RE: [Embedlets-dev] JBASIC

[Christopher S. <cs...@oo...>]

Ted,

Hmmm, reality is always interfering with the pure pursuit of happiness. I
can see that we will be unable to rescue you from the dark side.

I appreciate the difficulty in teaching an advanced language such as Java
with its numerous OOP assumptions, but I also have reservations regarding
the presentation of a Basic interpreter on top of a byte code interpreter as
a viable contender in the embedded market. I can see the value in some
scripting capability as a form of glue logic if there is a tight integration
with the Embedlet container and a fundamental OO syntax such as exists in
Java Script eg:

function void startMachine() {

	container = context.getContainer();
	startSwitch = container.getComponent("StartSwitch");
	if (startSwitch.getBoolean()) {
		state = "on";
	} else {
		state = "off";
	}
	println("Start switch is " + state);
}

Did you look at Rhino or Jython?

Chris

Christopher Smith
OopScope, LLC.
www.oopscope.com
cs...@oo...
805-276-0598

> -----Original Message-----
> From: emb...@li...
> [mailto:emb...@li...]On Behalf Of Ted
> Kosan
> Sent: Saturday, October 11, 2003 12:10 AM
> To: emb...@li...
> Subject: RE: [Embedlets-dev] JBASIC
>
>
> Topic tags:[ARCH][JAPL][WIRING][DOCS][MGMT][STRATEGY][NEWBIE]
> _______________________________________________
>
> Chris wrote:
>
> > The idea is repugnant! A step back from the Renaissance to the
> dark ages!
> > You are painting over a Picasso with Elvis felt art! Condemning your
> > students to a life long struggle with a language impediment.
>
> Chris, for the most part I agree with you!
>
> But... here is how I eventually made the decision to go with
> JBasic.  Earlier
> this summer I finally figured out that neither BeanShell nor
> Jython was going
> to fit on a TStik and that, if an easy-to-use interpreter was
> going to be made
> available for EmbeddedJava devices, I was going to have to
> develop it myself.
>
> After I made the decision to build an interpreter, I drove myself
> absolutely
> nuts trying to decide which language to go with.  During this
> process I was
> forced to keep coming back to the fact that most of the programmers in the
> world today started off on some form of BASIC (like Apple BASIC,
> Commodore 64
> and VIC 20 BASIC, TRS-80 BASIC, Microsoft BASIC, GW-BASIC, Timex Sinclair
> BASIC, QBASIC and most recently VisualBasic).
>
> Also, it is hard to escape from the fact that even today, the most popular
> Embedded systems for beginners are products like BASIC Stamp, BASICX, etc.
>
> Beyond this, during all of the "Intro to programming" classes I
> have taught
> during the past 13 years, BASIC (QBASIC specifically) was absolutely the
> hands-down easiest language to teach to beginners.  The 2 years
> that I tried to
> teach Java to non-programming beginners were very rough and it felt like a
> forced march the whole way through.
>
> So, I finally was forced to simply go with my instincts and experience and
> (after the required 'unbelievable amount of hard work'), JBasic
> was the result.
>  As the screen shot shows, I have also made an IDE for it (which
> is based on
> jEdit) and I must say that teaching programming to beginners is
> *fun* again!
>
> After experiencing how easy it is to teach BASIC to beginning programmers
> again, I am extremely confident that I made the right choice.
>
> And, for the first time since 1999, I feel deep down that we
> finally have a way
> to market EmbeddedJava to the Embedded systems masses.  It was such a good
> feeling to be able to put a program on a TStik last week without
> having to use
> javac and TiniConverter and now I can see a clear path for how we
> can approach
> the huge BASICStamp, BASICX and PICBasic communities with
> embedded systems that
> they can jack right into the net and program in an easy manner.
>
>
>
> > At least you could have done it in JavaScript, a (small) step
> in the right
> > direction.
>
> Actually, I think that a 'huge step right to the destination' is
> to follow up
> JBasic with a pure Java interpreter.  My thought is that a
> significant number
> of developers are going to quickly exhaust JBasic's capabilities
> and then the
> most logical step for them will be to learn Java.
>
> JBasic will already have some Java syntax in it and so a move to
> a Java based
> version of the interpreter should represent a natural
> progression.  They will
> still be shielded from tools like TiniConverter, JemBuilder and
> Charade which
> will allow them to focus on learning what Object Oriented
> programming is all
> about.
>
> Finally, the hard-core developers will certainly want to go on to learn
> full-blown Java and by that time they should be ready for it.
>
> The gentle on-ramp that I envisioned for easing Embedded developers into
> Embedded Java will finally materialize and the IT support
> personel that I was
> personally wanting to target the OutPost/Graphic Wiring Tool
> combination at
> will be able to get started right now with OutPost/JBasic.
>
>
> Ted
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search
> http://shopping.yahoo.com
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.net email is sponsored by: SF.net Giveback Program.
> SourceForge.net hosts over 70,000 Open Source Projects.
> See the people who have HELPED US provide better services:
> Click here: http://sourceforge.net/supporters.php
> _______________________________________________
> Embedlets-developer mailing list
> Emb...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/embedlets-developer
>