I have a TI-83+ program I created with TI Graph Link about three years ago. Printed, it takes three dense pages. It runs fine on the TI-84+ SE and on my students' TI-83+, TI-84+ and SE. Now I want to edit it, so I try to open it in TI Program Editor 1.6.1 but I get the error message

> Unknown tag value in program image: 99 54

I know that means there's a character it doesn't like, but which character? If I could find out what code 99 54 is I could search for it and replace it.

What I've tried:

(1) SourceCoder here. Its entire output was
> File Type: TI-83 file
> Total File Size: 4554 bytes
> MATH200A
> Complete! 4339 tokens rendered in 0.234793 seconds.
which doesn't give me a lot to go on.

(2) TI Graph Link won't install on my 64-bit Win 7 computer, so I created a Windows XP virtual machine, installed TI Graph Link, and opened the program -- no problem at all. I carefully checked all my lower-case letters and replaced them with the corresponding statistics variables, but either I've missed one or there's some other problem because I still get the error in TI Program Editor.

Thanks in advance for your help!
Could you please give me the code dump?
Stan, if the SourceCoder output is correct, you can just use SourceCoder to edit your program. If that doesn't work, probably the best thing you could do is, if you don't mind, upload the program file (which ends in .8xp, as you probably know). Cemetech doesn't offer uploads, so you'll have to find somewhere else.
When the TI Program editor gives that error it means there's a token it doesn't recognize, and the numbers that follow are the bytes of the token in decimal.

According to the token tables, the token in question is Xres (99 and 54 in hexadecimal are 63 and 36, which this page says is Xres), but I have no idea why that would cause an error—that's been a perfectly valid token since the TI-83 series. Can you or someone else who has TI Program Editor try opening another program with Xres in it? That way we'll know if it's a bug in TI's software.

And as calcdude84se said, you can always edit the program with SourceCoder.

EDIT: Runer112 tried it. It's a bug with the new TI Program Editor that doesn't recognize Xres.
Thanks, all, for the fast replies.

* Deep Thought, "A bug with the new TI Program Editor that doesn't recognize Xres" -- good old TI! But at least now I know -- thanks. (I have the TIxx_Guide tables from ticalc.org, which are obviously in hex. I didn't realize that the error message values are in decimal. Thanks!)

* blue_bear_94/calcdude84se -- I don't know how to give the code dump because SourceCoder won't display it; same problem with "you can use SourceCoder to edit". I got just the four lines of output I showed originally -- no way to display or edit the program. What am I missing?
(Additional concerns: I have thetas in my program and a documented bug turns them into not(; also I read elsewhere in this forum that it can't handle statistics variables, ort which I have a lot.)

The code is already uploaded at: http://www.tc3.edu/instruct/sbrown/ti83/prog/math200a.zip , and select file M20083A.83P or MATH200A.8XP. Again, this actually works in TI-83 and in 83+/84+. It's actually kind of slick IMHO, and I'll post it to Projects when this is resolved.

Thanks again for the help - I'd like to know how to use SourceCoder effectively because it's not at all obvious to me, but at least now I know why TI Program Editor is choking.
Stan, welcome to Cemetech! Feel free to ask any questions about SourceCoder that you might need; which aspects of its functionality do you find non-obvious? If you'd like, you're welcome to introduce yourself in the following topic: Introduce Yourself.
Quote:
* blue_bear_94/calcdude84se -- I don't know how to give the code dump because SourceCoder won't display it; same problem with "you can use SourceCoder to edit". I got just the four lines of output I showed originally -- no way to display or edit the program. What am I missing?
Click the little down arrow next to the name MATH200A to view the source. There's also an editor if you click Edit, and we even have an online emulator on the editor page, jsTIfied!
Quote:
(Additional concerns: I have thetas in my program and a documented bug turns them into not(;
. No. thetas in the program name get turned into not(. Thetas in programs are fine. That would be a big bug for me to have not fixed! Smile
Quote:
also I read elsewhere in this forum that it can't handle statistics variables, ort which I have a lot.)
That's also incorrect, to my knowledge; where did you read that?

Finally, as I see you're a fellow educator, and one working with calculator programming, may I point you in the general direction of my book being printed in mid-August, Programming the TI-83 Plus/TI-84 Plus: A Beginner's Guide to Universal Programming Concepts, from Manning Publications. I've worked hard to package my fourteen years of experience programming calculators and teaching all kinds of coding into a readable, thorough introduction to programming, so I wonder if it would be relevant to you, your colleagues, or your students. Hope to see you around on Cemetech for a long time! Smile
Thanks, Kerm, for the reply.

1. Now that you point out the arrow, I see it. Meaning no disrespect, I think that's awfully subtle -- wouldn't a "View Source" button be a lot more helpful to someone who isn't already familiar with the tool?

2. " thetas in the program name get turned into not(" -- sorry, I misread that. That's a lot more tolerable!

3. "also I read elsewhere in this forum that it can't handle statistics variables, of which I have a lot." It was somewhere in this forum, an article I found while Googling "unknown tag value in program image" (in quotes), but I've just spent a few minutes and I can't find it any more. Maybe it was an earlier version, or maybe the original poster misunderstood. Anyway, I'm glad to know it's not true.

