I spent time making pretty gui demos for uxn, but it seems that all people want to see are examples of factorial, and Fibonacci, which I purposeful omitted from the tutorial docs.
I spent time making pretty gui demos for uxn, but it seems that all people want to see are examples of factorial, and Fibonacci, which I purposeful omitted from the tutorial docs.
Show previous comments
I rarely use borders and frames in my interfaces, but I wanted to try something different. @neauoire Do you think it would be possible to add proper breakpoints? Not just BRK, but: go until here and then let me step through from there?
Show previous comments
The debugger used to include an assembler, but all this stuff is redundant now that the assembler has an interactive mode! I'm having way too much fun with this stuff, but I'm not actually getting anything done right now tho, which I should probably be concerned about at some point..
Show previous comments
@neauoire some of these tapes were doing that in the 80s and i never knew why. a retensioning procedure was recommended but didn't seem to help. @neauoire I still have a drive from a SInclair computer, an endless reel of tape in a small case This program emulates on a PC most of the functionality of the Programma 101, a programmable desktop calculator marketed by Olivetti in the late '60's. Excellent blog post on trying to build resilient, accessible systems for all, by @eli_oat So, after wasting a bunch of time trying to pack a whole assembler into my text editor, I've realized that I was just making a mess of things and undid it all. Instead, I've tried something pretty simple: - when I press ctrl+b, it sends the file name that I'm working on out. - I've added an interactive mode to the assembler that constantly re-assembles incoming filepaths. @nasser a little while back, you were comparing two types or families of tools, you said something like "some are legos, other are more like clay", something like this. Do you remember how you've defined the too sides? @neauoire this was the original post: https://merveilles.town/@nasser/109265538480410221 I was thinking about programming specifically, particularly dynamic and static types at the time Since I've not found a better name for this sort of thing, I call this a waterfall optimization, when it's not only removing tailcalls, but you let the PC keep going and hitting the next routine, and then the next. "Don't repeat yourself" (DRY) is a principle of software development aimed at reducing repetition of software patterns, replacing it with abstractions or using data normalization to avoid redundancy. this trampoline is just a pit There's hardly a day that goes by on a boat when you don't have to build some sort of shelving or some other thing. For weeks now, I've been trying to use my assembler in a playground type way, where I can give it a filename interactively, and it assembles it, returning to its "waiting" state, and I had issues where erroring would always happen at different depth in the code, so the stack was always messy after encountering an error in live mode. I made an arity checker(it's a thing that makes sure that a program's function doesn't leave the stack in an unexpected state), and would run it over my assembler source and it threw an error at my error handling code. Each time I thought, it's probably being confused. But NO, it was telling me this whole time what I should change . I gave it a second look today and fixing that little thing was all I needed this whole time to get it to work properly. Thank you arity checker sensei. I've been changing my workflow these past few days from working with textual sources, to using something called structured editing. Normally you'd think of a program as source code made of text, but in structure programming, you edit the symbols of the program, in this case the bytecode, labels and comments. I use the textual representation when saving my work, so it can be versioned, but while working anything that is not a bytecode, a symbol or a comment is not recorded.
Show previous comments
@neauoire yes! this is how co works, the source code is natively a bytecode, and there is even a subset of the instruction set reserved specifically for source-only tokens (like newlines, indents, comments, and different types of label definitions) and then the text representation is really just a transformation layer/interface. and then there is also a symbol database integrated to the language tooling, similar to the “symbol file” you mentioned (i imagine?) So a few days I've realized that I very much liked working using structured editing. Structured editing means that your editor is aware of the program's functioning enough that it handles how it should be presented, so you're not editing text as much as the underlying structure of the program. It's just a fancy way of saying that it's basically just a symbols aware disassembler. I've spent the past 2 days improving the UX so I could run the reassembler without going through the terminal. Implementing structural editing in #uxntal. I remember having lots of fun with THINK Pascal when the IDE was reformatting my program automatically and I've been meaning to have this as part of my workflow now.
Show previous comments
@neauoire Off-topic, but that Cream font you customized looks glorious every time I see it in one of your posts. I’m curious if there’s any existing way to convert the UFX font to something like OTF? Walked in front of a yoga studio that had the words "Nothing in the history of the universe ever happened from the outside in." drawn in the window. Walked the rest of the way in a kind of haze
Show previous comments
@neauoire Every time I just want to loosen my ligaments, some stretchypant shaman is trying to make me think of the cosmos. What a weird sense of humour they must have.
[DATA EXPUNGED]
A little addition to #uxn's console device from the mailing list: https://lists.sr.ht/~rabbits/uxn/%3CCAE2DaSR8nb0D0ESreoBkHjLmTO9sJQKaM9SN9C6De5CfLyyHtQ%40mail.gmail.com%3E Added extra notes to the disassembly that shows jump labels, I have an idea in mind that I'd like to try with this. |
@neauoire i always seem to wind up doing an infinite rule 30/rule 110 scroll for my demos
@neauoire idk i think people love mandelbrot