Re: Interpreter for old basic programs from the line number era

winston19842005@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 expounded in
news:79cbe0c2-b809-43b4-9b75-62f966be745f@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 

> On Mar 18, 11:41 pm, Eric <englere_...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> On Mar 18, 6:18 pm, winston19842005 <bjjlya...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> > On 3/18/08 3:52 PM, in article
>> > Xns9A65A9BDEA2B5SnarkCharmedImS...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 "Charmed Snark"
>>
>> > <sn...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> > > Eric expounded in news:f1e8dd88-0800-4725-98ee-8ad4fa188ee5
>> > > @[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>
>> > >> On Mar 6, 5:26 pm, Guy Macon <http://www.guymacon.com/>
wrote:
>> > >>>> There's Cheesecake BASIC V 3 that does.
>> > >>>>http://noktosoft.megafolio.com/
>>
>> > >>> Now that is cool! "Cheesecake BASIC is written in BASIC, and
>> > >>> can be compiled with the PowerBasic Console Compiler (2.0 or
>> > >>> above), with QuickBASIC 4.5, or with Cheesecake BASIC V3"
>> > > ..
>>
>> > >> Remember that the term Virtual Machine is just a fancy term that
>> > >> means the runtime interpreter that executes the p-code
>> > >> instructions. "cvm" is the Cheesecake virtual machine. Once this
>> > >> is compiled it is called the "RTL".
>> > > ..
...
>> > > Wikipedia states (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_machine)
>> > > that the term was "originally defined by Popek and Goldberg as an
>> > > efficient, isolated duplicate of a real machine. Current use
>> > > includes virtual machines which have no direct correspondence to
>> > > any real hardware." 
>>
>> > > I can't recall if JVM was based on any real hardware. I seem to
>> > > recall Sun was making some noise about JVM hardware at one time.
>> > > But I suspect that in Java's case, Java byte code came long
>> > > before any real hardware ever existed.
>>
>> > Google UCSD Pascal. It was byte-code, for a virtual machine. UCSD
>> > Pascal involved porting an interpreter written to each processor.
>> > The environment (OS) was written in itself. It compiled to p-code
>> > (one of the first uses of this terminology).

I remember well p-code and UCSD Pascal, although I never used it much 
myself (at the time I was more of a C biggot). You couldn't really live 
through those years without being aware of them.

But the question that I raised wrt to Java, was whether or not a real 
machine existed when its byte code was "created". The same could be asked 
about p-code - agreed that hardware did subsequently exist for it.

>> Yes, although UCSD wasn't the first Pascal compiler to use p-code it
>> was the most popular by far. It used an especially compact variation
>> that was well suited for 8-bit CPUS.

Yep yep.

>> > If you Google Java, you will often find references to UCSD Pascal.

I know. It would be difficult not to find those comparisons.

>> The JVM is cool. The earlier versions were even hobbiest friendly.
>> But it has gotten way too complicated now. I looked at the source Sun
>> released, and it's a monster!

Somehow, I _don't_ doubt that.  ;-)

Warren.

-- 
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com