Re: A89: TI89 ROM vs. HP49 ROM

To: assembly-89@lists.ticalc.org
Subject: Re: A89: TI89 ROM vs. HP49 ROM
From: Jimmy =?iso-8859-1?Q?M=E5rdell?= <yarin@acc.umu.se>
Date: Tue, 08 Jun 1999 04:04:50 +0200
Delivered-To: assembly-89-outgoing@towerguard.unix.edu.sollentuna.se
Delivered-To: assembly-89@lists.ticalc.org
In-Reply-To: <19990608012325.9058.qmail@hotmail.com>
Reply-To: assembly-89@lists.ticalc.org

At 18:23 1999-06-07 -0700, you wrote:
>OK, here is my main questions: was the 89's ROM written in C?

The ROM to the original TI-92 was written in C as some of the
code can be found in the ROM :-) (together with some assembly
code as well). Thus, it's likely to assume that the 92+ was
also written in C, and the 89 is basically a 92+ in a new
format.

>Will Version 2.00 be written in assembly?

Unless they fear that the HP49 will steal buyers from then, no.

>What will be the major changes in Version 
>2.00?  If Version 2.00 isn't going to be written in Assembly, will there be 
>some functions written in assembler i.e. 3d graphing.

SOME stuff is written in assembly. Most likely all the basic
floating point operations for instance.

--
Jimmy Mårdell                  "Applications programming is a race between
mailto:yarin@acc.umu.se         software engineers, who strive to produce
http://www.acc.umu.se/~yarin/   idiot-proof programs, and the Universe
ICQ #: 14193765                 which strives to produce bigger idiots."

References:

A89: TI89 ROM vs. HP49 ROM

From: Josh Cunningham <rogue_ant@hotmail.com>