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

Re: Ok historians. When was the intel hex format introduced...

Expand Messages
  • Mike
    Yes, all classical 8008 code that I ve seen, is displayed to the user in octal. However when it comes to I/O, things are different. For instance, the
    Message 1 of 20 , Jun 17, 2013
    • 0 Attachment
      Yes, all classical 8008 code that I've seen, is displayed to the user in octal. However when it comes to I/O, things are different. For instance, the SCELBI tape interface is designed to read and write a 4bit nibbles at a time. All the TTY interface code that I've seen is dealing with 8 bit data bytes.

      regards,
      Mike W.

      --- In midatlanticretro@yahoogroups.com, "B. Degnan" <billdeg@...> wrote:
      >
      >
      >
      > -------- Original Message --------
      > > From: "B. Degnan" <billdeg@...>
      > > Sent: Monday, June 17, 2013 8:59 AM
      > > To: midatlanticretro@yahoogroups.com
      > > Subject: re: [midatlanticretro] Re: Ok historians. When was the intel
      > hex format introduced...
      > >
      > > Other than yours, any 8008 code I have ever seen pre 1976 has been in
      > > octal, but not sure what the papertape format would be, but Intel's
      > > "official" format was actually IBM 029 punched cards, and alternatively
      > > that simple papertape format with the BnnnnnnnnFBnnnnnnnnF, etc format.
      > > bd
      > >
      >
      > I should clarify - The Intel manual's format in 1975, for ordering ROMs was
      > 029 punched card format. The alternative is a papertape with the
      > BnnnnnnnnFBnnnnnnnnF format, containing the entire 1024 bytes in total for
      > the ePROM.
      >
      > bd
      >
    • B. Degnan
      My instinct is that early 8008/8080 used the motorola S format tapes in homebrew environments, while Intel was switching over to their own Intel Hex format
      Message 2 of 20 , Jun 17, 2013
      • 0 Attachment
        My instinct is that early 8008/8080 used the motorola S format tapes in
        homebrew environments, while Intel was switching over to their own Intel
        Hex format tapes to replace the punchcard format they had been using. They
        probably could not use the motorola format for legal reasons, but they
        probably wanted to.
        bd

        -------- Original Message --------
        > From: "Mike" <mike@...>
        > Sent: Monday, June 17, 2013 10:37 AM
        > To: midatlanticretro@yahoogroups.com
        > Subject: [midatlanticretro] Re: Ok historians. When was the intel hex
        format introduced...
        >
        > Yes, all classical 8008 code that I've seen, is displayed to the user in
        octal. However when it comes to I/O, things are different. For instance,
        the SCELBI tape interface is designed to read and write a 4bit nibbles at a
        time. All the TTY interface code that I've seen is dealing with 8 bit data
        bytes.
        >
        > regards,
        > Mike W.
        >
        > --- In midatlanticretro@yahoogroups.com, "B. Degnan" <billdeg@...>
        wrote:
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > > -------- Original Message --------
        > > > From: "B. Degnan" <billdeg@...>
        > > > Sent: Monday, June 17, 2013 8:59 AM
        > > > To: midatlanticretro@yahoogroups.com
        > > > Subject: re: [midatlanticretro] Re: Ok historians. When was the
        intel
        > > hex format introduced...
        > > >
        > > > Other than yours, any 8008 code I have ever seen pre 1976 has been in

        > > > octal, but not sure what the papertape format would be, but Intel's
        > > > "official" format was actually IBM 029 punched cards, and
        alternatively
        > > > that simple papertape format with the BnnnnnnnnFBnnnnnnnnF, etc
        format.
        > > > bd
        > > >
        > >
        > > I should clarify - The Intel manual's format in 1975, for ordering ROMs
        was
        > > 029 punched card format. The alternative is a papertape with the
        > > BnnnnnnnnFBnnnnnnnnF format, containing the entire 1024 bytes in total
        for
        > > the ePROM.
        > >
        > > bd
        > >
        >
        >
        >
        > ------------------------------------
        >
        > Yahoo! Groups Links
        >
        >
        >
      • s100doctor
        ... MCS-8 Microcomputer Set, 8008 8-bit Parallel Central Processor Unit, User s Manual - Nov 1973 rev 4 2nd printing All references are to BNPF format, none
        Message 3 of 20 , Jun 23, 2013
        • 0 Attachment
          --- In midatlanticretro@yahoogroups.com, "B. Degnan" <billdeg@...> wrote:
          >

          > I should clarify - The Intel manual's format in 1975, for ordering ROMs was
          > 029 punched card format. The alternative is a papertape with the
          > BnnnnnnnnFBnnnnnnnnF format, containing the entire 1024 bytes in total for
          > the ePROM.
          >

          "MCS-8 Microcomputer Set, 8008 8-bit Parallel Central Processor Unit, User's Manual" - Nov 1973 rev 4 2nd printing

          All references are to BNPF format, none to any hex format, for paper tapes for either software or PROMs. That's likely what Bill is referring to above. Bill's n's are either P for a high or N for a low, what we would call today 1 and 0 respectively.

          from the "Intellec 8/MOD 80 Operator's Manual - preliminary edition" - June 1974

          Appendix D- - Hexadecimal program tape format - quote-

          The hexadecimal tape format used by the Itellec 8 system is a modified memory image, blocked into discrete records. Each record contains record length, record type, memory address, and check sum information in addition to data. A frame by frame description is as
          follows: - end quote

          the description is the Intel Hex Record format of
          :NNAAAATTDDDDDD...CC as described elsewhere. ROM monitor commands are described elsewhere in the manual, to read or write either BNPF or "hexadecimal format" paper tapes.

          I may have more to say about this on my Web site in the future.

          Herb Johnson
          retrotechnology.com
        • s100doctor
          ... Specifically the Intellec 8/MOD 80 system. That s the Intellec 8008 system modified to an 8080 CPU and 8080-based ROM monitor. The manual says zero about
          Message 4 of 20 , Jun 23, 2013
          • 0 Attachment
            --- In midatlanticretro@yahoogroups.com, "s100doctor" <hjohnson@...> wrote:
            >

            > The hexadecimal tape format used by the Itellec 8 system...

            Specifically the Intellec 8/MOD 80 system. That's the Intellec 8008 system modified to an 8080 CPU and 8080-based ROM monitor. The manual says zero about 8008's.

            Herb
          • DougCrawford
            ... I was thinking it might be tied to the Intellec development also. I sure wish Gary Kildall was still around; I m sure he could have told us, as I just read
            Message 5 of 20 , Jun 30, 2013
            • 0 Attachment
              --- In midatlanticretro@yahoogroups.com, "B. Degnan" <billdeg@...> wrote:
              >
              > My instinct is that early 8008/8080 used the motorola S format tapes in
              > homebrew environments, while Intel was switching over to their own Intel
              > Hex format tapes to replace the punchcard format they had been using. They
              > probably could not use the motorola format for legal reasons, but they
              > probably wanted to.
              > bd
              >
              > -------- Original Message --------
              > > From: "Mike" <mike@...>
              > > Sent: Monday, June 17, 2013 10:37 AM
              > > To: midatlanticretro@yahoogroups.com
              > > Subject: [midatlanticretro] Re: Ok historians. When was the intel hex
              > format introduced...
              > >
              > > Yes, all classical 8008 code that I've seen, is displayed to the user in
              > octal. However when it comes to I/O, things are different. For instance,
              > the SCELBI tape interface is designed to read and write a 4bit nibbles at a
              > time. All the TTY interface code that I've seen is dealing with 8 bit data
              > bytes.
              > >
              > > regards,
              > > Mike W.
              > >
              > > --- In midatlanticretro@yahoogroups.com, "B. Degnan" <billdeg@>
              > wrote:
              > > >
              > > >
              > > >
              > > > -------- Original Message --------
              > > > > From: "B. Degnan" <billdeg@>
              > > > > Sent: Monday, June 17, 2013 8:59 AM
              > > > > To: midatlanticretro@yahoogroups.com
              > > > > Subject: re: [midatlanticretro] Re: Ok historians. When was the
              > intel
              > > > hex format introduced...
              > > > >
              > > > > Other than yours, any 8008 code I have ever seen pre 1976 has been in
              >
              > > > > octal, but not sure what the papertape format would be, but Intel's
              > > > > "official" format was actually IBM 029 punched cards, and
              > alternatively
              > > > > that simple papertape format with the BnnnnnnnnFBnnnnnnnnF, etc
              > format.
              > > > > bd
              > > > >
              > > >
              > > > I should clarify - The Intel manual's format in 1975, for ordering ROMs
              > was
              > > > 029 punched card format. The alternative is a papertape with the
              > > > BnnnnnnnnFBnnnnnnnnF format, containing the entire 1024 bytes in total
              > for
              > > > the ePROM.
              > > >
              > > > bd
              > > >
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > > ------------------------------------
              > >
              > > Yahoo! Groups Links
              > >
              > >
              > >
              >

              I was thinking it might be tied to the Intellec development also.
              I sure wish Gary Kildall was still around; I'm sure he could have told us, as I just read he was working with Intel as they developed
              the 4004 on forward.
            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.