Subj : SuperBAJA
To   : PistolGrip
From : Amcleod
Date : Fri Jul 28 2000 08:45 am

RE: mail_send
BY: PistolGrip to Amcleod on Fri Jul 28 2000 02:21 pm

 >  > Of course, nobody is interested in programming Command Shells, Modules, e
 >  > the SuperBAJA language (or whatever it's name is) with WHILE/DO/FOR loops
 >  > subroutine calls, arrays, records, structures, etc, etc.  So I don't actu
 >  > work on the BAJAPP program very much.  Because after all, I am no longer 
 >  > SysOp myself, so there is no real motivation for me to do so.
 > 
 > Yes, I understand your point(s).  And I agree that a SuperBAJA would only be
 > minmimal usefullness at this time.  But, in the future there could be some
 > possibilities opened up with the Linux version of SBBS.  Maybe then the PERL
 > BAJAPP could actually be very useful?? :)

Well, one of the advantages of doing this in perl is that it should be 100%
portable to Linux.  Sure, you could do it in C/C++ as well, but then C/C++
isn't quite as flexible in chewing up a buncha source code and spitting it out
in a different form as Perl is (IMHO).  And we're not writing 25,000-line BAJA
programs are we?  So we don't need the improved efficiency of C/C++ to make it
run fast enough...

Some months ago I exchanged some messages with DM on the usefulness of a class
of BAJA op. such as PEEK/POOK/EXEC_BUF and I think I convinced DM that these
were useful additions to BAJA.  If/when he adds them to the BBS there is every
possibility that he will enhance the BAJA compiler to utilize them in
fundamentally powerful new ways.  And I will probably find my interest in the
SuperBAJA idea reawakened too.

Er...  POKE, not POOK!  :)

.