Please see embedded remarks below.
Dick
----- Original Message -----
From: ajp166 <ajp166_at_bellatlantic.net>
To: <classiccmp_at_classiccmp.org>
Sent: Saturday, October 28, 2000 10:48 PM
Subject: Re: Monitor for iSBC 8024
> From: Richard Erlacher <richard_at_idcomm.com>
>
>
> Use the editor that comes with the mailer, please.
>
What???
>
> >Actually, it's not simple at all to set up the boards with dozens of
> jumpers
> >and pin fields for strappable options. Moreover, while the port
> locations
> >are pretty simple to set up in accordance with the "default" settings,
> there
> >are numerous things that, while not left to chance, are not completely
> clear
> >as described in the doc.
>
>
> As if I dont know this? I have an ISBC80/10 and a BLC80204 plus several
> Hurikon Multibus boards. It's a task I've done before along with
> designing
> for multibus. Whats the point? You set up the board to a common config
> and with that write a dumb monitor for those addresses. Added t that
> code is some diagnostic stuff to blink leds or toggle lines that would
> otherwise do nothing to show there is a cpu and some ram operational
> if it doesnt talk to the console.
>
> >> code generator was created.
> >>
> >I didn't mean to suggest I want to produce a code generator for those,
> as
> >they already exist. I just don't want to wade into a new compiler if it
> >doesn't support several commonly used MCU's. The Hi-Tech compiler is
>
>
> I havent a clue why you said that at all since the origin of the smallc-c
> compiler is 8080? I still have the original DDJ articles with sources.
>
What I said (I thought) was that I don't want to fiddle with small-C to the
extent of writing a new code generator for the 'HC11, 'HC05's, 805x-series,
PIC, etc, since Hi-Tech already has a code generator for their compiler for
each of those. It would be a BIG job to do that for the Hendrix compiler,
reduced though it is, since what's needed is a general enough compiler that
once I write a debug monitor based on some existing model I already have and
know. It's not enough that the 8080 and Z80 are already supported, since
I'll only need to use the 8080, which, BTW, it's not obvious that the
Hi-Tech 'C' supports. As I said, if I'm going to wander into the quagmire,
I want to be using a compiler that covers most of the MCU's I'll be using in
the near future. I'm quite sure nobody is going to hire me to generate code
for the Z80 or 8080. I've been known to write code in assembler as well,
but haven't done anything for hire in about 10 years that has required Z80
or 8080 coding.
However, if the Hi-Tech/Pacific 'C' compiler doesn't support 8080/8085 (it
definitely supports Z80) then the small-'C' is still a candidate, but only
once I've convinced myself that I want to create some new code generators to
support those other MCU's. I also need to cover the TI DSP's. I am not
even sure small-'C' will be adequate, though I see no reason it wouldn't
handle most small MCU's.
>
> Allison
>
>
Received on Sun Oct 29 2000 - 00:43:53 BST