Re: Liberty BASIC Booster

From	H-Man <Spam@bites.fs>
Newsgroups	comp.lang.basic.misc, alt.lang.basic
Subject	Re: Liberty BASIC Booster
Date	2011-09-13 08:20 -0600
Organization	L&H Custom Computer
Message-ID	<j4norg$i1u$1@dont-email.me> (permalink)
References	<781e639f-6931-4910-ab8e-14d0331ae358@z18g2000yqb.googlegroups.com> <29068e4e-b004-4984-bdf9-477574f4818e@k29g2000yqf.googlegroups.com> <j4lg62$v63$1@dont-email.me> <c1d50bc0-bc37-4571-af61-f99e58c31426@fe21g2000vbb.googlegroups.com> <j4lvtd$his$1@dont-email.me>

Cross-posted to 2 groups.

Show all headers | View raw

On Mon, 12 Sep 2011 16:08:44 -0600, H-Man wrote:

> On Mon, 12 Sep 2011 13:45:12 -0700 (PDT), news@rtrussell.co.uk wrote:
> 
>> On Sep 12, 6:40 pm, H-Man <S...@bites.fs> wrote:
>>> As BBC will compile to native x86 executable code,
>> 
>> If only!  BBC BASIC is interpreted (and there are features of the
>> language which make it virtually impossible to compile) so the speed
>> isn't that much greater than when running interactively under the IDE.
>> 
>>> As Richard champions his BBC Basic product, this is a great way to get
>>> Liberty Basic programmers to migrate to what could arguably be called a
>>> more powerful programming language.
>> 
>> Honestly, it's not.  If that had been the motivation I would have made
>> a LB to BBC translator, which then required the user to obtain BBC
>> BASIC in order to run the program.  In contrast, LBB is completely
>> self-contained; it even creates stand-alone executables without it
>> even being apparent that BBC BASIC is at work 'under the hood'.
>> 
>> LBB is a perfectly genuine attempt to improve the lot of Liberty BASIC
>> programmers.  Yes, it acts as a showcase for what BBC BASIC can
>> achieve but it's not trying to 'convert' anybody.  For more background
>> you can read my blog post:
>> 
>>  http://bbcbasic.blogspot.com/
>> 
>> Richard.
>> http://www.rtrussell.co.uk/
> 
> Okay, thanks Richard. I completely misunderstood what was indicated on the 
> website.
> From your website
> "The full version allows you to create a compact (typically less than 100K) 
> stand-alone executable (.EXE) file from your BASIC program, which will run 
> without BBC BASIC having to be installed and without the need for any 
> special DLLs. You can distribute such executables freely without any 
> royalty for BBC BASIC being due. "
> 
> I assumed, therefore that it was not runtime dependent. Looking into this 
> further everything i see does say it is interpreted so I'm assuning the 
> runtime is part of the self contained .exe.
> 
> From your Blog I found;
> "This is where we complete the circle. By combining the translation 
> capabilities of LB2BBC with the emulation capabilities of LBLIB it becomes 
> possible to run most Liberty BASIC programs, without actually needing 
> Liberty BASIC itself! In consultation with some leading Liberty BASIC 
> advocates it became clear that there might be a market for this, not as as 
> translator to BBC BASIC but as a 'Liberty BASIC Booster'. To the user it 
> would appear as a way to speed up LB programs (up to ten times in some 
> cases) and to create compact single-file executables, without it being 
> obviously apparant that BBC BASIC was at work 'under the hood'."
> 
> So then, is this a better LB compiler, and is that it's purpose? Does the 
> LB code run under BBC then? Very cool, but without knowing LB and the 
> limitations you speak of, I'm not sure I get it.

Sorry for the multiple posts, my usenet host was obviously having issues.

-- 
HK

Back to comp.lang.basic.misc | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar

