Knoware.no

[pjw]

Im currently working on a system that will do this automatically, based on
Qlib's EXT_PROC/EXT_FN keyword list. Simply add the name of some command
you wish to use to the list, and when ready, press a key and the toolkit
containing those commands will be built for you. It will take some time to
complete the project as it requires some reorganisation of the collection,
but as of now it works for me..

Enough! I better get on with the project!

Per,

Just curious: How do you identify code that is shared between keywords? Most of my "toolkits" (rather "dedicated libraries for specific S*BASIC programs") contain shared parameter fetch routines, for example. Even manually ripping them into pieces has been a challenge for me in the past.

As far as libraries are concerned I keep common code, such as fetching or returning parameters, in their own libraries, while specific toolkit code is held separately. When linking, the linker first takes my toolkit code, and then extracts what it needs from the general libraries. Is that what you mean?

[NormanDunbar]

Afternoon Ralf.

... I always took the trouble to use DP's "IDIS Intelligent Disassembler" ...

I remember buying IDIS, and using it frequently, until one day, I broke it. I reported it to Freddie who put me in touch with the author, I can't remember his name sadly, and between us, we found the bug and he fixed it. It was crashing when it disassembled a "bsr.s label" instruction. The code didn't cater for the short branch variant of the BSR instruction.

Freddie was so pleased that we had fixed it, he sent me a complimentary copy of IDE Special Edition! I was most pleased as I wanted the SE, but couldn't afford it back then.

Happy days!

Cheers,
Norm.

[tofro]

Per,

Just curious: How do you identify code that is shared between keywords? Most of my "toolkits" (rather "dedicated libraries for specific S*BASIC programs") contain shared parameter fetch routines, for example. Even manually ripping them into pieces has been a challenge for me in the past.

As far as libraries are concerned I keep common code, such as fetching or returning parameters, in their own libraries, while specific toolkit code is held separately. When linking, the linker first takes my toolkit code, and then extracts what it needs from the general libraries. Is that what you mean?

Yep, answers my question, thanks. While I tend to use libraries and "need-to-have-linking" in most of my programs, for some reason I have always put all toolkit stuff into one single file. Might be worthwhile to have a re-think here.

[Artificer]

As they say there is nothing new under the sun.

When I bought toolkit 2 aka "Supertoolkit" back in the 80s it came as a build your own version of the toolkit.

The disk and pogram still runs.

Cheers

[Derek_Stewart]

Hi,

The Configurable SuperToolkit II v2.06 is available on the QL Homepage.

[Peter]

When I bought toolkit 2 aka "Supertoolkit" back in the 80s it came as a build your own version of the toolkit.

Very cool. When I played with QIMSI on unexpanded QL, I was looking for a very small toolkit that only contains the minimum I need. Pity we do not have this for a newer version of TK2.

[Peter]

The Configurable SuperToolkit II v2.06 is available on the QL Homepage.

But SuperToolkit II is TK3, not TK2. Configurable TK2 would be far more interesting.

[pjw]

TK2 is a kind of hybrid toolkit, part systems enhancement (for Qdos), part utility. The source code is included with the SMSQ/E sources, so you can make a suitable cut down version if you like.

The core of the Knoware configurable toolkit is basically just a sort of database, so in theory, the same system could be used to make ad hoc versions of TK2 (I presume).

[pjw]

Knoware.no has had a wee update: www.knoware.no/htm/changes.htm. Nothing to write home about..

[pjw]

Knoware has moved to Canada! Thanks to all those who made it possible!

Although Im not keen on the idea I enjoyed the challenge, so yesterday afternoon I produced an S*BASIC source code obfuscater. (See www.knoware.no/htm/changes.htm) It does only the first basic steps of what such a program might do, namely change all variable and function names to something impenetrably obscure and remove any REMarks and prettifying spaces, etc.

Anyone serious enough about this sort of thing might then go for muddying the program structure. That could be done in a second pass, but Ive left all that for those who "need" it or who would enjoy the challenge.