4. About the book: I'd probably be interested in it for myself. The great majority of my students are users and stress enough over just manipulating the built-in commands without trying to write programs.

5. I have a couple of suggestions for Source Code -- I'll add them over in Suggestions.
1. Fair enough; I'll do a bit of polling around and see if and what a better alternative might be.
2. Indeed.
3. I hope it isn't, but if you do run across any bugs, I'll happily field any bug reports
4. Fair enough, that's understandable. Feel free to throw any thoughts or feedback from that in my direction as well.
5. Great, I look forward to them.
Just a follow-up to all to say thanks for the great help! It happens that the Xres was the only token TI Program Editor 1.6.1 didn't like, so I was able to do my edits.(*) I did find another bug: its syntax checker thinks that three arguments is wrong for binomcdf(). I suspect whoever programmed it just looked carelessly at the reference section of the TI-83+ manual and didn't notice that the text is missing part of the first argument ("numtria" instead of "numtrials", the whole second argument, and the optional third argument.

(*) And if there are more in the future, now that I know the codes are decimal I can look them up on my own.
Is there a particular reason you use TI Program Editor over SourceCoder or TokenIDE? What features are in it that you prefer?
I guess the fact that it's "official," but even then TI has discontinued it and left it with a bunch of bugs (Xres and the lowercase tokens, among others) that weren't even there in previous versions. And the syntax checker.

Otherwise, the two editors merth suggested really are great. If you prefer something offline rather than SourceCoder, Tokens is the best alternative to the Program Editor I know of.
Merth asks a fair question. I used to use GraphLink and quite liked it, or really I was accustomed to its eccentricities. But then I got a new laptop, with 64-bit Windows 7, and GraphLink of course wouldn't install. I tried booting a 32-bt Windows XP virtual machine, but it couldn't recognize the serial-to-USB converter I had used with my Win XP laptop. (I never got GraphLink to work with USB.) So I went looking for an alternative editor. I found TI Program Editor, which as DT says is "official", but never really messed with it till just last week when I had occasion to edit one of the programs I had written for my students.

I tried SourceCoder (a student had recommended it years ago, and I still had the link), but the user interface was quite baffling to me. (Following posts in this forum today, I'm no longer baffled. I've posted some suggestions for improvements that might help other newbies.)

Temperamentally I do prefer something offline, and I'm a big fan of syntax checking, which TI Program Editor promises. Unfortunately, its syntax checker is wrong about the syntax of binomcdf(). Since the syntax checker finds only one error, and that one's not an error, it is useless to me for finding any actual errors.I can't use the syntax checker on my program. So much for that!

DT, you seem to be implying that TI Program Editor 1.5 didn't have the same bugs as 1.6.1. It it worth giving that version a try? Or should I just forget about it and use Tokens?

I'll probably play with SourceCoder a bit anyway, now that I know how to use it.
Stan in Dryden wrote:
DT, you seem to be implying that TI Program Editor 1.5 didn't have the same bugs as 1.6.1. It it worth giving that version a try? Or should I just forget about it and use Tokens?
I think I might have remembered wrong—might be the TI GRAPH LINK editor that didn't have the bug. (I've never tried it myself, just reading some old threads on UTI.)
Hmm -- that would make more sense. Thanks!
Stan in Dryden wrote:
Temperamentally I do prefer something offline, and I'm a big fan of syntax checking, which TI Program Editor promises. Unfortunately, its syntax checker is wrong about the syntax of binomcdf(). Since the syntax checker finds only one error, and that one's not an error, it is useless to me for finding any actual errors.I can't use the syntax checker on my program. So much for that!

DT, you seem to be implying that TI Program Editor 1.5 didn't have the same bugs as 1.6.1. It it worth giving that version a try? Or should I just forget about it and use Tokens?
Unfortunately Tokens doesn't do any syntax checking, but I think if you tried it you might like it more Smile
http://merthsoft.com/Tokens.zip
It's being actively developed by yours truly, so if there are features you want, you can always post in the relevant forum.

It's advantage over SourceCoder is only that it's offline. Of course, for online stuff and integrating with the forum, SourceCoder is very much the way to go.
And on the flip side, although SourceCoder is convenient and powerful, TokenIDE gives you a more fluid and complete user experience, as befits a desktop application. Token views and file stats update in realtime, and you have ancillary tools like a sprite editor available to you. One of SourceCoder's (new) big selling points is the jsTIfied emulator built-in, but if that's not helpful to you, especially if you have Javascript disabled, it's less important. It all boils down to which makes your life the easiest, I think.
  
Register to Join the Conversation
Have your own thoughts to add to this or any other topic? Want to ask a question, offer a suggestion, share your own programs and projects, upload a file to the file archives, get help with calculator and computer programming, or simply chat with like-minded coders and tech and calculator enthusiasts via the site-wide AJAX SAX widget? Registration for a free Cemetech account only takes a minute.

» Go to Registration page
Page 1 of 1
» All times are UTC - 5 Hours
 
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

 

Advertisement