Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!think!ames!sdcsvax!ucbvax!WALKER-EMH.ARPA!InfoMail-Mailer From: InfoMail-Mailer@WALKER-EMH.ARPA Newsgroups: comp.sys.atari.8bit Subject: Undeliverable Mail Message-ID: <8709100346.AA24068@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU> Date: Wed, 9-Sep-87 23:21:00 EDT Article-I.D.: ucbvax.8709100346.AA24068 Posted: Wed Sep 9 23:21:00 1987 Date-Received: Sat, 12-Sep-87 06:01:29 EDT Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU Organization: The ARPA Internet Lines: 316 Mail was not delivered to the following users because there were bad address(es) in TO and/or CC field(s): info-atari UNDELIVERED-MESSAGE: ---------------------------------------------------------------- Received: from BBN.COM by WALKER-EMH.ARPA ; 10 Sep 87 02:48:17 GMT Received-2: from score.stanford.edu by BBN.COM id aa26686; 9 Sep 87 22:45 EDT Date: Wed 9 Sep 87 18:41:36 PDT Subject: Info-Atari8 Digest V87 #79 From: Info-Atari8 @ SCORE.STANFORD.EDU Errors-to: Info-Atari8-request@Score.Stanford.EDU Maint-Path: Info-Atari8-request@Score.Stanford.EDU To: Info-Atari8 Distribution List: Reply-to: Info-Atari8@SCORE.STANFORD.EDU Text: Info-Atari8 Digest Wednesday, September 9, 1987 Volume 87 : Issue 79 This weeks Editor: Bill Westfield Today's Topics: 1200xl portb user groups 1200xl and the cpu and OSe 6502 upgrade for the atariS? Re: 1200xl and the cpu and OSe CC8 Compiler Version 2.3b (1 of 3) CPU upgrades ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 6 Sep 87 18:01 EDT From: Cothrell@DOCKMASTER.ARPA Subject: 1200xl portb To: Info-atari8@SCORE.STANFORD.EDU I would like to know what the pinout of the 1200xl's port b is. also, which pin on the 6520 corresponds to bit 0 (I assume the rest are meerly increments of bin and bit). Also, there have been some rumors on occasion that the CPU in the Atari 8 bitters is a custom CPU with a 6502 instruction set. Is this true? If so, what changes were made? I have a 65C802 CPU (16 bit, 6502 pin compatible) that I would like to drop into my 1200 or 130XE. A friend has done this with a Vic-20 (no laughs please) and had no problems...except his games sped up. Comments and suggestions are welcome. Cothrell -at dockmaster.arpa ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 7 Sep 87 12:56 EDT From: Cothrell@DOCKMASTER.ARPA Subject: user groups To: info-atari8@SCORE.STANFORD.EDU does anyone know of a users group (8bitters) in the Baltimore, MD area. or if there is a "clearing house" of user group addresses? . Scott Cothrell (Cothrell -at Dockmaster.arpa ) /s/] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 7 Sep 87 13:42 EDT From: Cothrell@DOCKMASTER.ARPA Subject: 1200xl and the cpu and OSe To: info-atari8@SCORE.STANFORD.EDU Ok, I have just found out that the 1200xl (and I presume everything else but the 400 and 800) does NOT have a standard 6502 in it. Can anyone answere the questions of the day? Namely, what was done to the processor to make it non-standard? I suspect that the boot vector (as well as some others) have been changed from the standard 6502 vectors. If you dont know for sure, but could tell me how to talk to somebody at Atari...I would appreciate that greatly. Otherwise, suggestions and comments are welcome...results will be posted (if there are any). The second question concerns the OS source code. Has the OS source been published for the xl/xe machines (i have a 1200xl and a 130xe). If it has been published, who and where??? If not...does anyone have a suggestion for writing an OS? I want to use a regular 6502 in my 1200xl and I think I will need to change the OS startup vectors (see question number 1 above). Better yet, are there any "alternate OS" available for the ataris...and would any of the authors be willing to release the source under a non-disclosure agreement or make a custom version? please address replies to Cothrell -at DOCKMASTER.ARPA or to Info-Atari8 thanks...Scott Cothrell Cothrell -at DOCKMASTER.ARPA. