Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1,179 Excellent

About Willsy

  • Rank
    River Patroller
  • Birthday 12/03/1970

Contact / Social Media

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Uzbekistan (no, really!)
  • Interests

Recent Profile Visitors

16,940 profile views
  1. That's what stacks are for, my friend! 👍 Or in assembly, you can chain workspaces via the BLWP & RT instructions - which is really nice, because each subroutine gets a bunch of registers (ostensibly R0 to R11 inclusive) to themselves.
  2. Good point. I'm very rusty. So the best I can say is TF will work for up to 1MB on a 4MB card. I think. It's an easy fix to make it work with 4MB cards. Assuming I have enough bytes free 🤯
  3. Yes. @InsaneMultitasker and Fred Kaal helped me to work them out.
  4. Good. Glad to read this. TurboForth always writes a word when using >MAP - but not because of any great insight from me - I just cribbed it all from the original SAMS docs/driver disks 🤓.
  5. Oh my this was seven years ago! We should keep this thread alive and include fbForth and Forth99.
  6. Also, I wonder how fast it would be with no screen I/O at all? Just output the final result? Then you're really timing your algorithm (and the underlying Forth system, of course) and removing the I/O.
  7. He he! Great to see this thread come back to life - I'm really enjoying it. I'd be interested to see how fast TF is with the screen scrolling switched off: FALSE SSCROLL ! The problem with screen scrolling is we're adding the time taken to scroll the screen into the measurements. By removing it, I think you'll see the effects of your optimisations much more clearly. Have fun 🙂
  8. Yes but you need to access vdp regularly to allow the interrupts to fire. Interrupts in TF were an after thought. Most video related commands, and things like JOYST do that for you. For example if you ran this program, interrupts wouldn't work: : test begin again ; But this would work: : test begin 0 [email protected] drop again ;
  9. Shucks, thanks guys!
  10. Just stopping in to say a quick hello to all my TI friends! I still pop by the site most days to read various threads, especially the Forth stuff, but I'm mostly in lurk mode because if I allow myself to go back down the TI/Forth/Assembler rabbit hole my university grades will suffer! I've allowed myself a very enjoyable couple of hours this evening going over old TF threads in search of some info on a question for TSR code for TF. I found a sound player written in FOrth assembler that I had completely forgotten writing. Bit rot, eh? Anyway, wanted to say hi - I'm still kind of around - and will be back once my degree is finished. Take care Mark
  11. For more info on ISR/TSR in TF, see this thread. That was a nice a nice trip down memory lane!
  12. Even I don't know how to call a Forth word (in TF) from an assembler word. I've looked at it a couple of times and it makes my hed hurt! If you guys ever fathom, could you let me now
  13. This might provide some inspiration. The Forth syntax probably won't mean very much, but overall i'm sure it'll make sense. Cheers Mark
  14. NTSC or PAL? In addition, are you guys running any fancies such as F18 etc. It's not really enough to say "it works fine on my system". When you've seen one TI system, you've seen... one TI system
  • Create New...