Re: Duet in Lores

["Bill Buckels" <bbuckels@mts.net>]

"Michael J. Mahon" <mjmahon@aol.com> wrote in message 
1Jidne__Ltumtl_VnZ2dnUVZ_t_inZ2d@comcast.com">news:1Jidne__Ltumtl_VnZ2dnUVZ_t_inZ2d@comcast.com...
>...and those aren't Apple II graphics, either!

"limtc" <thyechean@gmail.com> wrote in message 
news:94a108d4-07f8-4af3-9b84-209a9471371f@n33g2000pri.googlegroups.com...
>I love Applesoft (and Complete Pascal and Orca/Pascal) programming,and has 
>been running a site for emulated Apple IIGS (Virtual GS) for sometimes now. 
>I think people should have all sort of options on this forum, like "Java 
>for Apple II" or "Apple II for Java", etc. If we put ourselves as only 
>"Apple II programming on real Apple II computers and nothing else", then 
>the community will be even smaller.

Hi Michael,

The above is taken from the thread Applesoft-like programming for iPhone on 
comp.sys.apple2.programmer in which limitc replied to me with his rationale 
on all this.

I think his point is that since the Apple II community is so small that Java 
programs for the IPhone that run in some Web Browsers and don't run in the 
majority of web browsers and are reminisent of the Apple II are valid topics 
for this group.

This isn't applesoft basic either. The fact that the function calls use a 
same-naming convention doesn't mean much to me either. I sould for example 
write wrappers and library functions for the Aztec C graphics and other 
libraries that are exactly like Applesoft calls with brackets around the 
parameters and call my language "Applesoft Basic for Aztec C". Doing so 
would be more valid in my mind than this since my Graphics library could be 
used either in a native mode compiler or in a cross-compiler and would 
generate native code that would run on a REAL Apple II. Doing so doesn't 
interest me however.

comp.emulators.apple2 might be a more appropriate place for his posts if 
this was evolved to a full-blown emulator for the iPhone.

However his posts do generate lots of interest judging from the popularity 
of his threads (more than my posts which I think are usually more on topic) 
so it could be that this is the future direction of comp.apple2 and related 
groups.

I have refrained from participating in these threads because I am more of a 
REAL Apple II guy but he could have a point. Besides he is putting a 
tremendous amount of effort into this project and it all seems to be working 
quite nicely. I certainly can't be negative about that part of it.

What do you think?

Bill