Re: A82: Re: Why not???

To: <assembly-82@lists.ticalc.org>
Subject: Re: A82: Re: Why not???
From: "Dines Justesen" <c958362@student.dtu.dk>
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 1997 22:26:02 +0200
Reply-To: assembly-82@lists.ticalc.org
 Yesterday i was mailing Andreas Ess (co-creator of Usgard), and i asked him
if he would be interested in a ti82 version of the "libraries" included in
Usgard 1.1. Today i got the answer, we can use the functions from usgard if
we want. He will send me the code and i can the translate it so it workes
with the ti82. This way we should have a pretty good start, and any one who
makes a good functions can just get it added later.

So when wil this be released ? When i get the time to translate the
functions.

For thos of you wh does not know usgard, it contains a lot of ob files which
you can include in your program if you want the function it contains. In
this functions can easily be reused, and it should get easier to get start
on a program. Since including .obj files is not supported by tasm/prgm82 the
functions will probably be released as text files with a lot of .DBs.

Maybe all the people out there who have made games/programs for the ti82
could have a look at your programs and see if they contain anyfunctions
which might be useful for others.

Dines


-----Original Message-----
From: Tronik123@aol.com <Tronik123@aol.com>
To: assembly-82@lists.ticalc.org <assembly-82@lists.ticalc.org>
Date: 23. september 1997 22:31
Subject: Re: A82: Re: Why not???



>Any people with functions they've made that they would like to see in
>something like this can either mail me or, in some other way, make them
>available to this mailing list.  Then, I (or someone else who thinks they
>would rather do it) would periodically release the newest version of the
>"library" (I refer as it to a library-hope no one is offended).
>
>The way I see it is as follows: at first, the library would have only a few
>functions, but as it circulated, people would be free to make additions to
it
>or present routines that they prove are more effecient, etc. than the
>existing ones.  However, whoever takes this task over (if no one else,
myself
>or the shell dev., but I think I rememer him saying he had some HUGE
>project...) would have to make sure that the new library is released
>regularly and without bugs.
>When something like this is started, it is ESSENTIAL that there is no
>competition among multiple libraries (similar to what happened with ASH vs.
>OSHELL).  Any competition would only confuse the project and destroy the
>reason for starting this (simplicity, ease of use, and high productivity
for
>everyone).
>
>