Newsgroups: alt.sys.pdp10 From: pwilson@world.std.com (Pete Wilson) Subject: Code the 6502?? Shoot me first! Message-ID: Date: Fri, 1 Jun 2001 17:03:59 GMT Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA Lines: 11 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!newsfeed00.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!newsfeeds.belnet.be!news.belnet.be!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.skycache.com!Cidera!news-reader.ntrnet.net!uunet!ash.uu.net!world!pwilson Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.sys.pdp10:5136 Ben Franchuk wrote, speaking of the 6502: > Well no more dread full than any 8 bit uP made - 6800 8080 z80 8088 > and the few other chips left out are simply not general purpose computers. Oh, now, really! History asks me to defend the Z80 which, after all, could do a load of a register from memory without a preceding explicit load of H&L! I mean -- get serious :-) -- Pete Wilson 6502 .eqv. 8080? Pshaw! 8008, more like. ###### From: Arthur Krewat Newsgroups: alt.sys.pdp10 Subject: Re: Code the 6502?? Shoot me first! Organization: Kilonet.net Lines: 19 Message-ID: <3B17DD72.7BDA421B@bartek.dontspamme.net> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (X11; I; SunOS 5.8 i86pc) X-Accept-Language: en Date: Fri, 01 Jun 2001 18:26:33 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.186.100.134 X-Trace: news02.optonline.net 991419993 24.186.100.134 (Fri, 01 Jun 2001 14:26:33 EDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 01 Jun 2001 14:26:33 EDT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!newsfeeds.belnet.be!news.belnet.be!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed.skycache.com!Cidera!cyclone-sjo1.usenetserver.com!news-out-sjo.usenetserver.com!news01.optonline.net!news02.optonline.net.POSTED!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.sys.pdp10:5153 Pete Wilson wrote: > > Ben Franchuk wrote, speaking of the 6502: > > > Well no more dread full than any 8 bit uP made - 6800 8080 z80 8088 > > and the few other chips left out are simply not general purpose computers. > > Oh, now, really! History asks me to defend the Z80 which, after all, > could do a load of a register from memory without a preceding explicit > load of H&L! I mean -- get serious :-) > > -- Pete Wilson > 6502 .eqv. 8080? Pshaw! 8008, more like. And how many cycles did it require to do a move from memory in one instruction? 8080 took 5 for the LHLD and 2 for the move. Forgive me, I can't find my 6502 book :) aak ###### Sender: eric@ruckus.brouhaha.com From: Eric Smith Newsgroups: alt.sys.pdp10 Subject: Re: Code the 6502?? Shoot me first! References: <3B17DD72.7BDA421B@bartek.dontspamme.net> X-Disclaimer: Everything I write is false. Organization: Eric Conspiracy Secret Labs X-Eric-Conspiracy: There is no conspiracy. Date: 01 Jun 2001 12:32:36 -0700 Message-ID: Lines: 19 User-Agent: Gnus/5.0807 (Gnus v5.8.7) Emacs/20.7 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii NNTP-Posting-Host: ruckus.brouhaha.com X-Trace: 1 Jun 2001 12:49:37 -0700, ruckus.brouhaha.com Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!newsfeed00.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!colt.net!newsfeed.icl.net!netnews.com!feed.cgocable.net!out.nntp.be!propagator-dallas!news-in-dallas.newsfeeds.com!in.nntp.be!easynews!news.he.net!news.kjsl.com!news.spies.com!ruckus.brouhaha.com Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.sys.pdp10:5159 Arthur Krewat writes: > And how many cycles did it require to do a move from memory in one instruction? > 8080 took 5 for the LHLD and 2 for the move. Forgive me, I can't find my > 6502 book :) The 8080 can't do *anything* in two cycles. On the 6502, if you have a pointer to a memory location in a zero-page address, you can load the contents of that location into the accumulator in four cycles. The 6502 may not have had a very friendly instruction set, but it could do more work in fewer clock cycles than any 8-bitter of its time except the 6809. For most purposes a 1 MHz 6502 was about as fast as a 4 MHz Z-80. But back in 1977 you could buy 3 MHz 6502s, whereas 4 MHz was the fastest Z-80 of the time. Later they introduced the 6 MHz Z-80, and much later 8 MHz. They didn't get much faster until Hitachi redesigned the core in CMOS. ###### Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!not-for-mail From: Neil Franklin Newsgroups: alt.sys.pdp10 Subject: Re: Code the 6502?? Shoot me first! Date: 02 Jun 2001 00:52:08 +0200 Organization: My own Private Self Lines: 55 Message-ID: <6ulmnbke3r.fsf@chonsp.franklin.ch> References: NNTP-Posting-Host: chonsp.franklin.ch X-Trace: chonsp.franklin.ch 991435929 598 10.0.3.2 (1 Jun 2001 22:52:09 GMT) X-Complaints-To: news@chonsp.franklin.ch NNTP-Posting-Date: 1 Jun 2001 22:52:09 GMT X-Newsreader: Gnus v5.7/Emacs 20.4 Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.sys.pdp10:5166 pwilson@world.std.com (Pete Wilson) writes: > Ben Franchuk wrote, speaking of the 6502: > > > Well no more dread full than any 8 bit uP made - 6800 8080 z80 8088 > > and the few other chips left out are simply not general purpose computers. > > Oh, now, really! History asks me to defend the Z80 which, after all, > could do a load of a register from memory without a preceding explicit > load of H&L! I mean -- get serious :-) > Code the 6502?? Shoot me first! Bang! Z80: LD A,(1234) 3A 34 12 13 Tstates, 3.25us @ 4MHz Actually 8080 could also do that. 6502: LDA 1234 AD 34 12 4 clocks, 2us @ 2HMz Seems to be the same thing, just a bit faster. Direct loads from memory were actually one of the 6502s strenghts. Now anything that required address registers... [1] [1] For non-6502-programmers: it had no address registers. You had to use pairs of 8bit memory words in the bottom 256 bytes of memory, addresed by an 8bit constant in the instruction. A bit like PDP-8 needing to used its in-instruction constant to address an low-memory word with the actual address in it. And yes, Z80 and 6502 are both little-endian, not just bit numbering, but actual memory arrangement of 16 data. Read low 8 bits first, process, then get high 8 bits. Done so because of address calculation carry. > -- Pete Wilson > 6502 .eqv. 8080? Pshaw! 8008, more like. Actually fairly equivlent in effect. Missing instruction power made up with efficent memory access and so less clock cycles. P.S. I learned Assembler in the row: Z80, 6809, 6502, 68000, 8088 Of all the 8bit ones 6809 was the nicest, roughly PDP-11 level. -- Neil Franklin, neil@franklin.ch.remove http://neil.franklin.ch/ Hacker, Unix Guru, El Eng HTL/BSc, Sysadmin, Archer, Roleplayer - Intellectual Property is Intellectual Robbery ###### Message-ID: <3B13E27A.D9BBAC07@jetnet.ab.ca> From: Ben Franchuk X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.18 i586) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.sys.pdp10 Subject: Re: Code the 6502?? Shoot me first! References: <3B17DD72.7BDA421B@bartek.dontspamme.net> <3B1820ED.44F8F3E8@bartek.dontspamme.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lines: 24 Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 11:55:06 -0600 NNTP-Posting-Host: 207.153.6.53 X-Trace: newsfeed.slurp.net 991458157 207.153.6.53 (Sat, 02 Jun 2001 00:02:37 CDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 02 Jun 2001 00:02:37 CDT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed.slurp.net!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.sys.pdp10:5170 Eric Smith wrote: > > What did the fastest 6502 run at, 2 MHZ? My VAX-11/750 runs 8Mhz with > > 32 bits. really lets compare bus width here! > Apples and oranges. The VAX-11/750 is a 32-bit minicomputer, not a > microprocessor. And it was introduced years later than the 8080, 6502, > or Z-80 Remember the 8 bit micros were state of the art 20 years ago. It is only that chips went to CMOS that you got faster chips do to power reduction. > If you compute the raw processor performance per dollar (list price) of > the 6502 vs. the VAX-11/750, I think you'll find that the 6502 appears > orders of magnitude more cost effective. But that's ignoring what the > thing is intended for. My Alpha machine is a lot faster than the > processor in my microwave oven, but who the hell cares? Hey I do... send me all old the ALPHA's BETA's GAMMA's and I will turn them into toaster ovens. 3 mother boards will do pizza in 11 minutes. -- ###### Message-ID: <3B1407CE.1897C3FA@jetnet.ab.ca> From: Ben Franchuk X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.18 i586) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.sys.pdp10 Subject: Re: Code the 6502?? Shoot me first! References: <3B17DD72.7BDA421B@bartek.dontspamme.net> <3B1820ED.44F8F3E8@bartek.dontspamme.net> <3B13E27A.D9BBAC07@jetnet.ab.ca> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lines: 24 Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 14:34:22 -0600 NNTP-Posting-Host: 207.153.6.35 X-Trace: newsfeed.slurp.net 991496738 207.153.6.35 (Sat, 02 Jun 2001 10:45:38 CDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 02 Jun 2001 10:45:38 CDT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed.slurp.net!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.sys.pdp10:5169 Eric Smith wrote: > > Ben Franchuk writes: > > > Eric Smith wrote: > > > > What did the fastest 6502 run at, 2 MHZ? My VAX-11/750 runs 8Mhz with > > > > 32 bits. > > Hey, careful with those attributions! I (Eric Smith) did NOT write that!!! > In the message you quoted, I had quoted someone else saying that, and I > included the correct attribution. > > I commented on it being a ridiculous comparison. "I say get a life!" Note the "> > >" in the message. I expect most people would realize that by now is quote from other messages, and need not assume Mr Smith had said that. Ben. -- "We do not inherit our time on this planet from our parents... We borrow it from our children." "Luna family of Octal Computers" http://www.jetnet.ab.ca/users/bfranchuk Updated - Now with schematics. ###### From: aek@spies.com (Al Kossow) Newsgroups: alt.sys.pdp10 Subject: Re: Code the 6502?? Shoot me first! Date: Fri, 01 Jun 2001 12:52:15 -0700 Organization: Apple Computer, Inc. Lines: 8 Message-ID: References: <3B17DD72.7BDA421B@bartek.dontspamme.