You tell that you can also use large text to generate text sprites, 7x7. Please give a short description of how this is done, I'm sure its not that different, I just don't see it or am having an off day.
Date: 29 Sep 2007 01:49
Number of posts: 23
RSS: New posts
The way you get the large text is by using the Text(-1,Y,X,"Text trick. The text-sprite technique is still the same, though. Does that make sense?
Um no, not making sense, please show the code, I tried using.
Im new to Advanced TI Basic and am quickly finding out how much it sucks that the TI-84 has SYNTAX issues with a lot of TI-83 and Assembly programs.
Now, it says in the "donut" code to do this
:"([X[( →Str1 //the characters plus 2 spaces
does that mean I put in characters like A, B, C, etc.? And how do I separate these characters? Or are they supposed to be crammed together? Are the two spaces at the end? Will I stop asking questions?
Those questions are all valid. The characters can be anything you want, they are usually crammed together, and the two spaces are at the end — they are used to erase the leftover pixels from the last character.
I added a part explaining the underline problem in TI84's for the text() function.
Perhaps you would be interested in adding the other things to the graphics page:
- Bitmap Sprites, Stat Sprites, Text Sprites, Greyscale, Caching
- Layered graphics, Using pictures as buffers, Clearing parts of the screen
That page is arguably one of the most important on the site, and it needs a lot of work to be completed :D
Also, why is there only an advanced graphics page? I can't find a plain ol' graphics page.
Or is that because all BASIC graphics are advanced? ;)
Basic graphics is just using the graphics commands, while advanced graphics is more about applying those commands with techniques (case in point, text sprites). In any case, it's just a name; you can call it whatever you want.
I know how to do fairly good greyscale using xlib.
I also know how to use logic and xlib to mask sprites.
reply if you would like to know
why don't you add your pool of knowlage to the graphics page while i work on Caching, Stat Sprites, and Picture Buffers
I added that part on statistical sprites.
(Do i have to post whenever i change something?)
Also i noticed that the character bar thing doesn't appear on those pages, and that would be helpfull when editing.
Any questions, etc. about the article should be conveyed in the article's discussion thread rather than in the article itself. Look for the wiki syntax description when editing a page for formatting help.
I rewrote the "statistical sprites" section. The spelling and grammar (and dear God, punctuation, please – this is a wiki, ffs) need to be patched up in many places, and much of the information given in the article (terms used, etc.) needs to be reworked so as to be more 1) coherent and 2) widely accepted (i.e., familiar). It reads a lot like original content with no research, and I would have expected some more usage of some of the jargon that is commonly found in this community rather than the utterances given in this article, which sound more like phrases that have been concocted by the authors for their own use, and less like what they are best known by. And overall, in my opinion, the entire page should be written to feel more like an assemblage of knowledge and less like a tutorial. This needs work, and honest work – and for the page, not for the person writing it.
I'm going to be gone for a week starting tomorrow; I may or may not have online access, which is why I'm putting this out here before I go.
Best of luck,
A year later, I've tried to carry through an improvement. Punctuation is one problem, but I've also tried to give a balanced account of the various methods (balanced, not in the sense that I'm claiming they're all equally good, but in the sense that I tried to fairly describe the advantages and drawbacks of each, and there are reasons to use each one).
A few things I've simply removed. For instance, the section of Hard-coded Sprites which described using a matrix — has anyone actually tried that? There is nothing slower or more memory-consuming, and it has no redeeming features.
*3 years later* …
I remember looking at the Matrix method way back in 2008 or 2009 and it worked very well for me. At some point, I think it would be great to include it again simply as a way to show more methods. It went like this, if my memory serves me well:
[[0,1,1,1,0][1,0,0,0,1][1,0,0,0,1][1,0,0,0,1][0,1,1,1,0 For(A,1,5 For(B,1,5 If Ans(A,B Pxl-On(A,B End End
It is not efficient in the least, but it works.
Also, on another note, I came up with a method (back in 2008 or 2009) that I called "Polar Sprites" as it used polar graphs to create some detailed images that looked like monsters (and could be scaled and rotated by changing the window size and making appropriate transformations on the function). I'm thinking a topic on that should be included. Anybody have any opinions?
They look like this:
47%? Take a look and try to imagine how cool 100% will be. This has won zContest 2011 and made news on TICalc. This compromise between Assembly and BASIC parses like BASIC and is fast like assembly. Grammer 2