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 8 Sep 87 18:35 EDT From: Subject: 6502 upgrade for the atariS? To: info-atari8@score.stanford.edu X-Original-To: info-atari8@score.stanford.edu Hi John Could you refer my questions to your resident Hardware wizard PauL Swanson. Has anyone out there ever tried to run the atari custom chips at a higher clock rate. They normally run at 1.79Mhz but the cpu can run at a full 2mhz. I'm thinking about replacing the 6502 with the 65816(The IIGs cpu). the 65816 can run at clock speeds between 1mhz and 4mhz. I know that the 65816 is not directly pin compatable with the Atari 6502c(Its in the Xl & XEs), but it should work thru the parrallel bus. Does anyone here in netland known of other 8/16 bit 6502 compatible cpu's. Also price list and distributors of the 65816 compatibles would be very helpful. William M. Buford (Novice Hardware Hacker) (An Action Programmer!) Dflint02@ulkyvx.bitnet ------------------------------ Date: 8 Sep 87 23:52:43 GMT From: aramis.rutgers.edu!knutsen@RUTGERS.EDU (Mark Knutsen) Subject: Re: 1200xl and the cpu and OSe To: info-atari8@score.stanford.edu In article <870907174221.284781@DOCKMASTER.ARPA> Cothrell@DOCKMASTER.ARPA writes: > Ok, I have just found out that the 1200xl (and I presume everything else > but the 400 and 800) does NOT have a standard 6502 in it. Can anyone > answere the questions of the day? Namely, what was done to the > processor to make it non-standard? While talking to the "doctor" after my 800XL's recent brain transplant, I also learned to my surprise that the CPU is not a stock 6502. I believe I was told that there is a small amount of extra circuitry in there for address decoding, but am not sure. Can check it out if you wish. > number 1 above). Better yet, are there any "alternate OS" available for > the ataris...and would any of the authors be willing to release the > source under a non-disclosure agreement or make a custom version? For playing around with the OS, I suggest you get The Boss alternate OS. In addition to being a good substitution for the Translator disk, it offers coldstart from the keyboard, and has a special mode where it deselects the OS ROM in favor of the RAM underneath, and copies itself there. What you get is a RAM OS that you can POKE around with. --Mark Knutsen -- _________________________________ Jersey\\\\\\\\ _____________________________ ARPA: knutsen@rutgers.edu | \\\Atari\\\\\\ | GEnie GE Mail: M.KNUTSEN UUCP: {...}!rutgers.edu!knutsen | \\\\\\Computer | The JACG BBS: (201)298-0161 --------------------------------- \\\\\\\\\Group ----------------------------- ------------------------------ Date: 8 Sep 87 20:32:10 GMT From: cbosgd!cbterra!smk@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (Stephen Kennedy) Subject: CC8 Compiler Version 2.3b (1 of 3) To: info-atari8@score.stanford.edu This is version 2.3b of CC8, an improved version of the Deep Blue C Compiler. The version fixes a particularly nasty bug found by John Dunning (#4 below) and has some other differences from the original posted version (detailed below). Part 1 -- this article Part 2 -- the original CC8 doc Part 3 -- the uuencoded CC8.COM (33732 bytes, 24465 bytes uudecoded) Steve Kennedy {ihnp4,moss,decwrl,?}!cbosgd!smk [ CC8 is available for FTPing from SCORE::CC8.NTXT (in tops20 mail file (eg text) format). --BillW] -------------------------------------------------------------------------- The following is a list of fixed bugs, enhancements, and known problems: Bug fixes: 1. Empty expressions in for statement accepted, i.e., for(;;;) $( $) 2. Constant expression are now valid after "case", i.e., "case 2*3." (fixes "case -1:" problem) 3. "*a" if a is an array no longer generates an error. 4. A function argument declaration of "type var[]" is now converted to "type *var." Previously, the compiler generated bad code which caused a lock-up when the resulting program was run (e.g., programs using "getname()" in ACECIO.C). Enhancements: 1. The expressions "a[x]" and "x[a]" are both valid and equivalent provided one of x or a is a pointer or array. 2. structs without explicit tag names are now legal, i.e., "struct $( .... $) y;" 3. The compiler now recognizes the keywords "short" and "long." Note that "int" = "short" = "short int" = "long" = "long int" = 2 bytes. "Long" declarations produce the warning "long == short." 