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: il0502a-dhcp38.apple.com X-Trace: news.apple.com 991425135 20012 17.205.24.38 (1 Jun 2001 19:52:15 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@news.apple.com NNTP-Posting-Date: 1 Jun 2001 19:52:15 GMT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!feed2.news.luth.se!130.240.42.8.MISMATCH!feed2.news.luth.se!luth.se!nycmny1-snh1.gtei.net!paloalto-snf1.gtei.net!news.gtei.net!forum.apple.com!news.apple.com!il0502a-dhcp38.apple.com!user Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.sys.pdp10:5181 In article , Eric Smith wrote: > > Later they introduced the 6 MHz Z-80, and much later 8 MHz. They didn't > get much faster until Hitachi redesigned the core in CMOS. Hitachi did a CMOS Z80? I thought they were in the Moto camp (6309) ###### From: Tim Shoppa Newsgroups: alt.sys.pdp10 Subject: Re: Code the 6502?? Shoot me first! Date: 1 Jun 2001 13:37:50 -0700 Organization: Newsguy News Service [http://newsguy.com] Lines: 26 Message-ID: <9f8ueu019kd@drn.newsguy.com> References: <3B17DD72.7BDA421B@bartek.dontspamme.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: p-535.newsdawg.com X-Newsreader: Direct Read News v2.65 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed.direct.ca!look.ca!pln-w!spln!dex!extra.newsguy.com!newsp.newsguy.com!drn Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.sys.pdp10:5171 In article , aek@spies.com says... > >In article , Eric Smith > wrote: > >> >> Later they introduced the 6 MHz Z-80, and much later 8 MHz. They didn't >> get much faster until Hitachi redesigned the core in CMOS. > >Hitachi did a CMOS Z80? I thought they were in the Moto camp (6309) From the comp.os.cpm FAQ: The Z180 was not an outgrowth of the Z800. It was a joint effort between Zilog and Hitachi. The first two versions of the HD64180 were slightly different from the current Z180. The current HD64180 and Z180 are identical, and both have flags in one of the control registers to emulate the earlier versions. The changes are mostly bus timing, as the HD64180 was designed to interface with Motorola 6800 style peripherals as well as Intel and Zilog, which wasn't too strange since Hitachi second sources some Motorola 6800 series products. Tim. ###### From: Arthur Krewat Newsgroups: alt.sys.pdp10 Subject: Re: Code the 6502?? Shoot me first! Organization: Kilonet.net Lines: 28 Message-ID: <3B1820ED.44F8F3E8@bartek.dontspamme.net> References: <3B17DD72.7BDA421B@bartek.dontspamme.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (X11; I; SunOS 5.8 i86pc) X-Accept-Language: en Date: Fri, 01 Jun 2001 23:11:31 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.186.100.134 X-Trace: news02.optonline.net 991437091 24.186.100.134 (Fri, 01 Jun 2001 19:11:31 EDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 01 Jun 2001 19:11:31 EDT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!isdnet!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.skycache.com!Cidera!cyclone-sjo1.usenetserver.com!news-out-sjo.usenetserver.com!news01.optonline.net!news02.optonline.net.POSTED!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.sys.pdp10:5179 Eric Smith wrote: > > Arthur Krewat writes: > > And how many cycles did it require to do a move from memory in one instruction? > > 8080 took 5 for the LHLD and 2 for the move. Forgive me, I can't find my > > 6502 book :) > > The 8080 can't do *anything* in two cycles. Interesting, my Intel 8080 said that move from memory was 2 cycles - of course, there was probably the instruction fetch itself. > The 6502 may not have had a very friendly instruction set, but it could > do more work in fewer clock cycles than any 8-bitter of its time except > the 6809. For most purposes a 1 MHz 6502 was about as fast as a 4 MHz > Z-80. But back in 1977 you could buy 3 MHz 6502s, whereas 4 MHz was the > fastest Z-80 of the time. The Atari game systems used a 6502, and it was quick enough to be there for every video scan. If you spent too much time, the video would flicker :) > Later they introduced the 6 MHz Z-80, and much later 8 MHz. They didn't > get much faster until Hitachi redesigned the core in CMOS. What did the fastest 6502 run at, 2 MHZ? My VAX-11/750 runs 8Mhz with 32 bits. aak ###### From: aek@spies.com (Al Kossow) Newsgroups: alt.sys.pdp10 Subject: Re: Code the 6502?? Shoot me first! Date: 1 Jun 2001 16:28:20 -0700 Organization: Spies In The Wire Lines: 11 Message-ID: <9f98ek$2pd$1@spies.com> References: <3B1820ED.44F8F3E8@bartek.dontspamme.