>Just exactly why would you recommend a TINY BASIC as opposed to a full-up
>interpreter? Most SBC's support huge amounts of RAM, far in excess of what
>the basic interpreter should require.
Heck, we can get SBC's of just a few square inches with a Pentium Pro, 128
Mbytes of RAM, SVGA output, and a hard drive interface, why not just install
Windows NT on the SBC so you can run the latest and greatest Visual BASIC++++?
Well, I took your argument there a little too far, but I hope you get the
point: Use the tools appropriate to the job. And for most SBC applications,
the floating point capabilities and libraries as well as the file I/O
facilities of a "full-up" BASIC are overkill. OTOH most Tiny Basic
implementations are perfect for the bit-banging and input/output that a
SBC is often called upon to do.
(And yes, I know of other cases where Windows NT and 128 Mbytes of RAM on
the SBC are appropriate, but I don't think any of us want to go down that
road!)
--
Tim Shoppa Email: shoppa_at_trailing-edge.com
Trailing Edge Technology WWW: http://www.trailing-edge.com/
7328 Bradley Blvd Voice: 301-767-5917
Bethesda, MD, USA 20817 Fax: 301-767-5927
Received on Wed Feb 16 2000 - 15:15:43 GMT