Re: TI-82 programmer at your service.
[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: TI-82 programmer at your service.
You morons!!! The matrices DON'T TAKE UP SPACE!!! The TI-OS just says
they do. How to prove it: Load ash, and then load 25k of other
programs. IT WORKS!!!
On Sun, 31 Aug 1997 19:00:27 -0400, ADAMMAN106@AOL.COM wrote:
>In a message dated 97-08-31 17:50:15 EDT, you write:
>
><< ><< ASH uses
> > something like 15K! >>
> >Oh the poor, misguided soul!!
> >Ash uses 999 bytes, plus 34 bytes in two matrices
> >Total: 1,033 bytes, just over ONE kilobyte
>
>
> Looking at my 82 right now, with ash 2.0 loaded, the ash program takes up
> 935 bytes, L1-9224 bytes, L2-17bytes. Total-9.94K. So it is not 15K,
> maybe when he was trying to support his argument, he looked at the wrong
> number, but it still more than one kilobyte. How do you guys figure that
> it is only 1K?
>
>
>
>
> -calc82
> c82@juno.com
> >>
>
>ok, maybe nobody explained this, but here are the variables on the clean Ash
>3.0 backup:
>
>prgmASH - 999
>L1 (matrix) - 9224
>L2 (matrix) - 17
>
>actually I made a mistake in my previous statement - L1 actually takes up no
>space at all
>how can this be? Let me explain:
>On the TI-82, in the VAT is, say, variable ASH, the program
>The addr for it is, I think, $8D24.
>The actual code for prgm ASH doesnt start at $8D24, it starts at $8D26
>This is because the first two bytes at $8D24 and $8D25 are there to tell the
>calc how much memory the variable takes, which it uses in the mem/delete
>thing.
>
>Now with the L1 Matrix, if you hexedit the Ash backup, it will say that it is
>at $8114 (I think...) but that is impossible, as the user mem starts at
>$8D24. This has to do with starting the shell, which I wont go into.
>anyway, the first word at the addr of the matrix is equal to 9224d, which is
>what it displays in the mem/delete/matrix thing
>this is also why your calc will lock up if you delete that var, because it
>will 'erase' 9224 bytes starting at $8114, which it shouldnt, so whatever was
>in the user mem now fills that up.
>
>BTW, next time check your mem free setting, it is not effected by this
>'bloated variable'
>
>~Adamman
>
>P.S. if you wanna know why the matrices 'look' like lists just ask
References: