Re: A86: TI's ROM Sux

To: assembly-86@lists.ticalc.org
Subject: Re: A86: TI's ROM Sux
From: Bryan Rittmeyer <bryanr@flash.net>
Date: Wed, 01 Jul 1998 23:30:46 -0400
Delivered-To: assembly-86-outgoing@towerguard.unix.edu.sollentuna.se
References: <BMSMTP8989627750a0734985@dpcmail.itg.ti.com>
Reply-To: assembly-86@lists.ticalc.org

2.5 us v.s. 3 us on a 4 MHz z80? I realize that can add up
over iterations, but, with all due respect, a better electrical 
link port design would have done much more for increasing
bitrate... Overall, though, TI has done a great job with
these things. Sorry if I sounded like a jerk in that
post. I'm just getting frustrated with random link port
puking on the 8X calcs.

Bryan

Pat Milheron wrote:
> 
> jp's execute faster, in the link code speed was more important
> than rom usage.
> 
> PAT
> 
> ------------------
> Original text
> 
> From: Bryan Rittmeyer <bryanr@flash.net>, on 6/27/98 8:45 AM:
> 
> rabidcow@juno.com wrote:
> 
> > really?  tell ti, they used add
> 
> I really wonder about the quality of some of their ROM coders...
> Half the people on the list could do a much better job. They use
> jp in some of the link port code to move PC up/down less than
> 10 instructions!
> 
> Was the 8X ROM written in C as well? I believe the 92 ROM was.
> Then again, if they have a whole ROM chip to play with they
> can waste as damn much as they want.
> 
> --
> Bryan Rittmeyer
> mailto:bryanr@flash.net
> http://www.bridges.edu/horizon/

-- 
Bryan Rittmeyer
mailto:bryanr@flash.net
http://www.bridges.edu/horizon/

References:

From: