Re: A82: ASM on 19.006 (PROBLEMS???)
[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: A82: ASM on 19.006 (PROBLEMS???)
On Mon, 2 Oct 2000, Dines Justesen wrote:
> If all of the above is true making an asm shell which support the new ROM
> versions would require:
> - A new ROM_CALL function which uses the ZShell method*
Could you remind what it consists in?
> - All programs would have to be recompiled
Because of the shift of the address at the very begining of the ROM (where
address where constant)
> - All programs uising the ROM table directly would have to take the offset
> into account, or the calls should be added to the shell
> - The new ROM_CALL might be longer requiering other functions included in
> the shell to be moved (and all programs using addrs in the shell might have
> to be changed)
I don't think it's a big problem because very few progs use the ROM_CALL in an
intensive way.
>
> It might also be worth considering the following:
> - If the new version is added support for all the old ROM version can be
> added without problems.
> - ROM CALLs needed to implement VAT compatible relocation should be included
Yes, it's the fashion ;-)
> - Should the shell be compatible with a TI83 shell?
Well, I think some problems would be very hard to solve: the statram only
available on the TI83, the different way to manage the link port...
Knowing as easy it is to convert a prog between 82<->83, I think we should not
think about introducing compatibility and keep our time on the VAT+ROM
compatibilities.
>
> All in all making a shell work on the new ROM version would require a lot of
> work, so I guess the question is whether anyone wants to do it. As i haven't
> even been able to finish ASH 3.1 (but I should still have the source for all
> version including Ash 3.1Beta3G) it is unlikely that I am going to finish a
> shell supporting the new version. If any one is interested in making a shell
> I will probably be willing to send the source to them. So if someone out
> there is interest lets discus the new version on the list, so we can all see
> whether there is a real chanve that it is gone to be done.
According to the plan of CrASH_Man, he is working on the problem. I have to say
that I would be very happy if only one shell subsisted on the ti82. May be you
could ask Hideaki if he is interested by your source code to give it a little
boost.
Eric
Follow-Ups:
References: