RE: TI-H: universal calc issues

[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]

RE: TI-H: universal calc issues

To reduce size, the Shell/OS will be unique to each calc.  The main libraries (textOut, draw, gray4/8, etc.) would also follow that format.  However, everything after that would be universal.  In fact, I just thought of something.  Why not save a lot of trouble in conversion and "just" use a new file format?  something that the calcs can only recieve within the shell, making even the expanders universal in design.  I would end up writing specific interface software for the PC (Mac also?), but it might be worth it.
	My main worry is that I don't want "another Usgard," which is hailed by some as the greatest thing since sliced bread, while I find it big and annoying if I don't have the proper libraries.  I want this to be as general as possible, but not too large.  I might use individual library loading, but only because not all of us care about grayscale and don't want to waste mem on it.  Of course with an expander, who cares? :)
	Also, why use windows on a platform that would choke on pre-emptive multitasking?  We might have the first release with nothing more than a z80 version on bsh/bash....
Christopher Kalos
raptorone@geocities.com
raptor_one@hotmail.com
Executive Director/Administrator
Virtual Technologies Developer's Group


----------
From: 	Osma Suominen[SMTP:ozone@clinet.fi]
Sent: 	Friday, October 10, 1997 4:26 PM
To: 	ti-hardware@lists.ticalc.org
Subject: 	Re: TI-H: universal calc issues

Christopher Kalos wrote:
> I'm working on XCalc, an OS to run the entire link-enabled TI8x series.  It
> will include a universal code system that will eliminate the need for
> recompilation of binaries for each calc, and will hopefully be a bit smaller
> than usgard.  I need recommendations
>  as to what users want, and you guys represent the largest pool of calc-savvy
> people.  Any recommendations will be taken quite seriously.
>    The bytecode issue involves using only z80 opcodes and library calls, and we
> might toss in program relocation in order to facilitate the system.  To top it
> all off, I would like to include an X*nder psuedo-loader with some level of
> intelligence.  
>    Before you all laugh, there are 4 of us working on this, so it might be
> do-able.

How about all the ROM calls? At least keyboard handling (call GET_KEY on
TI-85) and the different text output calls would be real nice to have
either as ROM calls that work similarly on all calcs (do they?), ROM calls
used via a conversion library that translates the calls so they look
similar to the application using them, or a library that does everything
(and takes up lots of RAM).

It's a really interesting project, but I'm afraid the calcs are so
different that eventually the code takes up so much RAM that using it is no
longer feasible. Possibly you could make different versions of the shell/OS
to each calc, so they could include only the calc-specific code and still
be able to run the same programs (a little bit like Unices that share the
same binaries even though the hardware is a bit different).

I don't believe in fancy X style windowing (even though I'm writing this in
an X window 8) on a TI with a very limited amount of RAM (you didn't
mention it but someone on this list did). The shell should include only a
simple set of features that are necessary to use it on all calcs, and maybe
some easy-done nice add-ons like contrast adjustment and auto power down.

-Ozone

--
*** Osma Suominen *** ozone@clinet.fi *** http://www.clinet.fi/~ozone ***
Warning
Could not process part with given Content-Type: application/ms-tnef