01:20:09 pm »
Of course, since they are plain text that gets interpreted. Just try to compile a Grammer program in the ASM resulting of its interpretation and then we'll can talk.
Did you only read this post ? https://tiplanet.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=11837&start=10#p140313

Quote
Bien sûr que si que ça sert de comparer, on présente souvent la page d'application Grammer nécessaire pour exécuter des programmes Grammer comme un inconvénient, il est donc juste de montrer que les programmes sont d'un autre côté bien plus légers et qu'avec pas mal de programmes, la balance penche bien vite du bon côté.



Offline Matrefeytontias

  • Axe roxxor (kinda)
  • LV10 31337 u53r (Next: 2000)
  • **********
  • Posts: 1982
  • Rating: +310/-12
  • Axe roxxor
    • View Profile
    • RMV Pixel Engineers
Re: [grammer] Problem with trigonometry
« Reply #17 on: May 13, 2013, 01:20:48 pm »
EDIT: And to clarify, the purpose of Axe Fusion was to result in smaller compiled programs. It was not intended to increase either compiling or execution speed.
Ah ? I thought it was about compiling speed. Yeah, can be useful too to have smaller progs if you have a lot of projects.

Yeah, programs compiles within the same time, but there aren't several hundreds of bytes that gets suddenly added when you reach 100% of the first pass.
« Last Edit: May 13, 2013, 01:22:01 pm by Matrefeytontias »

Offline Hayleia

  • Programming Absol
  • Coder Of Tomorrow
  • LV12 Extreme Poster (Next: 5000)
  • ************
  • Posts: 3367
  • Rating: +393/-7
    • View Profile
Re: [grammer] Problem with trigonometry
« Reply #18 on: May 13, 2013, 01:27:50 pm »
Of course, since they are plain text that gets interpreted. Just try to compile a Grammer program in the ASM resulting of its interpretation and then we'll can talk.
Did you only read this post ? https://tiplanet.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=11837&start=10#p140313

Quote
Bien sûr que si que ça sert de comparer, on présente souvent la page d'application Grammer nécessaire pour exécuter des programmes Grammer comme un inconvénient, il est donc juste de montrer que les programmes sont d'un autre côté bien plus légers et qu'avec pas mal de programmes, la balance penche bien vite du bon côté.
Yeah, so everyone codes in Basic, that is the language that saves the most space. You don't even need an external app to start saving space, the OS runs them natively.
I own: 83+ ; 84+SE ; 76.fr ; CX CAS ; Prizm ; 84+CSE
Sorry if I answer with something that seems unrelated, English is not my primary language and I might not have understood well. Sorry if I make English mistakes too.

click here to know where you got your last +1s

Offline mdr1

  • LV6 Super Member (Next: 500)
  • ******
  • Posts: 303
  • Rating: +21/-2
    • View Profile
Re: [grammer] Problem with trigonometry
« Reply #19 on: May 13, 2013, 01:31:16 pm »
Yeah, so everyone codes in Basic, that is the language that saves the most space. You don't even need an external app to start saving space, the OS runs them natively.
You're twice wrong : Grammer's programs are faster AND more light than TI-Basic's ones.



Offline Xeda112358

  • they/them
  • Moderator
  • LV12 Extreme Poster (Next: 5000)
  • ************
  • Posts: 4607
  • Rating: +716/-6
  • Calc-u-lator, do doo doo do do do.
    • View Profile
Re: [grammer] Problem with trigonometry
« Reply #20 on: May 13, 2013, 01:34:36 pm »
Overall, the one thing I like best about Grammer is that you can make programs as quickly as you can in BASIC. If you test the program and you need to change something, just press ON to break the program, edit the code, and run it again-- no need to compile the source. It is also why I like programming in hexadecimal. It is often more efficient for how quickly you can program something.

However, if you need something to be really fast, I would go with Axe since it is highly efficient and a lot faster to code in than Assembly (if you are used to Axe).

Offline Hayleia

  • Programming Absol
  • Coder Of Tomorrow
  • LV12 Extreme Poster (Next: 5000)
  • ************
  • Posts: 3367
  • Rating: +393/-7
    • View Profile
Re: [grammer] Problem with trigonometry
« Reply #21 on: May 13, 2013, 01:41:51 pm »
Overall, the one thing I like best about Grammer is that you can make programs as quickly as you can in BASIC. If you test the program and you need to change something, just press ON to break the program, edit the code, and run it again-- no need to compile the source. It is also why I like programming in hexadecimal. It is often more efficient for how quickly you can program something.

