Re: A86: Replacement OS

To: assembly-86@lists.ticalc.org
Subject: Re: A86: Replacement OS
From: Chris Phelps <chicane@reninet.com>
Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 19:06:08 -0800
References: <386AB869.8ACA2274@reninet.com> <386ACB15.1501B8D1@umbc.edu>
Reply-To: assembly-86@lists.ticalc.org

The call table is at the top of the call area, so that is taken care of...

One of the things that I forgot about in the original writing of this
little summary was grayscale.
The games that would need 32k of ram would most likely be grayscale, and
since port 0 can only point at
addresses greater than $C000, i would have to reserve 3k for that on ram
page 0. Oh well...gotta put the vat somewhere else i suppose.
Shouldn't be all that many rom calls to fix. Most suck anyway and could
use some work :o)

Later,
Chicane

Aaron Curtis wrote:

> Replacing all those rom calls would be an insane amount of work...  and
> you don't have any space allocated for a call table.  The only benefits
> are the large execution area, which I thought we had all agreed is not
> that important, and the built in sprite routines and stuff.  The memory
> saved from these would most certainly be offset by the memory taken up
> by the new OS.  Then you have to consider the fact that it's not going
> to run any current programs...
>
> Chris Phelps wrote:
> >
> > Please read the attachement and send me some comments on this idea
> > please.
> > It has to do with writing a replacement OS for the 86 (as should be
> > obvious from the subject or this email)

References:

A86: Replacement OS

From: Chris Phelps <chicane@reninet.com>

Re: A86: Replacement OS

From: Aaron Curtis <acurti1@umbc.edu>