Microsoft basic source code

Page 1/2
| 2

By iamweasel2

Hero (604)

iamweasel2's picture

12-04-2020, 18:03

While doing some studies with Basic, I found this site.

https://www.pagetable.com/?p=774

It seems to have the original MSX Basic source code, it has nice information about how it was written. It has even comments to what was done by Bill Gates and what was done by Paul Allen. :)

I wonder how was this source code obtained. And more importantly, maybe the MSX Basic source code is available somewhere and we just don't know it? :-)

Login or register to post comments

By iamweasel2

Hero (604)

iamweasel2's picture

12-04-2020, 18:08

"What is interesting is that initially it was Microsoft adapting their source for the different computers, instead of giving source to the different vendors and having them adapt it."

It seems Bill wouldn't take any chances of having his source code stolen. Wink

By Dolphin101546015

Champion (273)

Dolphin101546015's picture

12-04-2020, 19:09

iamweasel2 wrote:

"What is interesting is that initially it was Microsoft adapting their source for the different computers, instead of giving source to the different vendors and having them adapt it."

Moreover, they paid for the creation of some libraries and accepted Basic to MSX with many errors, and made it slow.
For example, I have circle algorithm for X-Basic, that draw circles faster than stock MSX Basic twice.
Also not so long time ago I showed errors in the Paint function. (By the way, in my childhood I thought that MSX Paint is the most correct algorithm than on other platforms that I used).
In any case, the MSX2 is the best computer of all ages.
Only Amiga can become the undisputed competitor.

By iamweasel2

Hero (604)

iamweasel2's picture

12-04-2020, 19:15

Dolphin101546015 wrote:

Moreover, they paid for the creation of some libraries and accepted Basic to MSX with many errors, and made it slow.

You mean, Microsoft paid other companies to build libraries for her Basic? I didn't know that. What libraries are those and who wrote those libraries?

And what exactly mean "accepted Basic to MSX with many errors" ? If they ported their Basic to MSX by themselves, then everything that was wrong and the final quality of the produtct are their own fault , right?

By Dolphin101546015

Champion (273)

Dolphin101546015's picture

12-04-2020, 19:29

iamweasel2 wrote:

You mean, Microsoft paid other companies to build libraries for her Basic? I didn't know that. What libraries are those and who wrote those libraries?

Not companies, just peoples.

iamweasel2 wrote:

And what exactly mean "accepted Basic to MSX with many errors" ? If they ported their Basic to MSX by themselves, then everything that was wrong and the final quality of the produtct are their own fault , right?

I do not mean original errors, but new ones that were added only on a new platform for them.
As I said earlier, imho they did not fully understand the VDP architecture, so all the graphical functions of the language work so slowly.
If you take into account that the original manual from Yamaha contains many errors and ambiguities, then this is not surprising.

By iamweasel2

Hero (604)

iamweasel2's picture

12-04-2020, 21:12

Could you tell examples of libraries that Microsoft bought from other people?

About the question of Basic being slow, it is not my intention to defend Microsoft, but the team could be under pressure to release it quick. And since it was Basic and it was interpreted, maybe it was not their intention to make it to be as fast as possible, at that time people that wanted speed would code the critical parts in ASM. The idea of Basic was just to be simple.

By Dolphin101546015

Champion (273)

Dolphin101546015's picture

12-04-2020, 23:00

iamweasel2 wrote:

Could you tell examples of libraries that Microsoft bought from other people?

Mathpack

iamweasel2 wrote:

About the question of Basic being slow, it is not my intention to defend Microsoft, but the team could be under pressure to release it quick. And since it was Basic and it was interpreted, maybe it was not their intention to make it to be as fast as possible, at that time people that wanted speed would code the critical parts in ASM. The idea of Basic was just to be simple.

Above, I have already talked about speed degradation in specific functions.

By PingPong

Prophet (3554)

PingPong's picture

13-04-2020, 01:49

The asm code is from 6502 cpu not z80. There're fore cannot be msx basic

By iamweasel2

Hero (604)

iamweasel2's picture

13-04-2020, 02:51

PingPong wrote:

The asm code is from 6502 cpu not z80. There're fore cannot be msx basic

Sorry, I saw it was 6502 code (couldn't be any different, since that information is written in big letters on the title of the site). what I meant was "Microsoft Basic" instead of "MSX Basic" in the first paragraph. Sorry for my mistake.

But the question I posted in the last paragraph is correctly written. I wonder if, in the same way as this 6502 source code, the MSX Basic source code isn't available somewhere.

By NYYRIKKI

Enlighted (5595)

NYYRIKKI's picture

13-04-2020, 10:45

Dolphin101546015 wrote:

Moreover, they paid for the creation of some libraries and accepted Basic to MSX with many errors, and made it slow.
For example, I have circle algorithm for X-Basic, that draw circles faster than stock MSX Basic twice.
Also not so long time ago I showed errors in the Paint function.

I don't think it feels right to blame Microsoft about this... Although advertising was high, Pie-charts newer became popular on MSX and I don't think the real reason was either speed of circle or bug in paint. TBH I think MSX was performing pretty well compared to other home computers of the era.

You should also ask your self: How many companies today make 100% optimized code? (Yes, indeed: None) Microsoft was trying to make business and although during that venture they have made a lot of stuff that they should be blamed for (like killing many companies that could have accelerated computer development in general), making few bad decisions during BASIC development don't belong to that category in my eyes... Naturally in 40-years we have found some errors, but actually I think MSX-BASIC is relatively bug free considering the size of the program and what kind of primitive tools they had in their disposal. I would say today the general situation is much worse.

By Dolphin101546015

Champion (273)

Dolphin101546015's picture

13-04-2020, 11:31

I find no anyones guilty here, friend, these are just facts, nothing more.
In addition, I am grateful to all the creators and programmers of MSX. Thanks to them, I learned how to write more efficient code, and also learned assembly language.
I just because you should not look for idols in the faces of Nishi or Bill.
They are the same people who once really loved their job as much as they could.
Besides, you are damn right: today the situation is more than just deplorable.

Page 1/2
| 2