Were you aware of the neat little opcodes that were built into the 6502? I
don't have my list of them any more, but back in the KIM days, there were
several lists in circulation. As I recall, one of them was a double load,
i.e it loaded a value into both a register and the accumulator. I believe
another loaded a register and pushed the value on the stack at the same
time. Esoteric, for sure, but you never know . . .
Dick
-----Original Message-----
From: Hans Franke <Hans.Franke_at_mch20.sbs.de>
To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers
<classiccmp_at_u.washington.edu>
Date: Saturday, April 17, 1999 9:27 AM
Subject: Re: z80 timing... 6502 timing
>> <65C02, because it was buillt in several conflicting versions. What
about
>> <the Z-80 core? Whose? Which one? Speed, of course, should be
"limited" t
>> <whatever was available in 1982. That certainly includes the Synertek
(MOS
>
>> In 1982 all of the z80s in the market had the same hidden features
>> including the IX/IY 8bit ops. I know of no z80 that didn't have them.
>> Not all of them were available to the 6mhz spec though many could be
>> pushed. Also allowed is the 8085 (available as a 5-6mhz part then).
Again
>> all of the 8085s had the extra unsupported instructions as they were deem
>> important!
>
>a) The speed (of a particular CPU) used is not important for this, since
>(I assume) we all can handle the transformation - the goal is still the
>factor to use to judge the relative power.
>b) unsupported OPCs in the 8085 ? Did I miss them ? I did 2 years of
>8085 development projects, and never heared of (also of course never
>used) - can you tell what they where alike ?
>
>Gruss
>H.
>
>--
>Stimm gegen SPAM: http://www.politik-digital.de/spam/de/
>Vote against SPAM: http://www.politik-digital.de/spam/en/
>Votez contre le SPAM: http://www.politik-digital.de/spam/fr/
>Ich denke, also bin ich, also gut
>HRK
Received on Sat Apr 17 1999 - 10:29:14 BST