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: spies.com X-Trace: 1 Jun 2001 16:46:28 -0700, spies.com Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!news.maxwell.syr.edu!out.nntp.be!propagator-dallas!news-in-dallas.newsfeeds.com!in.nntp.be!news.kjsl.com!news.spies.com!localhost!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.sys.pdp10:5185 From article <3B1820ED.44F8F3E8@bartek.dontspamme.net>, by Arthur Krewat : > > What did the fastest 6502 run at, 2 MHZ? My VAX-11/750 runs 8Mhz with 32 bits. ^^ does 14MHz http://www.westerndesigncenter.com/distribution.html ###### Sender: eric@ruckus.brouhaha.com From: Eric Smith Newsgroups: alt.sys.pdp10 Subject: Re: Code the 6502?? Shoot me first! References: <3B17DD72.7BDA421B@bartek.dontspamme.net> <3B1820ED.44F8F3E8@bartek.dontspamme.net> X-Disclaimer: Everything I write is false. Organization: Eric Conspiracy Secret Labs X-Eric-Conspiracy: There is no conspiracy. Date: 01 Jun 2001 18:00:18 -0700 Message-ID: Lines: 22 User-Agent: Gnus/5.0807 (Gnus v5.8.7) Emacs/20.7 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii NNTP-Posting-Host: ruckus.brouhaha.com X-Trace: 1 Jun 2001 18:17:21 -0700, ruckus.brouhaha.com Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!newsfeed00.sul.t-online.de!newsfeed01.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!feed.news.nacamar.de!newspeer.clara.net!news.clara.net!newsfeed.icl.net!nntp.news.xara.net!xara.net!gxn.net!news.he.net!news.kjsl.com!news.spies.com!ruckus.brouhaha.com Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.sys.pdp10:5182 I wrote: > The 8080 can't do *anything* in two cycles. Arthur Krewat writes: > Interesting, my Intel 8080 said that move from memory was 2 cycles - > of course, there was probably the instruction fetch itself. Terminology problem. I should have said that the 8080 can't do anything in two clocks. Intel talks about cycles that are each 3 or 4 clocks, IIRC. > What did the fastest 6502 run at, 2 MHZ? My VAX-11/750 runs 8Mhz with > 32 bits. Apples and oranges. The VAX-11/750 is a 32-bit minicomputer, not a microprocessor. And it was introduced years later than the 8080, 6502, or Z-80. If you compute the raw processor performance per dollar (list price) of the 6502 vs. the VAX-11/750, I think you'll find that the 6502 appears orders of magnitude more cost effective. But that's ignoring what the thing is intended for. My Alpha machine is a lot faster than the processor in my microwave oven, but who the hell cares? ###### Sender: eric@ruckus.brouhaha.com From: Eric Smith Newsgroups: alt.sys.pdp10 Subject: Re: Code the 6502?? Shoot me first! References: <3B17DD72.7BDA421B@bartek.dontspamme.net> <3B1820ED.44F8F3E8@bartek.dontspamme.net> <3B13E27A.D9BBAC07@jetnet.ab.ca> X-Disclaimer: Everything I write is false. Organization: Eric Conspiracy Secret Labs X-Eric-Conspiracy: There is no conspiracy. Date: 02 Jun 2001 01:08:05 -0700 Message-ID: Lines: 12 User-Agent: Gnus/5.0807 (Gnus v5.8.7) Emacs/20.7 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii NNTP-Posting-Host: ruckus.brouhaha.com X-Trace: 2 Jun 2001 01:25:12 -0700, ruckus.brouhaha.com Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!news.maxwell.syr.edu!news.he.net!news.kjsl.com!news.spies.com!ruckus.brouhaha.com Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.sys.pdp10:5183 Ben Franchuk writes: > Eric Smith wrote: > > > What did the fastest 6502 run at, 2 MHZ? My VAX-11/750 runs 8Mhz with > > > 32 bits. Hey, careful with those attributions! I (Eric Smith) did NOT write that!!! In the message you quoted, I had quoted someone else saying that, and I included the correct attribution. I commented on it being a ridiculous comparison. ###### Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!not-for-mail From: Neil Franklin Newsgroups: alt.sys.pdp10 Subject: Re: Code the 6502?? Shoot me first! Date: 02 Jun 2001 21:57:11 +0200 Organization: My own Private Self Lines: 43 Message-ID: <6ubso6irjc.fsf@chonsp.franklin.ch> References: <3B17DD72.7BDA421B@bartek.dontspamme.net> <3B1820ED.44F8F3E8@bartek.dontspamme.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: chonsp.franklin.ch X-Trace: chonsp.franklin.ch 991511831 478 10.0.3.2 (2 Jun 2001 19:57:11 GMT) X-Complaints-To: news@chonsp.franklin.ch NNTP-Posting-Date: 2 Jun 2001 19:57:11 GMT X-Newsreader: Gnus v5.7/Emacs 20.4 Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.sys.pdp10:5188 10 posts in alt.sys.pdp10 today. All in the 6502 thread. Spooky. :-) Eric Smith writes: > I wrote: > > The 8080 can't do *anything* in two cycles. > > Arthur Krewat writes: > > Interesting, my Intel 8080 said that move from memory was 2 cycles - > > of course, there was probably the instruction fetch itself. > > Terminology problem. I should have said that the 8080 can't do anything > in two clocks. Intel talks about cycles that are each 3 or 4 clocks, IIRC. 8080 and Z80 cycles are 4 or 5 clocks. 