Stephen Kellett <snail@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in
news:0UmKH9Wpb6Y$EwCq@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 64K, when I was a lad, I had 5K, well thats what Commodore advertised
> on the box. Nasty marketing folks, I had 3.5K! 0.5K had gone to the
> screen and the rest to the OS, but if you knew where the cassette read
> buffer was you could poke a nifty assembler routine in there too.
> Vic=20 time!
>
> Anyone else?
Atari 800! Advertised as 48k (they were nice and didn't count the 16k
ROM). Started out with basic. You could could move sprites horizontally
with a simple poke, but to move them vertically required moving the
bits, so I wrote a vertical blank interrupt routine to move the sprites
vertically (stuffed in good ol' page 6--0x0600-0x06ff). After getting a
taste of RAW speed I ran out and bought a copy of the Mac65 assembler.
>>instructions than you could shake a stick at. Many of the Itanium
>>instructions I can't even think what on earth you would use them for.
>
> RISC is a farce. The most RISC processor I've found is the 6502. 51
> instructions (from memory). Lots of flexibility. 3 registers (A, X,
> Y). Problem is, 6502 is a CISC, not a RISC.
I've often though about that. I'd like to see what a 6502 instruction
set processor built using 2003 technology could do... just for fun.
--
ybbxvatyvxrnobeantnvayvivatyvxrnurergvpyvfgravatgbneguheyrrerpbeqfznxv
atnyylbhesevraqfsrryfbthvyglnobhggurveplavpvfznaqgurerfgbsgurvetrareng
vbaabgriragurtbireazragnertbaanfgbclbhabjohgnerlbhernqlgborurnegoebxra
|
