[A83] Re: Windows 2000 SP3


[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]

[A83] Re: Windows 2000 SP3




Yeah, that 0x0b instead of 0x0d can be a real problem, I had the same
fault with bin8x, the TiGL program really needs the correct value.yu

On Wed, 7 Aug 2002, Henk Poley wrote:

> 
> > Van: David Phillips <david@acz.org>
> > 
> > Can you be more specific?
> > 
> > I just did a quick verification of the source code with the format
> published
> > here:
> > 
> > http://gladstone.uoregon.edu/~tsinger/link/TI-83+/fformat.html
> > 
> > The only error I see is that the first 2 bytes of the variable entry
> should
> > be 0x0d instead of 0x0b.  Is there anything else?  Another possible issue
> is
> > that the variable type ID is 0x06 (edit locked program) when it possibly
> > should be 0x05 (program).  Does it need to be changed?
> 
> That can be the error. This 0x0D / 0x0B value is the size of the header.
> See my next (HTML, for the layout.. sorry) post for some extra info. I
> was/am working on some perl program to detect if a program is an assembly
> file, etc. So I cracked "the code" a little bit, previous documentation
> (found at Ticalc.org) was kinda vague.
> 
> The problem is that I don't have that much 'official' programs made by the
> appropriate TiGL software. So I'm not exactly sure.
> 
> > The length values are weird and don't exactly match the specification,
> but I
> > remember doing a lot of tests and comparisons when I wrote the code, so
> it
> > is likely to be correct.
> > 
> > The rewrite of Bin2Var 2.0 will follow that specification exactly and the
> > layout of the source code will make it trivial to verify that it is
> correct
> > according to the specification.
> 
> You might want to check "bin2var3" as stored in the z88dk CVS tree, it has
> some adjustments. I can't remember them, I think it was something with the
> Ti85 format, but I'm unsure.
> 
> 	Henk Poley <><
> 




References: