Jump to content

danwinslow

Members
  • Content Count

    2,871
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by danwinslow


  1. One that integrates as a device driver (I:) and runs on either an interrupt or polling. I had gotten one up to handling ICMP,ARP,DHCP, and UDP largely by wrapping/modifying parts of IP65 into extended memory and a relocateable driver handler. Was trying to support 4 channels from anything that could use CIO. Ran out of time and energy on the TCP part of it. My target was the UDP part for games, anyway, and that's easily incorporated into games from IP65, as was done recently.

    If on an interrupt, it would stay up and processing ARP, ICMP, etc., in the background while DOS is being used. I wrote a standalone ping command usable from DOS, etc.

    • Like 2

  2. Yeah, but then what? After the cool factor wears off, how actually useful is it, given the ease of FN's file servers and just the general capability to shoot ATR's back and forth?

     

    That's the problem with a lot of this network connection stuff - yes, you can hit the internet. Congratulations. With a very restricted color system and a screen the relative size of a postage stamp and enough memory to hold maybe the initial headers & some text from your average website, now what? Chat? You bet. Can we do email? Yeah, sort of, an 80 col card would probably make that pretty tolerable. FTP and other file transmissions? Yep. Can we use the web? Not the real web...we might be able to use our own custom sub-web of NEON-style pages, but somebody has to write a shit-ton of code to make it all happen AND people need to generate content that's useful/interesting. Can we play games together over the internet? Yes, although somebody needs to write/adapt them, and playing a fast action game is doubtful with current setups.

     

    There's so many limitations and so much work involved in all of this, that while it's certainly cool and it does have some application, it kind of stops in 1990's-land.

    • Like 2

  3. 54 minutes ago, ivop said:

    Anyway, I wrote per sé, which is wrong either way :) The accent is not a grave accent BTW, but an acute accent (accent aigu).

    A touch! I do declare!

    Yep, you're correct.

    Ironically, 'flout' is more or less from dutch:

    mid 16th century: perhaps from Dutch fluiten ‘whistle, play the flute, hiss (in derision).

     

    The general idea is that 'I play my flute at you in derision'. 

     

    • Like 1

  4. "per se" is latin.

     

    per se

    "by himself, herself, or itself," 1570s, Latin, literally "by itself;" from per (see per) + se (see se-). The Latin phrase translates Greek kath auto (Aristotle).

     

    It is not spelled with an accent grave (`). English phonetic could be "purr say", as mentioned above. Modern usage usually means "on it's own" or "by itself", or sometimes "literally".

    • Like 1

  5. I am not an expert on PMBASE, but if glurk is correct above, then this is a general feature you run into when writing to control ports of dedicated chips. They often are only using specific bits for information and will ignore any other bits set in the number. Why he was using $1C in this case I don't know.


  6. I think it's your repetition of the claim that it is easy to read and understand. You've promoted that as a selling point, so people are mentioning when they don't agree. I don't find it readable at all either, but of course everything takes some effort and if I were interested I would put the effort in.

    • Like 1

  7. 19 minutes ago, zbyti said:

    Encouraging to write in Action! not help

    Doesn't help *your* goals, maybe. What's wrong with Action? It's a great language, and look, no errors, no bugs that you can find in 'longer than a few lines'. What is it exactly you think we should do? Encourage use of languages you like?

    • Like 1

  8. 4 hours ago, zbyti said:

    Of course I understand why you are writing this in Action! but it's a bit of an unused amount of work.

     

    If you chose Mad Pascal, Millfork or KickC, you would be helping the developer with the ongoing development, by writing 500 examples you would probably find many bugs in compiler or place to improve...
     
    No one will develop Action! based on your work.

    Well, no one besides us (who would do it anyway) would develop in MPascal, MIllfork, or KickC based on a bunch of stuff in rosetta code, which is hardly a 'go to' resource for most developers. I think you might be missing his point.

    • Like 1

  9. For the TSR type thing, you have to drive it off of an interrupt. VBI/VBD is always an option, you can chain yourself in there even if something else is already (provided they did it the right way). I've also driven things off of one of the pokey timers. As always, you need to attend to the stack/regs and CRITIC and so forth. Anyways, from a high level: get yourself loaded somewhere safe, steal the interrupt vector by replacing it with your routine, saving off the old one if you want to chain to it when you are done (VBI/VBD, usually pokey you wouldn't do that) and also to replace it if you quit. You finish the VBI/VBD by jumping through the old vector, if I recall, and from pokey you'd RTI. Both need attention to putting the stack and regs back together as necessary. For pokey you need to do some setup and control the rate you want.

     

    There's lots of examples in docs about VBI/VBD, pokey interrupts are slightly more exotic but there's still a lot out there. If you are ok with cross compiling on a PC, you could look at MADS or CA65. I used CA65, but if you write the C correctly you can actually use CC65 to do interrupts fairly well. The whole CC65 toolchain is fairly complicated, so you might want to look at MADS for just straight assembly.

    If you want to do it natively on the Atari, I'm not sure what's best but I'm sure someone will have a recommendation.

     

    For the BASIC question, I think you just PEEK(addr)+PEEK(addr+1)*256, or use DPEEK(addr) from one of the more advanced BASICs.


  10. That's a pretty clear error message. You are directing 858 more bytes into LOWCODE than it was defined to hold.

    You might need to put in some segment pragma control in your source code, which is one reason sanny needs to see it.

     

     

    It is a complicated subject, and puts a lot of people off from using CC65, but it is well worth the effort. You do just about anything with the cfg files.

    • Like 1
×
×
  • Create New...