Implementation in Interpreted Language
For some implementations, an interpreted language (IL) is used. (At least two later versions, Palo Alto Tiny BASIC and 68000 Tiny BASIC, are direct interpreters). An interpreter written in IL interprets a line of Tiny Basic code and executes it. The IL is run on an abstract machine, which interprets IL code. The idea to use an interpreted language goes back to Val Schorre (with META II, 1964) and Glennie (Syntax Machine). See also virtual machine, CLI.
The following table gives a partial list of the commands of the interpreted language in which the Tiny BASIC interpreter is written. The length of the whole interpreter program is only 120 IL operations. Thus the choice of an interpretive approach economized on memory space and implementation effort, although the BASIC programs run thereon were executed somewhat slowly. The CRLF in the last line symbolizes a carriage return followed by a line feed.
| TST lbl, string | If string matches the BASIC line, advance cursor over string and execute the next IL instruction; if the test fails, execute the IL instruction at the label lbl |
| CALL lbl | Execute the IL subroutine starting at lbl; save the IL address following the CALL on the control stack |
| RTN | Return to the IL location specified at the top of the control stack |
| DONE | Report a syntax error if after deleting leading blanks the cursor is not positioned to reach a carriage return |
| JUMP lbl | Continue execution of the IL at the label specified |
| PRS | Print characters from the BASIC text up to but not including the closing quotation mark |
| PRN | Print number obtained by popping the top of the expression stack |
| SPC | Insert spaces to move the print head to next zone |
| NLINE | Output a CRLF to the printer |
Source: Dr. Dobb's Journal, Volume 1, Number 1, 1976, p.12.
Read more about this topic: Tiny BASIC
Famous quotes containing the words interpreted and/or language:
“A separation situation is different for adults than it is for children. When we were very young children, a physical separation was interpreted as a violation of our inalienable rights....As we grew older, the withdrawal of love, whether that meant being misunderstood, mislabeled or slighted, became the separation situation we responded to.”
—Roger Gould (20th century)
“It is impossible to dissociate language from science or science from language, because every natural science always involves three things: the sequence of phenomena on which the science is based; the abstract concepts which call these phenomena to mind; and the words in which the concepts are expressed. To call forth a concept, a word is needed; to portray a phenomenon, a concept is needed. All three mirror one and the same reality.”
—Antoine Lavoisier (1743–1794)