Re: A83: Re: Productive Progs: Printing

[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]

Re: A83: Re: Productive Progs: Printing


Dont you understand, why you make programs is just for the fun of doing it
I mean if you're making a graph on the calc to print it on the computer
why not use excel instead?
But if you build a printer that would be so cool and fun to develop.

/Stefan

On Mon, 23 Nov 1998, Justin Karneges wrote:

> 
> Not a bad idea.  We could actually save ourselves a step by using the
> already existing TI Winlink software (so that we don't have to write our own
> communications program).  A word processor for the calc needs to be made
> that will save the file in a string or something and then a program on the
> PC to turn the string (.83S file) into a text file.  If we wanted to be even
> cooler, the word processor would support fonts and bold/italic/underline.
> Though it may be difficult to represent on the calc, as long as we know what
> is going to be what in the end then it doesn't matter how it looks on the
> calc.  Anyways, the TI-83 word processor could put in font/style codes
> embedded in the .83S and then the PC program could turn the .83S file into a
> .DOC instead of a .TXT.
> 
> This way, we can use the standard graphlink and print fully styled and
> fonted documents on a nearby computer.  Type your essay on the calc in first
> period, and print during passing period at the library.  Just in time for
> second period english!
> 
> -Justin Karneges [Infiniti]
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: VorTexx15@aol.com <VorTexx15@aol.com>
> To: assembly-83@lists.ticalc.org <assembly-83@lists.ticalc.org>
> Date: Sunday, November 22, 1998 4:18 PM
> Subject: Re: A83: Re: Productive Progs: Printing
> 
> 
> >
> >Why not make your program send data to a program on your computer much like
> >the ROM dump programs do.  At that time you could have the choice of
> printing
> >it out (on a real printer on real paper) or saving your data.  I am not
> sure
> >if this has been mentioned yet.  Sorry if I am repeating something already
> >mentioned.
> >
> 
>
References: