Re: 83 vs. 85/86
[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: 83 vs. 85/86
>Grant Stockly wrote:
>>
>> > When the TI-85 came out, a bug was notice that allowed control
>>of the
>>
>> A 'bug' would be an edited backup with a pointer to the shell.
>
>Editted by who?
Depending on the shell. Mel said he worked on the technical work with usgard
>>
>> >calculator on a lower level than Basic Programming. It was named
>> >Assembly. Obviously since it was a bug, the TI-85 wasn't built for
>>
>> I hope you meant that the language assembly (aka machine programming
>> [through complier]). ASM has been arround for a long time.
>
>Tt has but it was discovered with the 85
>
>>
>> >handling assembly and it is not as safe on the TI-85 (nor as powerful)
>> >as it is on the TI-83. The TI-83 and 86 were both made WITH knowledge of
>> >assembly programming and so they are assembly friendly than the 85's and
>> >82's, being capable of handling more ASM programs.
>>
>> The calculator (TI-83) is just as powerful as an 85. The TI-83 was
>> documented by TI so there are millions of rom calls that access most of the
>
>I think you misunderstood. I said and meant ASM on the 85 isnt *as* safe
>or powerful as on the 83.
Ok. The 85 ASM is plenty safe if you don't run (or try) to run programs
made for another shell or version. The only reason the 83 is 'more
powerful' (which it isn't) is because TI has toons of rom calls available.
No one has spent the time to figure out the 85s.
Mel helped work on it. Look at the credits screen for usgard or zshell.
Follow-Ups: