hhos

Sorry about that, FarmerPotato. I think it was me that started that. Thank you for the source for the Xmodem program. It's kind of distracted me from my original goal, but it's raised some points that I need to address, or just want to. I'll post any other questions on those to another thread, and try not to clutter this one up too much again. Thanks, HH

Oops, forgot that I also copied ASSM1 and ASSM2 onto that disk before trying the assembly. They seemed to load without problem and then afterward I could access nothing on that disk. The disk was also a 1.2 MB HD disk, formatted as SSSD(90K), so that could well have been a part of that problem, even though I had not had a problem with it up to that point. What can I say? I was warned about that. I have now formatted 15+ DSDD disks as SSSD's so I shouldn't have to worry about THAT happening again. Thanks, HH

This almost sounds like you completely agree with me. The TI99 is completely hamstrung by the use of GPL as its primary language. All of this can be done with machine language. I know this because it IS done with machine language in the end. It looks to me like GPL was forced on us because they didn't put a decent quantity of RAM in the machine, and also because they might have thought we would never know the difference? TI should not have tried so hard to compete with the Commodore PET. That's what killed them. If they had put just 4K in there they would have had a much better machine, without GPL. I think 48K, a full 16 bit bus, a monitor, and an 80 column display mode would have positioned them to take the business market. IBM might not have even gotten into the home and small business computer market, or they might have been forced come in with a much more capable first entry into the market. But probably, that's just me. Right off the bat I have a problem with, "with the right hardware set up." But then I don't have any idea how fast C or Forth can be on the TI99 either. I ran some tests in BASIC several months ago when I acquired some 20+ TI99's. I wish I had written the results down, but I didn't. I just remember that a CoCo1, running at .894886 MHz, blew the doors off the TI99, which was of course running at 3 MHz. A C64 was even faster than either the CoCo or the TI99. I think the TI99 BASIC should run at least 3 times faster than it does, but I'm not about to re-write the BASIC interpreter. I don't like BASIC either, but it can be a quick way to demonstrate/test an idea. (quick, not fast) Where is this demo? What hardware set up? Thank you, HH

Too late. I already re-formatted it. I was getting a "device error". I concluded from that, that all was lost. I was surprised when it re-formatted without error. So far all the disks I've tried to format when I got "device error" were failures, with this one exception. It definitely happened when the assembler wrote to the disk. My program has never been run. It's too dangerous to the disk currently in the drive. One of the reasons I decided to put some output to the display was to prevent damage like what you describe. The plan was to start it, put up some rudimentary instructions, something like "Place a the disk in DSK1", "All data on the disk will be destroyed", "by the formatting process", "Press ENTER when ready." I started this project in response to a request from an Italian 99er, "ti99iuc". The request was made in 2011 and hopefully all his issues have already been addressed, but his fix for the problem was to send his Disk Manager to his fellow Italian 99er, so he could get some disks formatted. I had pretty much the same problem myself, which is why I found his request. I at first thought I could write a BASIC program to "poke" in some assembler to do the format. Then I went through some of the stuff I had bought for my TI99 years ago, and found a FlashROM99, so my troubles were over, at least in that respect. I am continuing with the project because I figure there could be more need for such a utility, but now it will be 100% assembler, and be distributable via cassette or WAV file. I'm not inexperienced in assembly language, just TMS9900 assembly language. I wrote my own assembler for the TRS-80 Color Computer (hand assembled), complete with its own file system (I didn't understand RS's file system so I made my own) and low level format utility. Then I saw Radio Shack's macro assembler, bought it, and started using that, and then turned to OS9 and its even more capable assembler. This project would not have been a big deal for me back then, but I think I should be able to handle it now, even with my age-shrunken brain. I used to find it relaxing to take a break in the day and just program a computer for 15 minutes. Now it's more of a chore, but my brain needs some exercise, and I've become somewhat fascinated by the TI99 design. The question in my mind is this: How many times can they possibly shoot themselves in the foot? But I'm rambling now. I think I would have finished this project long ago if the TI99 was more like the other platforms of its time. It is more advanced in many respects, and I think if they hadn't made so many mistakes they could have been the other major computer manufacturer to take on IBM's PC, or even been in IBM's place in home computer history. Thanks for the offer of help with my little disk SNAFU, HH

I know for a fact the disk was not full. Even after the error was first encountered I was able to assemble other versions of the same source, under different names, in an effort to determine the cause. I can no longer go back to check to see how much disk I still had left, but the only things on it were EDIT1, the source, object, and listings for two versions of my main file( the listing and object files for the "COPY" version were zero length and therefore only took up one sector each) and source, listing, and object for the "include" file. Thanks, HH

I couldn't figure out how to get the controller out to get a good look at it. I was afraid of breaking it so all I can tell you is it is a TI disk controller. HH

I'm running hardware. What good does it do to set up 4 disk buffers if the DSR is going to override your choices. That makes it look like COPY never did work, ... for 30+ years? At least with the original DSR ROM anyway, right? How could this problem not have surfaced before this? That makes no sense to me, though I have no better theory to present. As far as I know the disk controller is the original TI SSSD. I'll have a closer look inside later on tonight. I tried assembling with just "R" for my option(s) and got the same result. Since I was using E/A II on FlashROM99 I decided to try assembling it with my original EA on floppy disk. Before I did that I checked the directory on the disk, just to get the correct file names so I wouldn't be filling up the disk needlessly, and everything looked fine. After the attempt at assembly my copy of EA, the entire floppy was trashed. I'm going to have to rewrite the whole thing because I didn't create a backup! That must be for the best, SOMEHOW! I'm not seeing it right now, though. Maybe that will teach me to start making a backup, like I used to do back in the day. I searched through some of the stuff I bought years ago just after I bought this system. I found another assembler called the RAG assembler. I am certain I have read good things about this ASM on this forum. I have no printed manual, but there appears to be several files on the disks with manual-like text. I'm finding it hard to read on the TI screen and printing it out might not be much better. Besides I don't have anything set up to print it out anyway. Can anyone direct me to a tutorial/RAG-4-dummies that might be easier to read? My own search led me only to a manual for a GPL assembler. That's not for me. I think GPL is the biggest reason why the TI99 is so SLLLOOWWW. I didn't turn to assembly language on a Z80 forty years ago to go slow, and that hasn't changed because I'm looking at a different machine. But I digress. At first I plan to just create a skeleton program with a COPY directive in it and try it with each assembler. If the problem is in the DSR ROM then the RAG will also have the same problem, unless the RAG programmer had a way to get around this little wrinkle. Either way it turns out, I'll have a better idea of how I'm going to get around this. Thanks a lot for all the help. HH

I didn't do any nesting of COPY directives, but I do almost always generate a listing when I'm working in assembly language. In this case I did so without giving it a single thought. I'm a bit too tired to trust myself to try this on such an unfamiliar machine tonight. I think I'll wait for morning to try assembling with just "R" as my option(s). It sounds very promising. Thank you, HH

I am trying to develop a simple disk format program that would load from cassette/WAV and format a SSSD disk in DSK1. I think I've gotten it pretty much done, but I decided to put in some screen output, which I thought would be easy, and I still think it SHOULD be. However, I put my character definitions into a separate file so I could use it in other future projects. Now, when I put a COPY directive in like this: LABEL COPY "DSK1.CHASCII" in my main source file, I get a "DSR error 0094". I don't know if I am misunderstanding the function of the COPY command, or I'm using a manual that is giving me the wrong syntax, or other. I am using the TI99 E/A manual, which I've found has a plethora of errata. As far as I can see I'm doing nothing wrong in using this command in this way, but I have tried single quotes and no quotes, which both give me a syntax error. I have also tried inserting and deleting a label, which is supposed to be optional, as well as a number of other combinations, all with no effect. I have started to think perhaps I've misread the purpose of the COPY command. It sounded like it should behave as an "include" or "use"(Microware OS9 and NitrOS9), each of which imports and assembles source as if the separate file was actually in the original file being assembled.(I've read that definition quite a few times and I can't see how it could possibly mean anything else) Is COPY something else? If so, that is one very big chunk of errata to add to the list. And, is there some other command that will provide this function for me? If it is indeed supposed to be an "include" what am I doing wrong? Thank you, HH P.S. The main source assembles fine when I comment out the offensive COPY command line, and the "include" file assembles with only one error, saying that an "END" is assumed or some such. The include file is Matthew180's SCSI from his "Assembly on the 99/4A".

Wow. That's great, Lee. That's a source code for the whole thing. I see that I already had those seven files downloaded onto my main computer. I just hadn't gotten into them yet. You've saved me a good of deal time. Thank you. My initial read on all this is that I will have to locate the ROM first, using the 0x00 bit to turn on the ROM every 0x100?, or 0x200?, bits, search for DSK in the name list of the ROM to verify it is the correct one, then locate the 0x11 function in the subprogram list, get the entry point address (EntryAddr), and then call it with a BLWP using a vector containing 0x83E0, EntryAddr. But before I do that I will have to build a PAB in the PAD/VDP memory. Sounds very doable if I am understanding it fully. Thanks in advance for any advice/additions/critiques to my approach here. I am new to the TI99, but not to assembly language. I am very confused by the TMS9900, starting with the curious way they chose to number their bits, and continuing on from there. HH

Yes, that is what I thought, and I can't use more than 40 tracks. I don't think this drive in the PEB has a read/write head on both sides either. Are there mod kits/instructions for upgrading this drive controller module for DD? I've seen pictures of units with half-height 5.25" and 3.5" drives mounted where this one SSSD is. I won't be doing this mod in the near future, but I have no doubt I will get to it eventually. Thank you, HH

Sounds like a challenge. I might get to that right after the TI99/4A-powered-time-travel-machine starts to coalesce.... wait.... I think I see it!.... Nope, just some bacon grease hit my glasses. Glad that wasn't my eye. I'll see what I have around here in DSDD disks. They should work OK, right? This is the second machine I've ever had that had only single density drives. On that other one I used DSDD 3.5" disks and had no trouble. I'm not really having a lot of trouble with these HD disks for that matter. HH

I'm not quite ready to tackle TI99/4A-powered time travel just yet.

That's what I needed! Thanks, Home Automation. I almost got a 90k disk onto a 1.2Meg floppy! Almost. lol I'll have to try again, but I'm in business now. Thanks again. HH

I found this: http://shawweb.myzen.co.uk/stephen/earfeb89.htm#dsr It gives me the parameters to send to the DSR routine on the disk-controller card, so if I can figure out this crazy TI BASIC's version of "POKE" and "EXEC" I can hand assemble a short assembly routine to call the DSR routine, if I can acquire the entry point to that subroutine you mentioned. Is there a disassembly listing of that DSR ROM? Thank you, HH

I have a similar problem to the Italian 99er in this topic. I have no Disk Manager cartridge. No disk operation manual came with the PEB I bought. My copy of Editor/Assembler disk A is corrupted, I think. I can get a catalog of the disk, but get errors when I try to access any of the files on the disk. I think I can reconstruct my EA disk if I can just get a disk formatted, but I am at a loss when I try to find a command in XB (I presume this is short for extended BASIC) that will format a disk for me. Everything I am reading says to insert the Disk Manager, which I do not have. I do have a FlashROM99 cart that I could put a ROM image on if someone can direct me to a Cart image that would do the job for me. Thank you, HH