Tursi Posted December 15, 2021 Share Posted December 15, 2021 1 hour ago, senior_falcon said: I had my doubts, so I ran this program using RXB2020 in Classic99. This pokes the values 1 to 24 to >8300 10 CALL LOAD(-32000,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24) 20 GOTO 20 Using the debugger I could see that only the first 5 bytes were as expected; the others were different values.Not even Rasmus can write a useful assembly program on the TI using only 5 bytes. Poking to the FAC at >834A yielded similar results - a couple of bytes were correct, but most were not. So I cannot see how this would be useful on a TI99 without the memory expansion. I was curious too. It looks like in some programs, at least, the buffer at >8398 might be good for 40 bytes. I ran a few tests with strings, prints and math and it wasn't overwritten. I'm sure it's needed for something, but it might be free in some cases... RXB2020E I suppose we're kind of hijacking the 10-liner thread though... maybe we should move it over to the RXB thread if we continue. 10 CALL LOAD(-32000+9*16+8,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24) 11 CALL LOAD(-32000+11*16,25,26,27,28,29,30,31,32,33,34,35,36,37,38,39,40) 15 A$=STR$(1+1)&"HI" 16 PRINT A$ 30 GOTO 15 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RXB Posted December 16, 2021 Share Posted December 16, 2021 Yea we need to move this discussion to another thread to just be polite. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.