4. The compiler now recognizes the keyword "unsigned" and will generate unsigned comparison code for <, <=, >, or >= when one or both operands are unsigned. Caveats: - You'll have to write your own routines to print these correctly (no %u in ACE C or DBC printf). - I'm not sure *, /, or % work properly on unsigned numbers. Known problems (send mail or post if you want to add to the list): 1. Not all escape sequences recognized by ACE C are recognized by CC8. (\u, \d, \l, \r, \e) 2. Compiler doesn't like "register x" although it will accept "register int x." Note that "register" doesn't do anything special anyway. ------------------------------ Date: 9 Sep 87 17:17:15 GMT From: jumbo!ehs@decwrl.dec.com (Ed Satterthwaite) Subject: CPU upgrades To: info-atari8@score.stanford.edu Several recent postings have raised questions about CPU upgrades for the 8 bit Ataris. The obvious candidates are the 65C02, a CMOS version of the 6502 with some minor extensions, and the 65802, a version of the 65816 (Apple IIgs CPU) that is pin compatible with the 6502. One source of both is Jameco Electronics; see any issue of Byte, etc., for their ads. The most recent prices I've seen are 65C02: $8.95 65C802 $19.95 To keep things in perspective, Jameco's quantity-one prices for the 68000 range from $11.95 (8 MHz) to $17.95 (12 MHz); i.e., neither 6502 replacement is much of a bargain in terms of processing power, especially considering the relative amount of support available. For a while, I thought that upgrading my 800 with one of these would be really nifty. I think I was wrong. Maybe I'm overlooking something, but here's how I see things: (1) Software The 65C02 includes a few new opcodes that plug a number of annoying holes in the 6502 instruction set. The MAC/65 assembler for the Atari supports these extensions, so anything for which I have assembler source could be (re)written to take advantage of them. But most of the software I care about was either bought on the commercial market or written in Action. No gain there (or for Basic either). To my knowledge, the only commercial assemblers that support the 65802/65816 extensions run on the Apple II line of machines. So the situation there is even bleaker. In either case, I couldn't give or sell my software to owners of vanilla Ataris -- or to Apple IIc/e/gs owners either. (2) Speed I just glanced through the Rockwell data book (only one at hand covering the 6500). The tabulated cycles/instruction are essentially identical for the R6502 and R65C02. In fact, their 65C02 is a cycle *slower* on decimal arithemetic (as in Basic floating point). I think I recall reading that the WDC (= NCR?) 65C02 did shave a cycle here and there, but that the speedups were removed in the WDC 65802/65816 running in compatibility mode, presumably so that old timing loops would work. No significant gain here without changing the clock speed. But changing the clock speed will almost certainly cause major problems with everything else. The 1.79 MHz. crystal was chosen to match a color TV standard, not because the processor won't go faster. In fact, at least some 800's were built with 6502B's, which are rated to run at 3MHz. (3) Power The new CMOS chips do use less, but I don't believe that the old NMOS 6502 is consuming any significant amount of the power used by an Atari 8-bitter. (4) Wider Bus The 65816 brings out more address lines and thus visions of big memories without bank switching, etc. Someone who chooses to stuff all this in an old Atari box might have a lot of fun and learn a lot, but he ought to understand that he is basically engineering a whole computer system, and probably much of its software, from scratch. I'd appreciate comments and counterarguments; I'd still love an excuse to try the upgrades. Ed Satterthwaite Arpa: ehs@src.DEC.COM UUCP: ...!decwrl!ehs ------------------------------ End of Info-Atari8 Digest ************************** ------- -------------------END OF UNDELIVERED MESSAGE-------------------