On Tue, Aug 13, 2002 at 09:25:34AM +0500, James Paul wrote:
>  Vasile,
>
>  For my own edification, why is 'JAL' "More proper" than Basic or
>  Assembly for beginners?   I don't understand the reasoning.

I won't even attempt to answer that. However I would like to take a minute
to throw out my criteria for programming language evaluation and talk about
each of the contenders briefly. The criteria in no particular order:

* High level: Easier to learn, faster the develop, possible to port.

* Structured: Significantly reduces developement errors. Easier to maintain.

* Freely Available: Personal preference. I believe that pricing development
                    tools often locks out a large segment of potential users.

* Multiplatform: I'm a Linux guy. The development environment shouldn't
                 dictate the type of machine you have to use.

* Microcontroller oriented: Should support uC features such as special function
                            registers, bit manipulation, and interrupts.

* Efficient: Fast code execution is often critical.

* Widely supported: Preferably an industry standard.

No language I know of is 7 for 7 on this list yet. I think that Scott Dattalo's
port of SDCC has the best shot of hitting the bulleye. But it's in late alpha.

Now the contenders:

JAL: 6 for 7. Isn't an industry standard... yet. Keep plugging Wouter!

Assembly: 5 for 7 simply because of the nature of the language (i.e. it isn't
          high level or structured).

Basic: Typically 5 for 7. Often fails the efficency test if interpreted (Basic
       Stamp). Usually isn't structured. Often variable in terms of uC features
       offered. Sometimes is single platform (i.e. Windows) oriented.

       The most interesting one is Myke Predko's BASIC87x. Could be a winner
       if structured statements could be added. Multiplatform by definition
       because the entire development environment is embedded onto the 16F87x
       part.

C: Probably the best all around. Routinely 5 for 7. Free versions add another
   point. Only debatable point is uC oriented and most add minor extensions
   to make that so. Again SDCC has a shot to be gold. I'm sure glad that Scott
   is working on it.


The wheels have kind of fallen off my own language project: NPCI. It's a
threaded interpreter of a simple, structured, high level language. An overview
can be found here:

http://www.finitesite.com/d3jsys/README-NPCI.html

I'd grade it as high as 6 for 7 if I could ever get it to beta. Right now
I'm mired between trying to upgrade the interpreter to the 18F452 and finishing
integer support.

Just some thoughts on the subject. JAL definitely has possibilites...

BAJ

--
http://www.piclist.com#nomail Going offline? Don't AutoReply us!
email listserv@mitvma.mit.edu with SET PICList DIGEST in the body