5 clocks for instruction fetches, 4 for all others. The first processor I ever programmed was a Z80. > > What did the fastest 6502 run at, 2 MHZ? My VAX-11/750 runs 8Mhz with > > 32 bits. 6502 was introduced 1976 at 1MHz, later (first half 1980s) there were 2 and 4MHz around. 8080 AFAIK started somewhere 1-2MHz in 1984. Went up to about 5MHz (or was that already its 8085 version?). Z80 started with 2.5MHz in 1976, then 4MHz (Z80A), then 6MHz (Z80B), then 8MHz (Z80H) in the same time frame. > Apples and oranges. The VAX-11/750 is a 32-bit minicomputer, not a > microprocessor. And it was introduced years later than the 8080, 6502, > or Z-80. About 1978 for the first VAX (11/780). -- Neil Franklin, neil@franklin.ch.remove http://neil.franklin.ch/ Hacker, Unix Guru, El Eng HTL/BSc, Sysadmin, Archer, Roleplayer - Intellectual Property is Intellectual Robbery ###### Message-ID: <3B143BB0.87632A17@jetnet.ab.ca> From: Ben Franchuk X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.18 i586) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.sys.pdp10 Subject: Re: Code the 6502?? Shoot me first! References: <6ubso6irjc.fsf@chonsp.franklin.ch> <9fbh68$a95$1@spies.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lines: 22 Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 18:15:44 -0600 NNTP-Posting-Host: 207.153.6.42 X-Trace: newsfeed.slurp.net 991513350 207.153.6.42 (Sat, 02 Jun 2001 15:22:30 CDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 02 Jun 2001 15:22:30 CDT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed.slurp.net!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.sys.pdp10:5190 Al Kossow wrote: > 10 posts in alt.sys.pdp10 today. All in the 6502 thread. Spooky. :-) Yes the 6502 running lunix will take over the world. http://lng.sourceforge.net/ Abandon all hope PDP-10 users. > > OK, here's some 10 news. > > Got the KI10 print set on loan from Carl Friend today, so I'll work on > scanning that in. Will need to bug the person who promised me the KA10 > prints.. What is the thoughts on a CD-rom of 1) PDP-10 hardware docs 2) PPD-10 software providing the DEC GODs don't frown on the idea. -- "We do not inherit our time on this planet from our parents... We borrow it from our children." "Luna family of Octal Computers" http://www.jetnet.ab.ca/users/bfranchuk Updated - Now with schematics. ###### From: aek@spies.com (Al Kossow) Newsgroups: alt.sys.pdp10 Subject: Re: Code the 6502?? Shoot me first! Date: 2 Jun 2001 13:09:44 -0700 Organization: Spies In The Wire Lines: 11 Message-ID: <9fbh68$a95$1@spies.com> References: <6ubso6irjc.fsf@chonsp.franklin.ch> NNTP-Posting-Host: spies.com X-Trace: 2 Jun 2001 13:28:02 -0700, spies.com Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!enews.sgi.com!hammer.uoregon.edu!feed.textport.net!out.nntp.be!propagator-dallas!news-in-dallas.newsfeeds.com!in.nntp.be!news.kjsl.com!news.spies.com!localhost!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.sys.pdp10:5201 From article <6ubso6irjc.fsf@chonsp.franklin.ch>, by Neil Franklin : > 10 posts in alt.sys.pdp10 today. All in the 6502 thread. Spooky. :-) OK, here's some 10 news. Got the KI10 print set on loan from Carl Friend today, so I'll work on scanning that in. Will need to bug the person who promised me the KA10 prints.. ###### Sender: eric@ruckus.brouhaha.com From: Eric Smith Newsgroups: alt.sys.pdp10 Subject: Re: Code the 6502?? Shoot me first! References: <3B17DD72.7BDA421B@bartek.dontspamme.net> <3B1820ED.44F8F3E8@bartek.dontspamme.net> <6ubso6irjc.fsf@chonsp.franklin.ch> X-Disclaimer: Everything I write is false. Organization: Eric Conspiracy Secret Labs X-Eric-Conspiracy: There is no conspiracy. Date: 04 Jun 2001 15:22:23 -0700 Message-ID: Lines: 5 User-Agent: Gnus/5.0807 (Gnus v5.8.7) Emacs/20.7 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii NNTP-Posting-Host: ruckus.brouhaha.com X-Trace: 4 Jun 2001 15:39:58 -0700, ruckus.brouhaha.com Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!news.maxwell.syr.edu!news.he.net!news.kjsl.com!news.spies.com!ruckus.brouhaha.com Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.sys.pdp10:5237 Neil Franklin writes: > 6502 was introduced 1976 at 1MHz, later (first half 1980s) there were > 2 and 4MHz around. 2 and 3 MHz were readily available in 1977. 4 MHz was scarce until 1979. ###### Message-ID: <3B1C8C17.5DF7A1CF@jetnet.ab.ca> From: Ben Franchuk X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.18 i586) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.sys.pdp10 Subject: Re: Code the 6502?? Shoot me first! References: <6ubso6irjc.fsf@chonsp.franklin.ch> <9fbh68$a95$1@spies.com> <3B143BB0.87632A17@jetnet.ab.ca> <87itibqeih.fsf@prep.synonet.