Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: 1802 Languages

Expand Messages
  • Allison Parent
    ... I think a post was lost by yahoo. ...
    Message 1 of 39 , Nov 15, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      --- In cosmacelf@yahoogroups.com, "J.C. Wren" <jcwren@j...> wrote:
      >

      I think a post was lost by yahoo.

      > Say what? C expects nothing. C, the language, has no I/O. I/O is
      > implemented in libraries. Even so, beyond a console and perhaps
      < disk
      > storage, there are no standard C libraries that I'm aware of that
      >have any expectation of hardware.

      Hardware is the CPU, not IO. I understand libs. I've used smallC
      on z80 since the early 80s.

      What I was talking about is pointers and address arithmetic.
      What would 1802 C do with
      double *px;
      ++(*px);
      chr = *px + 8;

      I suspect the resulting code would be ugly if not large for both
      simple statements.

      C for 1802 would be useful. However C was born on a far larger
      machine that did indexed indirect addressing natively, 16bit
      stacks and an efficient call and return via stack. When put
      on smaller machines (even Z80) C tends to have some aspect that
      is inefficient. Smaller the machine the worse that tends to be.
      The 1802 is an oddball, it's pointer register rich, but how they
      are used is limited. when you take out the many needed for various
      things R(0-6) like DMA, stack, PC and SCRT there aren't many left.
      then there is the code to load, save and otherwise manipulate them.

      > In fact, second only to Forth, C is usually one of the first
      > languages brought up on a new architecture (since the mid-80's, at
      any rate).

      Sorry, Forth was years away when 8008, 8080, 8085, 8086/8, z80,
      ti9900, 1801, 1802, SC/mp. SC/MPII, 6800, 6502 and a long list
      I've forgotten were launched. All of them had BASIC of some form
      first. The first C for those was even longer. For modern post
      PC era (late 1981) that tends to be true as everyone now has a
      cross compiler on PC for xzy cpu.


      Allison
      >
      > --jc
      >
      > Allison Parent wrote:
      >
      > [snip]
      >
      > >
      > >
      > > The problem with C even in the small form is that it expects things
      > > from the hardware that often are not there. The result is often
      > > poor (slow or big code) performance. I'm sure it can be done
      > > for the 1802 but, why?? That and while I know C I really don't
      > > like it that much.
      >
      > [snip]
      >
      >
      > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      >
    • Stewart
      ... Hi Mike, Did you ever get the pascal compiler working to the point where you would share with another pascal (and 1802) enthusiast? Email me direct,
      Message 39 of 39 , Dec 31, 2007
      • 0 Attachment
        --- In cosmacelf@yahoogroups.com, rileym65 <no_reply@...> wrote:
        >
        > Allison,
        > Sounds like a fun project. There are no current high-level
        > languages that provide everything you need (although i am nearing
        > completion an a pascal compiler that would have everything you need)

        Hi Mike,

        Did you ever get the pascal compiler working to the point where you
        would share with another pascal (and 1802) enthusiast? Email me
        direct, offlist, and best wishes for the New Year,

        Stew
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.