Welcome Guest
( Log In | Register )
The time is now 6:58 am
You last visited January 23, 2017, 5:30 am
All times shown are
Eastern Time (GMT-5:00)

Assembly Language.


I was wrong, it has been too long since I took a look at 8 bits assembly code, I think that it was what they called OPCODES (Instructions), and for the addresses they used Hexadecimal (A combination of: 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 and A B C D E F) and or Decimal (0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9), the assembler would assemble the opcode(s) instructions into machine language (Binary), I think, but I don't remember for sure, I only took a quick look at that language a very long time ago, the 8 bits assembler was not that hard to learn, but I was not very interested in it, I should had learned and Basic too along with it, I also took a quick look at Commodore 64 basic (Basic 2, I think it was), I might just take up Basic again, maybe using a C-64 emulator such as Vice, that is, if it will allow Basic programming as if it was a real C-64, I will see, other-wise it will be either GWBasic and or QuickBasic (QBasic), after all these years I am finally going  to try to learn some Basic, I could of course just start with Visual Basic, but I want to start with good old Basic.

Entry #26


ToddComment by Todd - November 24, 2006, 7:44 am
I learned programming on a Commodore PET, which was a few years before the Commodore VIC-20, which itself was a couple of years before the Commodore 64. I first learned BASIC, and then learned machine language to make programs run quickly. I didn't have a compiler for the Assembler, so even though I learned the opcodes, I hand-wrote the bytes. In those days all of your program code has to run within 2.5K of RAM, and programs were saved onto a cassette tape, which ended up losing your programs 50% of the time.

That being said, if I were to learn BASIC today, I would not go backwards and learn that kind of BASIC. I would start with VB, because that's the real-world of how programs are written today. As a matter of fact, I would learn VB.NET, which you can download from Microsoft for free.
truecriticComment by truecritic - November 24, 2006, 12:46 pm
20 PRINT "********************************************************************************"
30 PRINT "Fernando,
40 PRINT "Good luck if you go with GW BASIC or even Quick Basic.
50 PRINT "If you run this in BASIC and have ANSI.sys installed, you will see it in color!
60 PRINT "********************************************************************************"
70 END

johnph77Comment by johnph77 - November 24, 2006, 1:18 pm
Agree with Todd re Visual basic - this is the closest language to either GW-Basic or Q-Basic commonly used today. On the other hand both versions will run in a Windows XP environment even though both were DOS-based programs and Windows no longer supports DOS.

Should you still want to go that route, though, I'd recommend something like PowerBasic or LibertyBasic, both of which are the modern version of QBasic. They'll run a lot faster in XP than QBasic. Do a Google search to locate vendors.
Comment by EXCALIBUR - November 24, 2006, 3:44 pm
Thanks, everybody, take a look at my new blog entry.
I have so many C-64 books and regular basic books and it is so easy to learn that I have to learn that first as it should help me a lot later.

You must be a Lottery Post member to post comments to a Blog.

Register for a FREE membership, or if you're already a member please Log In.