Subj : SuperBAJA
To : PistolGrip
From : Amcleod
Date : Fri Jul 28 2000 08:45 am
RE: mail_send
BY: PistolGrip to Amcleod on Fri Jul 28 2000 02:21 pm
> > Of course, nobody is interested in programming Command Shells, Modules, e
> > the SuperBAJA language (or whatever it's name is) with WHILE/DO/FOR loops
> > subroutine calls, arrays, records, structures, etc, etc. So I don't actu
> > work on the BAJAPP program very much. Because after all, I am no longer
> > SysOp myself, so there is no real motivation for me to do so.
>
> Yes, I understand your point(s). And I agree that a SuperBAJA would only be
> minmimal usefullness at this time. But, in the future there could be some
> possibilities opened up with the Linux version of SBBS. Maybe then the PERL
> BAJAPP could actually be very useful?? :)
Well, one of the advantages of doing this in perl is that it should be 100%
portable to Linux. Sure, you could do it in C/C++ as well, but then C/C++
isn't quite as flexible in chewing up a buncha source code and spitting it out
in a different form as Perl is (IMHO). And we're not writing 25,000-line BAJA
programs are we? So we don't need the improved efficiency of C/C++ to make it
run fast enough...
Some months ago I exchanged some messages with DM on the usefulness of a class
of BAJA op. such as PEEK/POOK/EXEC_BUF and I think I convinced DM that these
were useful additions to BAJA. If/when he adds them to the BBS there is every
possibility that he will enhance the BAJA compiler to utilize them in
fundamentally powerful new ways. And I will probably find my interest in the
SuperBAJA idea reawakened too.
Er... POKE, not POOK! :)
---
� Synchronet � Vertrauen � Home of Synchronet � telnet://vert.synchro.net