However, if you need something to be really fast, I would go with Axe since it is highly efficient and a lot faster to code in than Assembly (if you are used to Axe).
Yeah, I know all of that, and I have nothing against Grammer (also, if Grammer gets ported on the CSE before Axe, I'll use it instead ;)), I was just telling mdr1 that his arguments were not good.
I own: 83+ ; 84+SE ; 76.fr ; CX CAS ; Prizm ; 84+CSE
Sorry if I answer with something that seems unrelated, English is not my primary language and I might not have understood well. Sorry if I make English mistakes too.

click here to know where you got your last +1s

Offline mdr1

  • LV6 Super Member (Next: 500)
  • ******
  • Posts: 303
  • Rating: +21/-2
    • View Profile
Re: [grammer] Problem with trigonometry
« Reply #22 on: May 13, 2013, 01:57:38 pm »
Yeah, I know all of that, and I have nothing against Grammer (also, if Grammer gets ported on the CSE before Axe, I'll use it instead ;)), I was just telling mdr1 that his arguments were not good.
Well, if you could answer to my last post, it would be really great ! ;)
My arguments are that Grammer's programs are really light, enough to make profitable the 16,384 bytes used by the application when we begin having enough programs, and that Axe's programs are faster. Which is wrong ?



Offline Hayleia

  • Programming Absol
  • Coder Of Tomorrow
  • LV12 Extreme Poster (Next: 5000)
  • ************
  • Posts: 3367
  • Rating: +393/-7
    • View Profile
Re: [grammer] Problem with trigonometry
« Reply #23 on: May 13, 2013, 02:01:06 pm »
None of those assumptions are false. But the first one doesn't apply since Grammer programs are not in a high number (don't know why btw, Grammer has as much potential as Axe, maybe just because it came after Axe).
I own: 83+ ; 84+SE ; 76.fr ; CX CAS ; Prizm ; 84+CSE
Sorry if I answer with something that seems unrelated, English is not my primary language and I might not have understood well. Sorry if I make English mistakes too.

click here to know where you got your last +1s

Offline mdr1

  • LV6 Super Member (Next: 500)
  • ******
  • Posts: 303
  • Rating: +21/-2
    • View Profile
Re: [grammer] Problem with trigonometry
« Reply #24 on: May 13, 2013, 02:03:53 pm »
None of those assumptions are false. But the first one doesn't apply since Grammer programs are not in a high number (don't know why btw, Grammer has as much potential as Axe, maybe just because it came after Axe).
Of course. And this is a point to improve Grammer's programs number. It's like libraries : an enough number of programs is required to make it usefull for memory space.



Offline DJ Omnimaga

  • Now active at https://codewalr.us
  • CoT Emeritus
  • LV15 Omnimagician (Next: --)
  • *
  • Posts: 55821
  • Rating: +3151/-232
  • CodeWalrus founder & retired Omnimaga founder
    • View Profile
    • DJ Omnimaga Music
Re: [grammer] Problem with trigonometry
« Reply #25 on: May 13, 2013, 07:46:12 pm »
BASIC programs are smaller than Axe, but the data they use is horribly massive. This is why in many cases a BASIC game will end up way larger than its ASM counterpart.
In case you are wondering where I went, I left Omni back in 2015 to form CodeWalrus due to various reasons explained back then, but I stopped calc dev in 2016 and am now mostly active on the CW Discord server at https://discord.gg/cuZcfcF


Bandcamp|Reverbnation|Facebook|Youtube|Twitter

Offline Xeda112358

  • they/them
  • Moderator
  • LV12 Extreme Poster (Next: 5000)
  • ************
  • Posts: 4607
  • Rating: +716/-6
  • Calc-u-lator, do doo doo do do do.
    • View Profile
Re: [grammer] Problem with trigonometry
« Reply #26 on: May 13, 2013, 09:06:37 pm »
BASIC programs are smaller than Axe, but the data they use is horribly massive. This is why in many cases a BASIC game will end up way larger than its ASM counterpart.
Yes ^ I wish we had a way to make a parser hook that could read archived variables and compress variables to other formats. For example, if you have a list of only integers 0 to 255, it could cut the list size to 1/9.