How about some new extensions in the one chip msx-basic?
I was thinking of :
-call screensplit(y)
-call rotate
-call zoom
-mode(kind of new screen efector)

give me your opinion!

uhm, a screensplit in basic ?

and what's call zoom supposed to do, on what videochip?

I see it like a extension on the standaard basic now .
a extra command in basic .
this way it's easier to create a good game in basic.

Lord Zett

While nice ideas, I think there are better ways to support this than through CALL commands.
Afterall, a new BASIC will be a new BASIC, not just old BASIC with some new CALL commands.

okay but its just a idea(i like)

and makes the msx more powerfull for creating games when ther is a hardware bult in tools like scroll...

It seems to me, its better to have basic seperate on disk, then it can easely upgrated.
As long as MSX lives, there are always people who will make basic more powerfull.
A kind of open basic must be a option.

FLASH ROM could be used for that as well (upgrading the BASIC)

legacy, can you contact me on mvs@mvs-music.tmfweb.nl , I'm not always reachable by phone, esp. when I'm online

What would be handy in a new MSX basic?
- Mouse support, place the cursor on one of the key setting, click on the mouse and action;
- A more notpad kinda environment, copy/past by using the mouse;
- Internal Assembler, Type you code and run by _runASM;
- KUNBasic kind of Basic, but a version that can accelerate all BASIC commands.
- Etc.

-Q

deh?! You mean something like window$? That's the [u]LAST[/u] thing I would want in a MSX. I think the current BASIC is sufficient, if we talk about commands and functions. On the other hand, I'd like it to be more consistent. For example LOCATE X,Y,C and PRESET (X,Y). Note the parentheses. That way it'll be MUCH easier to use. Ow, and another thing, I think it should become NestorPreTer-native-like. So that is line labels instead of line numbers, and definable constants:

@DEFINE   TRUE    -1
@DEFINE   FALSE    0


~BLAAT:       IF (A=@TRUE)
              GOTO ~BLAAT

And now I'm having my monologue: a nice implementation of nested IF statements and 'block'-IF statements would do nicely as well:

IF A=B
(then) {
blah blah blah
} ELSE
IF A=C
(then) {
blaat!
}

And a nicer assignment/equation sign. So use '=' for assignments and '==' for equations, just like in C or something similar.

Quote:

deh?! You mean something like window$? That's the [u]LAST[/u] thing I would want in a MSX. I think the current BASIC is sufficient, if we talk about commands and functions.

I agree!

Quote:

On the other hand, I'd like it to be more consistent. For example LOCATE X,Y,C and PRESET (X,Y). Note the parentheses. That way it'll be MUCH easier to use.

I don't really know if this is a question of consitence. One could see it like this. You also can consider
LOCATE as a function. Than with parentheses. Or as a command, then without them.

Quote:

And a nicer assignment/equation sign. So use '=' for assignments and '==' for equations, just like in C or something similar.

Then, it wouldn't be BASIC anymore! What isn't nice on '=' for equations? Thats the normal mathematical usage, very intuitional in BASIC, Pascal etc. If there's an problem at all, -- I don't think there is one -- then it's the '=' for assignements! The pascalien ':=' is much better. But even BASIC has a better solution, consider ''LET A = 3''. Thats original BASIC! The form ''A = 3'' is just an abbreviation.

PRESET doesn't return a value, so it's not a function but a subroutine. Thus, parentheses shouldn't be necessary when calling PRESET.

What if you call a function, but you don't need the return-value. Should you call it with or without parenthesis? Should it actually be allowed to discard the return-value?

In my experience, using parentheses for functions and subroutines would make it a whole lot easier to program (at least in VB, curse the COM interaction! )

I'd also like to see a windowing system (I didn't add it to AdvancedBasic for nothing ). Would make it a lot easier to make editors with a GUI. Of course, you don't HAVE to use it...

Feature I'd like to see:

- Text-windowing
- Proper functions/procedures
- WHILE/DO, DO/UNTIL
- COPY using (X,Y,W,H) instead of (X1,Y1)-(X2,Y2). How often have I written code like
COPY(X,Y)-(X+W-1,Y+H-1) knowing that the interpreter would have to calculate the
W and H again from those expressions... Wasted CPU cycles!
- Oh, COPY in text mode!

10 SCREEN 0
20 WINDOW(10,10,70,20)
30 MYPROC("Hallo World!")
40 END
50 DEFPROC MYPROC(P$)
60 WHILE HELL <> FROZEN DO
70   PRINT P$;" ";  ' This of course only fills the window defined in line 20
80 ENDWHILE
90 ENDPROC

[edit]And long variable names, of course[/edit]

You mean like this: ?