21 November 2017, 19:50 | #41 | |
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: london
Posts: 49
|
Quote:
A guess might be that "%" is something like the -D option to C? Yes the doubled up $$ are basically escaped so they are passed to the UNIX shell by make correctly as a single $. When I type "make" on a UNIX-type system I see something like Code:
start.b start.obj opt '"%$AMIDOS,$AMIGA,$JUMPS,$MACRO,$EXT,$WORD,w30000"' obj A I suspect the $AMIGA is used in the conditionals inside the BCPL which are like "$<AMIGA" (similar to C preprocessor?) I've had a look online and can't find any docs. There is a MMC QL BCPL kit (which might have full docs) on EBay but I was outbid! |
|
21 November 2017, 22:28 | #42 |
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location:
Posts: 3,349
|
There's a PDF of the QL BCPL manual mentioned above. The book "BCPL: The Language and its Compiler" could perhaps contain some info, though of course it wouldn't be specific to the Metacomco compiler.
|
21 November 2017, 22:59 | #43 |
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location:
Posts: 3,349
|
It could be that % was a typo; it's Shift-5 for % vs Shift-4 for $ on the keyboard, and the corresponding UNIX opt line doesn't have a % in.
I don't know whether removing the % will make any difference, but I might try building the Amiga executable in NetBSD without it. The BCPL manual has a section on conditional compilation on page 13 (p.21 of the PDF). |
22 November 2017, 17:50 | #44 |
old bearded fool
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Bangkok
Age: 56
Posts: 779
|
Thinking of ancient Unix variants and their shells; the %$AMIDOS part is probably an environment variable, maybe it's supposed to point to sys:c on Amiga? Just a thought...
|
22 November 2017, 18:31 | #45 |
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Finland
Posts: 1,186
|
I cant imagine that the % has anything to do with the UNIX world side of things, in ancient UNIX shells the % was used as a indicator for job numbers.
Providing as a opt the job number stored in a variable (i'm not even sure bsh/csh/sh from back then would evaluate that) as an argument sounds extremely unlikely. Also seeing its escaped in the make output i'm pretty sure its passed verbatim to the BCPL side and probably only evaluated and expanded there by a preprocessor or the compiler. I do think the hunch that its some directives and/or variables for that. |
07 January 2018, 13:50 | #46 |
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 112
|
Is BCPL useful today ? In this non Amiga post they chat about using a tiny FORTH program to 'bootstrap' other software. https://github.com/Fedjmike/mini-c/issues/2
|
07 January 2018, 15:41 | #47 |
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Finland
Posts: 1,186
|
There's not really any 'modern use' of BCPL, Forth has some extreme niche uses as its one of the simplest languages you can imagine to implement a interpreter for and thats why its mentioned in that discussion.
|
07 January 2018, 18:07 | #48 |
Amigan
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: London
Posts: 1,317
|
The obvious use would be to compile the TripOS bits of AmigaOS when it is eventually open sourced
(assuming there's any left in OS3.x) |
16 December 2018, 19:41 | #49 |
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: Australia
Age: 51
Posts: 99
|
So dragging up this old thread. I'm really curious to know how this went.
Has it been possible to compile, and port away from the original BCPL code? |
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
Thread Tools | |
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
native x86 code in WinUAE? | Falk | support.WinUAE | 20 | 21 January 2023 18:30 |
Best way to write native code? | arodgers | support.FS-UAE | 4 | 02 September 2016 19:53 |
FS-UAE Native Code? | jdog320 | support.FS-UAE | 2 | 26 July 2016 11:03 |
amiga c/c++ compiler | Fissuras | request.Apps | 41 | 18 June 2012 20:50 |
Best C Compiler for Amiga is? | Pyromania | Amiga scene | 5 | 14 May 2002 17:17 |
|
|