Re: XyWrite for Windows

[Harry Binswanger hb@xxxxxxxx]

Robert wrote:
>I know that XPL is, either, 1) very close to, or 2) identical to, the
>actual way that XyWrite "thinks" and functions internally. Because
>XPL mirrors in its structure the way XyWrite works, it encourages
>programmers to think in harmony with the program, which induces efficient
>code. It's always best to speak the language of the machine, and not
>emulate, translate, or thunk.
>
Well, I can't buy the "translate" part, because, as many of you know, I
created XyBasic, which allows you to write a pgm in a sort of Basic, and
then run a translator which puts it into XPL. The final output is, of
course, pure XPL (which you can edit as such, if you wish). But it has IMHO
many advantages, such as *named* variables and *named* subroutines. I've
been working happily in XyBasic for about 3 or 4 years. (And you can too,
it's on the ftp site.)

Still, if "SmartWords" (ugh) has a better Basic-type language as a front-end
(with real XPL produced for us), I will happily make the switch. Note that
XyBasic *is* adapted to word-processing, because all the Xy functions and
commands are used directly (e.g., you type in 'bc and that gets translated
to the BC function).

Here's a real short example of a XyBasic program to print out 255 possible
VA functions, going through the ascii set one character at a time:

for i =1 to 255
com "va \" i
'lb i ". "
'le print 'rt
next i

When you "compile" or translate that, it produces the following XPL:

>255>BC va \XC LB .
LE +1>

(Natch, "LB" and "LE" come out as the line-begin and line-end cursor functions.)

Regards,




Harry Binswanger
hb@xxxxxxxx