Thread

[ANN] Liberty BASIC Booster "news@rtrussell.co.uk" <news@rtrussell.co.uk> - 2011-09-11 02:38 -0700
  Re: Liberty BASIC Booster aury <aurelw.wiz@gmail.com> - 2011-09-12 10:18 -0700
    Re: Liberty BASIC Booster H-Man <Spam@bites.fs> - 2011-09-12 11:40 -0600
      Re: Liberty BASIC Booster "news@rtrussell.co.uk" <news@rtrussell.co.uk> - 2011-09-12 13:45 -0700
        Re: Liberty BASIC Booster H-Man <Spam@bites.fs> - 2011-09-12 16:02 -0600
          Re: Liberty BASIC Booster "news@rtrussell.co.uk" <news@rtrussell.co.uk> - 2011-09-13 02:42 -0700
            Re: Liberty BASIC Booster H-Man <Spam@bites.fs> - 2011-09-13 08:18 -0600
        Re: Liberty BASIC Booster H-Man <Spam@bites.fs> - 2011-09-12 16:08 -0600
          Re: Liberty BASIC Booster H-Man <Spam@bites.fs> - 2011-09-13 08:20 -0600
            Re: Liberty BASIC Booster Tony Toews <ttoews@telusplanet.net> - 2011-09-13 18:03 -0600
              Re: Liberty BASIC Booster H-Man <Spam@bites.fs> - 2011-09-14 10:25 -0600
        Re: Liberty BASIC Booster H-Man <Spam@bites.fs> - 2011-09-12 16:04 -0600
  Re: [ANN] Liberty BASIC Booster "Gordon Rahman" <grahman@planet.nl> - 2011-09-20 21:57 +0200
    Re: Liberty BASIC Booster "news@rtrussell.co.uk" <news@rtrussell.co.uk> - 2011-09-20 14:19 -0700
      Re: Liberty BASIC Booster "Gordon Rahman" <grahman@planet.nl> - 2011-09-21 00:12 +0200
        Re: Liberty BASIC Booster aury <aurelw.wiz@gmail.com> - 2011-09-22 00:40 -0700
          Re: Liberty BASIC Booster "news@rtrussell.co.uk" <news@rtrussell.co.uk> - 2011-09-24 04:33 -0700
            Re: Liberty BASIC Booster "news@rtrussell.co.uk" <news@rtrussell.co.uk> - 2011-10-01 03:07 -0700
              Re: Liberty BASIC Booster "news@rtrussell.co.uk" <news@rtrussell.co.uk> - 2011-10-08 01:41 -0700
                Re: Liberty BASIC Booster "news@rtrussell.co.uk" <news@rtrussell.co.uk> - 2011-10-15 07:18 -0700
                Re: Liberty BASIC Booster "news@rtrussell.co.uk" <news@rtrussell.co.uk> - 2011-10-22 07:42 -0700
                Re: Liberty BASIC Booster "news@rtrussell.co.uk" <news@rtrussell.co.uk> - 2011-11-05 07:04 -0700
                Re: Liberty BASIC Booster "news@rtrussell.co.uk" <news@rtrussell.co.uk> - 2011-11-12 08:43 -0800
                Re: Liberty BASIC Booster "news@rtrussell.co.uk" <news@rtrussell.co.uk> - 2011-11-19 04:40 -0800
                Re: Liberty BASIC Booster "news@rtrussell.co.uk" <news@rtrussell.co.uk> - 2011-12-19 06:00 -0800
                Re: Liberty BASIC Booster Hector Alfaro <alfaropas@ceropublicidad.com> - 2011-12-20 15:03 -0430
                Re: Liberty BASIC Booster "news@rtrussell.co.uk" <news@rtrussell.co.uk> - 2011-12-24 09:55 -0800
                Re: Liberty BASIC Booster "news@rtrussell.co.uk" <news@rtrussell.co.uk> - 2012-01-06 14:31 -0800
                Re: Liberty BASIC Booster "news@rtrussell.co.uk" <news@rtrussell.co.uk> - 2012-01-14 08:34 -0800
                Re: Liberty BASIC Booster "news@rtrussell.co.uk" <news@rtrussell.co.uk> - 2012-01-29 10:19 -0800
                Re: Liberty BASIC Booster "news@rtrussell.co.uk" <news@rtrussell.co.uk> - 2012-02-24 07:08 -0800
                Re: Liberty BASIC Booster Hector Alfaro <alfaropas@ceropublicidad.com> - 2012-03-05 09:46 -0430
                Re: Liberty BASIC Booster "Auric__" <not.my.real@email.address> - 2012-03-06 15:44 +0000
                Re: Liberty BASIC Booster Hector Alfaro <alfaropas@ceropublicidad.com> - 2012-03-06 21:40 -0430
                Re: Liberty BASIC Booster "Auric__" <not.my.real@email.address> - 2012-03-07 02:35 +0000
                Re: Liberty BASIC Booster "news@rtrussell.co.uk" <news@rtrussell.co.uk> - 2012-03-07 02:16 -0800
                Re: Liberty BASIC Booster ArarghMail202NOSPAM@NOT.AT.Arargh.com - 2012-03-09 18:54 -0600
                Re: Liberty BASIC Booster "Auric__" <not.my.real@email.address> - 2012-03-10 08:02 +0000
                Re: Liberty BASIC Booster Hector Alfaro <alfaropas@ceropublicidad.com> - 2011-12-20 16:49 -0430

csiph-web