Not necessarily a BASIC programming routine; just a helpful tip.

Sometimes, when I'm working on an on-calculator project which I occasionally "save" by storing the variables to a group, I need to check whether I already saved the current version. For example, I might be working on project "A", but want to switch to project "B", but don't know whether the group containing project "A" is the newest version or the old version from a few days ago. Instead of deleting and regrouping the files, which might be a complete waste of flash memory if the group was the newest version anyway, I found that, assuming the update changed the amount of RAM a variable takes up, the amount of memory a group takes up is equal to the sum of all its constituent (I like this word ) variables, plus the length of the name of the group, plus 9. For example, if project "A" is comprised (I like this word also ) of a program of 2624 bytes, a list of 12 bytes, and a string of 208 bytes, and if group *A takes up 2734 bytes, I'd know that I didn't save the updated variables (since 2624+12+208+1+9≠2734).

:ZStandard
:84→Xmin
:-72→Ymax
:ZInteger
Wow, that is optimized. Thanks.

Thats the window setting i use as well ^^ I find its most useful when mixing window based drawing and screen based drawing.  haha i remember when i used to use the Integer window setting, and i had to do math in order to draw accurately

Me too. And before that, I just left the window in ZStandard and tried to work with the decimals. It was horrible.

EDIT: Especially for a game like checkers.

I made a program that does all of these conversions in the same way and a whole lot more other features that I used for chemistry.  I can show you the source code if you'd like, I never released it.

Sure. How much memory does it take up, just for reference?

Quote from: Deep Thought on May 29, 2010, 02:23:02 am

By the way, does anyone know of a PEMDAS-style evaluator in BASIC? It'd be really helpful for me when I add the operators.

Doesn't the calculator already do this by default?

Yeah, but I wanted to see a BASIC program for the source code.

Good point, though. Probably no one would bother to make another one.

EDIT:
(I know I'm quoting myself here, but I'm too lazy to type it all out.)

Unfortunately, I couldn't figure out division, parentheses, or exponents, so I set it aside and continued with other projects. One day, I really needed to clear some ARC space, so I deleted the group where I had saved it (I called it CALCALCA). I finally started regretting this decision, and will start coding it again, but I really need help with the issues I mentioned above.

Never mind! The operations turned out easier than I thought, or at least easier than it seemed last year.

Thanks for offering your help, though!

UPDATE: Division, exponents, and ²/^-1 all work! If all goes well, I can get the final version of this program at least onto my thumb drive by the end of the school year.

EDIT2: Wow, this is the first time xor has ever been useful to me.

UPDATE2: Now it supports all of the units listed above, with all SI prefixes from yocto to Yotta. Anyone think I'm overdoing this?

This is DEEP THOUGHT'S 42^nd post!

I discovered that when I was editing OTBP Assembler (since my calculator, for some reason, treated the main program as a null variable). After I got it on my calculator, I had to go through the code and change every r<span size=6>1</span>.

And that reminds me: Has anyone notified OTBP about their assembler bug? I tried to post a report, but their website didn't let me register an account, for some reason.

Yes, that is exactly it.

I think my program has all visual tokens with 1 symbol of width we need. AXSYMBZ has all non accessible from TI-OS menus like Catalogue and statistics and ATOKZ2.8xp has all of them.
What do you think about the order of tokens and usage?

The programs were shrunk a few more bytes on my calculator and is all I can reduce. After I receive feedback and write the ignoreme, I mean readme, I will release in ticalc since is one of the best tokens picker and the only with grayscale.
The grayscale I note in the program is that the current selected token is a bit lighter than the other tokens on the screen.
Do you think there is any problem saying it has grayscale? People may bash me with it being flicker and not grayscale. (especially TI-83+ users) I though it is quite funny to say this has grayscale.

That's as close as you can get to TI-BASIC grayscale on my TI-83 Plus. The only time I've seen nearly flickerless BASIC grayscale was when I tried it out with a single pixel turning on and off with nothing else in the loop. Can't find a use for that, though.

Ah, found it:

It's in this post:
http://www.unitedti.org/forum/index.php?showtopic=3586&view=findpost&p=57778
There's a similar image made by Weregoose here:

EDIT: Sorry about the size.
EDIT2: And the horizontal scrollbar. http://www.explosm.net/comics/2030/

Aaaaaagh, everyone's talking about how great Axe is! REALLY want to download it, but I can't ... until Tuesday! Yay!

I still remember the first time I saw the description for Axe on ticalc.org. Back then, I actually thought that it was another library of some sort that no one would ever take the time to download just to play a game slightly better than pure BASIC. Whoops.

A pity. So this means that if we wanted to display, say, the alpha-on cursor, we'd have to draw the pixels individually? I was hoping it'd be easier.