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lines: 17 Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2001 01:36:55 -0600 NNTP-Posting-Host: 207.153.6.50 X-Trace: newsfeed.slurp.net 991756533 207.153.6.50 (Tue, 05 Jun 2001 10:55:33 CDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2001 10:55:33 CDT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed.slurp.net!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.sys.pdp10:5208 Paul Repacholi wrote: > > Ben Franchuk writes: > > > What is the thoughts on a CD-rom of 1) PDP-10 hardware docs > > DEC gave permission to copy unavailable HW docs in 83/84. > > > 2) PPD-10 software providing the DEC GODs don't frown on the idea. > > Can't be any real diff to TS's archive. But with more stuff being scanned in, one does not download 60 meg tiff files over a 28k modem. Ben. -- "Your money or your SIG" ###### Sender: prep@k9 Newsgroups: alt.sys.pdp10 Subject: Re: Code the 6502?? Shoot me first! References: <6ubso6irjc.fsf@chonsp.franklin.ch> <9fbh68$a95$1@spies.com> <3B143BB0.87632A17@jetnet.ab.ca> From: Paul Repacholi Date: 05 Jun 2001 20:48:06 +0800 Message-ID: <87itibqeih.fsf@prep.synonet.com> Lines: 17 User-Agent: Gnus/5.0808 (Gnus v5.8.8) Emacs/20.7 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii NNTP-Posting-Host: 202.61.223.194 X-Trace: 5 Jun 2001 20:32:32 +0800, 202.61.223.194 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!newsfeed00.sul.t-online.de!newsfeed01.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!feed.news.nacamar.de!bignews.mediaways.net!newsfeed.iinet.net.au!nntp!usenet.per.paradox.net.au!127.0.0.1!nobody Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.sys.pdp10:5225 Ben Franchuk writes: > What is the thoughts on a CD-rom of 1) PDP-10 hardware docs DEC gave permission to copy unavailable HW docs in 83/84. > 2) PPD-10 software providing the DEC GODs don't frown on the idea. Can't be any real diff to TS's archive. -- Paul Repacholi 1 Crescent Rd., +61 (08) 9257-1001 Kalamunda. West Australia 6076 Raw, Cooked or Well-done, it's all half baked. Spam-To: uce@ftc.gov,enforcement@sec.gov,sness@fcc.gov,hfurchtg@fcc.gov, mpowell@fcc.gov,gtristan@fcc.gov ###### From: Mark Garrett Newsgroups: alt.sys.pdp10 Subject: Re: Code the 6502?? Shoot me first! Organization: Garetech Computer Solutions Lines: 68 Message-ID: References: <6ulmnbke3r.fsf@chonsp.franklin.ch> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit User-Agent: Microsoft-Outlook-Express-Macintosh-Edition/5.02.2022 Date: Thu, 07 Jun 2001 00:20:49 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 144.132.244.163 X-Complaints-To: news@bigpond.net.au X-Trace: news-server.bigpond.net.au 991873249 144.132.244.163 (Thu, 07 Jun 2001 10:20:49 EST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 07 Jun 2001 10:20:49 EST Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!newsfeed00.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed.cwix.com!intgwpad.nntp.telstra.net!news-server.bigpond.net.au!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.sys.pdp10:5277 in article 6ulmnbke3r.fsf@chonsp.franklin.ch, Neil Franklin at neil@franklin.ch.remove wrote on 02/06/2001 08:52: > pwilson@world.std.com (Pete Wilson) writes: > >> Ben Franchuk wrote, speaking of the 6502: >> >>> Well no more dread full than any 8 bit uP made - 6800 8080 z80 8088 >>> and the few other chips left out are simply not general purpose computers. >> >> Oh, now, really! History asks me to defend the Z80 which, after all, >> could do a load of a register from memory without a preceding explicit >> load of H&L! I mean -- get serious :-) > >> Code the 6502?? Shoot me first! > > Bang! > > > Z80: LD A,(1234) 3A 34 12 13 Tstates, 3.25us @ 4MHz > Actually 8080 could also do that. > > 6502: LDA 1234 AD 34 12 4 clocks, 2us @ 2HMz > Seems to be the same thing, just a bit faster. > > Direct loads from memory were actually one of the 6502s strenghts. > > Now anything that required address registers... [1] > > > [1] For non-6502-programmers: it had no address registers. You had to > use pairs of 8bit memory words in the bottom 256 bytes of memory, > addresed by an 8bit constant in the instruction. A bit like PDP-8 > needing to used its in-instruction constant to address an low-memory > word with the actual address in it. > > > And yes, Z80 and 6502 are both little-endian, not just bit numbering, > but actual memory arrangement of 16 data. Read low 8 bits first, > process, then get high 8 bits. Done so because of address calculation > carry. > You simplified that abit, the 6502 has a special addressing mode referred to as zero page addressing (btw page 1 was the stack very limited I always thought). So page zero looks like 128 base registers which can be indexed by the X or Y register eg lda (123+y). This all seems sort of a long time ago in my thoughts. If you ever hacked on applesoft basic you would also know that there is a 1-8(can no longer remember) instruction sequence stored in zero page and is called between every line of basic code so you could patch this to take control of the interpreter and extend it. My memory says something about access to zero page being faster than other memory? I still remember 20 hex is jsr and 60 hex is rts, assemblers in my day on apple consisted of a lead pencil and paper ;) ( Come to think of it, I still write a lot of code with a pencil and paper) I'm getting old this stuff no longer feels as certain as it once was ;) From a programming perspective I'd still prefer a Z80 over a 6502. 