77a
Subj : On BAJA development
To   : Digital Man
From : Angus McLeod
Date : Thu Sep 08 2005 11:33 pm

  Re: On BAJA development
  By: Digital Man to Angus McLeod on Thu Sep 08 2005 18:00:00

 >  > What with JS seemingly taking a preeminent place in SBBS programming, is
 >  > there any room for discussion of BAJA improvements?
 > 
 > Not really.

Ok, that's what I figured.

 > I mean, it can be discussed, but I'd prefer not to waste any energy
 > on enhancing Baja. Bug-fixes are of course still being persued. So I guess i
 > depends on your defintion of "improvement". :-)

I have often contemplated "improvements" that could be made by enhancing 
the compiler itself, rather than by adding any extra low-level 
functionality.  For instance, passing parameters to, and returning values 
from functions could all be achieve in the compiler.  And once, long 
ago, I devised a (*highly* inefficient!) means of implementing arrays and 
other structures in the compiler.

If BAJA were going to be supported indefinately, some of these ideas might 
be worth the effort.  But with JS already being the first choice for new 
development and BAJA slated for deprecation, it bviously isn't such a good 
idea.

 > I'm working on making Baja dispensable. It's not quite there yet, but will b
 > in the v4 time-frame. 

I'd imagine making BAJA optional and rewriting the command shells in JS 
would be something you'd want to do for v4.  It really isn't the sort of 
change that you want to introduce at a point-change in version.

Er...  I am assuming that there will be a v3 freeze soon, after which work 
on v4 will formally begin.  With this in mind, is there any docu on what 
changes are under consideration?  Other than the sectio "Contemplating a 
version 4" in your "to-do" list, I mean?

---
 þ Synchronet þ Great programs on the Synchronet Channel at The ANJO BBS

.

0