Working with 3k

[Boray]

I've decided to create two slim programs. Seperating them is a disappointing necessity. I have a 3k functioning version now, but I just don't think the added features make it worthy of plugging in another accessory (joystick, tape, ...and cart?).

I think that is really stupid. Think of all those people who doesn't have a vic-20. Is it worth making a vic-20 program at all? You need to buy an ancient piece of hardware to run it...

[Mike]

Is it worth making a VIC-20 program at all?

You're shaking the foundations of this discussion forum.

Now I am really torn. I like the 3k game I am now making, but it is... expanded memory. So much of my style has relied on the simplicity of unexpanded basic. I feel like I am cheating.

Restraining yourself to a mere 3.5K (or 6.5K) of available memory is, of course, your choice. But ...

... there are so much usable programming concepts, that are only sensible to use, if you have at least a little more memory available. I thought like you in the early 80's, shaking my head over C64 users, asking them what they would do with all that memory anyway.

I then got a C=116, wrote my first own machine language programs with TEDMON, then got a C=128. From then I thought everything on computers seemed possible, like I had been freed from all constraints.

I now think like this: if a program needs that memory, and that memory is available, then I use it. If that results in a good, readable, and fast program - I'm ok with that. Later, I might spend some thinking about, if I could save some memory here and there. It's almost always the data the program works upon, that can be made smaller in size - seldom the program itself.

But then, nowadays I write most of my programs in C. Even when I write a program in another language, I think in C.

Michael

[carlsson]

I had forgotten about the other, small spots of memory where UDGs could go into. One observation though, that you can't access the ROM font with reverse text if you point the character set there.