6502 was very RISCish and Z80 very CISCish in comparison Z80 2Mhz, Z80A 4Mhz and Z80B 6Mhz I ignore the lesser father the 8080 even the assembler mnemonics from intel seemed backward to me. The was a follow-on from the 6502, it didn't go far and I never programmed one. My rambling's for the day before I rush off to work cheers Mark :) ###### Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!not-for-mail From: Neil Franklin Newsgroups: alt.sys.pdp10 Subject: Re: Code the 6502?? Shoot me first! Date: 09 Jun 2001 00:20:57 +0200 Organization: My own Private Self Lines: 70 Message-ID: <6ubsnyobp2.fsf@chonsp.franklin.ch> References: <6ulmnbke3r.fsf@chonsp.franklin.ch> NNTP-Posting-Host: chonsp.franklin.ch X-Trace: chonsp.franklin.ch 992038857 822 10.0.3.2 (8 Jun 2001 22:20:57 GMT) X-Complaints-To: news@chonsp.franklin.ch NNTP-Posting-Date: 8 Jun 2001 22:20:57 GMT X-Newsreader: Gnus v5.7/Emacs 20.4 Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.sys.pdp10:5301 Mark Garrett writes: > in article 6ulmnbke3r.fsf@chonsp.franklin.ch, Neil Franklin at > neil@franklin.ch.remove wrote on 02/06/2001 08:52: That must be the record in quoting header :-) > > [1] For non-6502-programmers: it had no address registers. You had to > > use pairs of 8bit memory words in the bottom 256 bytes of memory, > > addresed by an 8bit constant in the instruction. A bit like PDP-8 > > needing to used its in-instruction constant to address an low-memory > > word with the actual address in it. > > You simplified that abit, Of course. > the 6502 has a special addressing mode referred to > as zero page addressing Above was actually "zero page indirect non indexed" mode. A processor with over 10 address modes... > thought). So page zero looks like 128 base registers which can be indexed > by the X or Y register eg lda (123+y). That also, when using the 8bit-only variable offset (called index) registers. > ago in my thoughts. If you ever hacked on applesoft basic you would also > know that there is a 1-8(can no longer remember) instruction sequence stored > in zero page and is called between every line of basic code so you could > patch this to take control of the interpreter and extend it. Commodore C64 Basic did the same thing. [gets THE book] Is stored in bytes 115 to 138 (decimal). So way more than 8 bytew here. "THE" book is of course "64 intern" by Data Becker, the classic over here in german speakingh lands. > something about access to zero page being faster than other memory? Access is same speed, but the instructions are smaller and so fetched faster from memory. > I'm getting old this stuff no longer feels as certain as it once was ;) :-) Well I am at the moment digesting the effects of 1/2l of fairly heavy red wine, drunk too fast. At least that is only temporary. > intel seemed backward to me. The was a follow-on from the 6502, it didn't go > far and I never programmed one. 65816. -- Neil Franklin, neil@franklin.ch.remove http://neil.franklin.ch/ Hacker, Unix Guru, El Eng HTL/BSc, Sysadmin, Archer, Roleplayer - Intellectual Property is Intellectual Robbery ###### Sender: eric@ruckus.brouhaha.com From: Eric Smith Newsgroups: alt.sys.pdp10 Subject: Re: Code the 6502?? Shoot me first! References: <6ulmnbke3r.fsf@chonsp.franklin.ch> <6ubsnyobp2.fsf@chonsp.franklin.ch> X-Disclaimer: Everything I write is false. Organization: Eric Conspiracy Secret Labs X-Eric-Conspiracy: There is no conspiracy. Date: 08 Jun 2001 16:37:26 -0700 Message-ID: Lines: 44 User-Agent: Gnus/5.0807 (Gnus v5.8.7) Emacs/20.7 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii NNTP-Posting-Host: ruckus.brouhaha.com X-Trace: 8 Jun 2001 16:55:45 -0700, ruckus.brouhaha.com Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!newsfeed-zh.ip-plus.net!news.ip-plus.net!news.tesion.net!news.belwue.de!news.uni-stuttgart.de!uni-erlangen.de!newsfeeds.belnet.be!news.belnet.be!