Re: A86: Re: Re: Maskable Interrupts

To: assembly-86@lists.ticalc.org
Subject: Re: A86: Re: Re: Maskable Interrupts
From: ComAsYuAre@aol.com
Date: Sat, 2 Jan 1999 12:49:14 EST
Delivered-To: assembly-86-outgoing@towerguard.unix.edu.sollentuna.se
Reply-To: assembly-86@lists.ticalc.org


In a message dated 1/2/99 2:36:11 AM Eastern Standard Time,
assets@eden.rutgers.edu writes:

> not quite, kid.  what halt does is stop CPU operation until an interrupt
>  occurs, so if you had the interrupts enabled, the calc would turn back in
>  less than 1/200 of a second ... it waits for on key to be pressed instead
to
>  be turned back on, since that is also an interrupt.
>  when it comes to having clock on the 86, i think, bluntly, that kirk is
>  wrong.  he's over looking the fact that you could use _alt_off to write
your
>  own shut down routine that turns off the LCD and loops over a check of the
>  bit in that port (i forget which one :P) keeping the interrupts enabled.
>  also, if you had the conviction, you could write a routine to adjust the
>  clock for battery power.
>  


you could do that, but then the battery power would just be drained
incredibly.  what's good about using halt is that it uses minimal battery
power