Post your ideas for new miscellaneous programs here, or build on ideas posted by other visitors.

Well i recently started a forum on 83(+) programming(asm and basic) and im looking for members. I a also looking for programmers who want to join me in creating programs for the 83 and the 83+. just click on the website button and sign up...

Has anyone ever thought of porting one of the emulators to a PDA platform? There is a readily available emulator of the HP48/49 available for Palm OS, but I can't seem to find any graphing calculator emulators for PocketPC or based on TI calculators. I would just like this capability in my PDA, because I often have it when I don't have my TI-92+.

Look in the news archives...I think there's a pretty recent one about an '89 emulator for PocketPC.

I just got my ti89; I decided to test the program editor with my 3D wireframe algorithm and here's what I found out:

IT IS INCREDIIBLY SLOW!! Basic programs run a million times faster on my TI83+! I don't understand why it should be slower on a better processor.

I was also dissapointed to discover:
-You CANNOT call one program from another
-You CANNOT use functions to do anything other than dataprocessing, therefore, you cannot create any subroutines/modules for your programs like it makes it sound
-There is NO WAY to load the value of a variable into another; it just makes the variable an expression!

Does anybody know any ways around any of this stuff, or are there better alternatives? I am going to give TIGCC a try..That better not dissapoint me; it IS in C!

So I guess I am stuck making slow TI83+ Basic programs, or using assembly to do things without datastructures and stuff...When I finish designing my OOP compiler for z80 calcs, then I will be able to do some crazy stuff in a high-level format/environment!

Man, even '86 basic is better than that... Maybe on the '89 there's more processing needed for interpretization (whatever) because the language is more complex-there are more commands, more variations in syntax, etc.

If you want a high-level language for the '83+, use z88dk.

It's funny how often I hear this kind of thing from die-hard 83 users. All the things you complain about can be done (except for the function thing, I was mad about that too). The thing is that the 89 works in a totally different mannor that most people I know will pass the 89 by just because it looks exceptionally complicated.

As for the problems:
Too Slow: I know about this too. I think (but am not certain) that the problem here is that the "silent link" feature takes a lot of processor time. If you plan on using TIGCC anyway, make a routine that does the same as a TIOS function without link-checking, and you'll see what I mean.

Program from Program: I really don't know what your problem is here. Maybe you were trying something like "prgmRUNTHIS". Just type the name of the program with () behind it.

Value: If you want the decimal equivalent of an expression to be stored in a variable, try this:
approx(VAR1) ->VAR2

Hope this helps!

<Vx>

I see this all the time in new 68k programmers.

Calling one program from another:
Not prgmPRGM1, but prgm1()

Subroutines aren't functions, they're programs.

Copying a variable:
CopyVar var1,var2

For more information, refer to Appendix A of the TI-89/Voyage 200 PLT manual, found online at the link.

If you need more programming help, refer to chapter 17 of the manual.

BASIC programs run faster on the 83+ because you know 83+ BASIC and not 89/V200 BASIC. Work hard on optimization. Sometimes, also, they take a while to convert to hex on the first execution; run it a second or third time and they'll work better. Plus, they have an improved interface and more commands.

TIGCC will give you some problems initially; however; they can be worked through <hint> ignore the online tutorials-they tell you to declare void _main(void); instead of double _main () </hint>

Does the TI92+ have more advantages over the TI89 than just the format it is setup in? Are all Basic programs for the MC68000 calcs slower & worse than those of the z80 calcs?? (I can't even change the graph style on my TI89 from a Basic program!)

NOT CHANGE THE GRAPH STYLE!!!!!????? I'M GLAD I HAVE AN '86, NOT AN '89...

TO change a graph style:
setMode( "Graph", x)

Where x can be:
"Function"
"Parametric"
"Polar"
"Sequence"
"3D"
"Diff Equations"

Like I said before, It's not really hard, just different. If you want to do something, start flipping throught the appendix A of the manual! You'll eventually find the function you're looking for.

<Vx>

Thanks for clearing it up! So the 89 really is much better than the 83+ (well, almost anything is...).

I'm writing a program, and I need to pass in a function to a program,such as x^2 - 5x + 3, and then evaluate it for any x. However, when ever I try to do this it doesn't work. Is there a way for me to do this?

Well, that really depends on what platform you are programming for. If you are refering to a z80 calc, there is already something like that built in.
it is under: "MATH: EQUATION SOLVER"

Otherwise, take it as a string, do a lot of substring checks, and use a stack (this would be a VERY slow and complex basic program; I would not recommend doing this in z80 basic)

shkaboinka's right-you can already do the variable evaluation on some calcs. HOWEVER, if that was just an example, there's no way (at least except for the on 68k calcs) to pass numbers the way you may be used to from VB or C++, BUT you can store the arguments to vars, then run the subprog, have it operate on those vars, store the result to another var, and then in the prog it was called from, you can display that var, operate on it, etc.

I'm not sure if this is what you are saying, but what im doing now is this: At the homescreen, do something like define F(x)=X^3-2X-1. Then, in my program, i just call f(x) to evaluate it. However, this is kind of annoying and i want to be able to put in the function in the program

Anything you can do from the homescreen, you can do from a program. Just enter it on a new line. The method you were talking about isn't quite what I meant, but it works too. Here's what I was talking about:

MAIN:

ClLCD
Prompt X
SUB
Disp Y
Return

SUB:

X^3-2X-1 -> Y
Return

I know that i can do that, but i want to be able to prompt for the function, not the x value. Heres an example. Lets say i have a program and it looks like this.

evaluate(x , y)
prgm
define f(x)=x
disp f(y)
endprgm

When I run it evaluate(x^2 ,5), i want it to return 25. However, it returns 5 because f(x) is defined as x, not the value of x, which would be x^2. I want to know if there is a way for me to run the evaluate (x^2,5) or evaluate(x-2 ,12) and get back 35 and 10, repectivly.

Of course, im using an 89

I don't have an 89, but the 83+ has an expr( command that executes the string within the parentheses, so you could do something like:

ClrHome
Prompt "function:",E
Prompt "var:",X
expr(E
Disp Ans
Return

Is there anything like that on the 89?

Wow. I can't beleive i didnt think of that. Thanks a lot.

Glad I could help. :-)

It's actually:
exprtest()
Prgm
ClrIO
Local qwer,tyui
Dialog
Title "Expr() Test"
Request "Function",qwer
Request "Var",tyui
EndDlog
If inString(qwer, "()")=1
Then
rotate(qwer,2)->qwer
EndIf
expr(qwer& "("&tyui&")")
EndPrgm

qwer and tyui...creative names for variables, but not recommended for anyone who wants to come after you to program....

That says that they were the first and second vars to be declared. It's as if I had used a1 and a2, except that I like to use those for toolbars and dialogs. Plus, the other programmer might not understand a 'meaningful' variable name if they don't speak English or compressing something like request_for_varname_one down to 8 letters would mean something like reqfvar1, which is opaque.

Graph it and calc the zeroes.... easy

That seems not worth writing a prog for

I don't beleive i said anything about the zeros. I said that i need to evaluate a function. Then, i will do more complicating things with it.

He didn't say anything about the zeroes.