This bugged me for a while, but Xavier Vassor straightened me out:

Press [HOME] [F1] [alpha] [A].

If it does not mention a hardware version, you have a HW 1 calculator.

If it does mention a hardware version, you most likely have a HW2 calc. If it says something other than Hardware Version 2, cool -- tell us about it :-)

This applies for both the TI-89 and the TI-92+. TI-92 is different.

Btw, anyone reading this discussion who lacks a TI-89/92[+] and still wants to see what's going on, download the AMS 2.03 software from the Flash calculator section of TI's website. Then grab VTI if you don't have it already -- rusty.acz.org. Coax VTI into thinking that your downloaded ROM is a ROM (you obviously must run the self-extracting EXE first). You may have to type its name in manually. But it works. You will have to increase the contrast by 2 or 3 notches. I think that VTI emulates a HW 1 calculator.

-Ken

What is the difference between the Developer version fo doors and the non-developers version?

The way I understand it, the Developer's version comes with several informational texts about writing programs that are compatable with DoorsOS. The regular version, of course, does not.

the developer version has the assembler to convert your program(writen as a simple text in edit or notepad)into a 89z/92 file .

personally, I'd enjoy it more if there were more shell-free programs (no need of a shell to run it); the 86 is my favorite calc for games because I don't really need a shell or a kernel to run a program (plus it has emulation :P). I hate running uninstall every time I have to switch back to math. And sometimes uninstall doesn't even work and the calc still crashes anyways. It sucks when 3 sqrt(6) can cause your calc to go haywire...

sure, they might be larger, but I never really liked libraries that much anyhow...

Yeah -- you can easily make programs in TIGCC in no-stub mode (it has a Doors mode (okay, a header file) also). More people should write programs with TIGCC -- it makes things so much easier (C vs. ASM), and GCC is a pretty shrewd optimizer. Just pass -O6 when compiling. There are a number of other optimization options in TIGCC that are not documented in the TIGCC package, but if on a Unix system you type 'man gcc', you'll see a listing of all options (obviously in the arch-specific stuff you are only concerned with the m68k stuff, and still you shouldn't need to mess with those options anyway). If anyone is interested, I could email the man page -- nah, get Linux yourself (click the Web Page link).

-Ken (another 5 bytes wasted)

isn't it -O2? if not, what does -O6 do?

Don't use -O6. Use -O2 instead. -O6 includes some optimization technics (like loop unrolling and function inlining). Such technics produces slightly faster code, but usualy produces much larger code. Maybe this is not important on PC, but IT IS on PC. Option -O2 is the best compromise between speed and size of the compiled code.

Btw, if you want a WHOLE list of command line option, this is a file larger than 300K !!! Go to www.gnu.org, find page for GNU C, than download the GNU C manual, You will find a complete list of options there...

Huh, typing error. The sentence need to be:

"Maybe this is not important on PC, but IT IS important on TI-89".

:-)

I was looking at the command line options for GCC and the optimization levels only go from 0 to 3. When I compiled a test program with each setting (as well as the -Os optimization for size) I found that -O2 produced the smallest files. The test program was not very big, however. About 300 lines.

-Kevin

Does the 89 emulation properly emulate HW1 games from the 89 on a HW2 TI-92+? It messed up on mine, I just want to see if it works for someone else and I messed up.

well i tried it on the emu and smq for the 89 and sonic worked...

When I tried to run DoorsOS() on my 89, it said "Error: ASAP or Exec String too long." I tried sending doors to the calculator instead of doorsos, but it gave the same message. What should I do to fix it?