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!news.he.net!news.kjsl.com!news.spies.com!ruckus.brouhaha.com Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.sys.pdp10:5314 Mark Garrett wrote: >> the 6502 has a special addressing mode referred to >> as zero page addressing Neil Franklin writes: > Above was actually "zero page indirect non indexed" mode. A processor > with over 10 address modes... The 6502 (NMOS) did NOT have a zero page indirect non-indexed mode. It had: zero page (non-indirect, non-indexed) LDA VAR zero page indexed LDA VAR,X or LDA VAR,Y zero page indexed indirect LDA (VAR,X) zero page indirect indexed LDA (VAR),Y The CMOS 6502 added: zero page indirect LDA (VAR) All above examples requiring that the address of VAR be in the range $0000..$00ff. Also, note that with ZP indexed and ZP indexed indirect, the indexing will not wrap to the high byte of the address. In other words, for "LDA VAR,X" if VAR is $CA and X contains $7E, the effective address is $0048, not $0148. Similarly, for "LDA (VAR,X) under the same circumstances, the effective address is the contents of locations $0048 and $0049. Also, for all ZP indirect modes, if the base ZP address is $00FF, the indirect address comes from $00FF and $0000, not $00FF and $0100. On the NMOS 6502, the same problem (no carry from low to high byte of address) also happens for the absolute indirect address mode, e.g., LDA ($45FF) will fetch the EA from $45FF and $4500. On the CMOS 6502 this was changed for absolute indirect (but not ZP indirect), so that example would fetch the EA from $45FF and $4600. >> The was a follow-on from the 6502, it didn't go >> far and I never programmed one. > > 65816. And it did go far, if you count embedded variants including the Super Nintendo game system. ###### From: not-a-real-address@usa.net (those who know me have no need of my name) Newsgroups: alt.sys.pdp10 Subject: Re: Code the 6502?? Shoot me first! Date: Sat, 09 Jun 2001 00:48:08 -0000 Organization: earthfriends Message-ID: References: <6ulmnbke3r.fsf@chonsp.franklin.ch> <6ubsnyobp2.fsf@chonsp.franklin.ch> User-Agent: slrn/0.9.6.3 (Linux) X-Complaints-To: newsabuse@supernews.com Lines: 12 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!newsfeed00.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!sn-xit-03!sn-post-01!supernews.com!news.supernews.com!not-a-real-address Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.sys.pdp10:5312 <6ubsnyobp2.fsf@chonsp.franklin.ch> divulged: >Mark Garrett writes: > >> in article 6ulmnbke3r.fsf@chonsp.franklin.ch, Neil Franklin at >> neil@franklin.ch.remove wrote on 02/06/2001 08:52: > >That must be the record in quoting header :-) the date and time could have been more usenetian, and therefore longer. -- okay, have a sig then ###### Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!not-for-mail From: Neil Franklin Newsgroups: alt.sys.pdp10 Subject: Re: Code the 6502?? Shoot me first! Date: 09 Jun 2001 19:56:00 +0200 Organization: My own Private Self Lines: 60 Message-ID: <6ur8wtpmfj.fsf@chonsp.franklin.ch> References: <6ulmnbke3r.fsf@chonsp.franklin.ch> <6ubsnyobp2.fsf@chonsp.franklin.ch> NNTP-Posting-Host: chonsp.franklin.ch X-Trace: chonsp.franklin.ch 992109360 772 10.0.3.2 (9 Jun 2001 17:56:00 GMT) X-Complaints-To: news@chonsp.franklin.ch NNTP-Posting-Date: 9 Jun 2001 17:56:00 GMT X-Newsreader: Gnus v5.7/Emacs 20.4 Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.sys.pdp10:5321 Eric Smith writes: > Neil Franklin writes: > > Above was actually "zero page indirect non indexed" mode. A processor > > with over 10 address modes... > > The 6502 (NMOS) did NOT have a zero page indirect non-indexed mode. [scratches head, memory slowly returns] Actually I think you are right there. ($nnnn) only existed for the JMP instruction. One of the one-off odities. > zero page indexed indirect LDA (VAR,X) Ah yes, the most useless one of all. IIRC the eintire 16kByte of ROM in the C64 did not use it once. (VAR),X or (VAR) would have been a lot more usefull. > The CMOS 6502 added: The 65C02. > $0000..$00ff. Also, note that with ZP indexed and ZP indexed indirect, > the indexing will not wrap to the high byte of the address. > Also, for all ZP indirect modes, if the base ZP address is $00FF, the > indirect address comes from $00FF and $0000, not $00FF and $0100. Yup. That is why I spoke of 128 pairs of address bytes. Although one can (realistically) use 127 1 byte offset variants. > Also, for all ZP indirect modes, if the base ZP address is $00FF, the > indirect address comes from $00FF and $0000, not $00FF and $0100. Yup. Somehow such primitive systems still are interesting, must be some form of programmers masochism, "I managed to beat this dumb thing into submission". And I should really be off beating CLBs into becoming an PDP-10, not discussing 6502s on a PDP-10 news group :-). > On the NMOS 6502, the same problem (no carry from low to high byte of > address) also happens for the absolute indirect address mode, e.g., > LDA ($45FF) will fetch the EA from $45FF and $4500. That would be JMP ($45FF), as the only one doing ($nnnn). -- Neil Franklin, neil@franklin.ch.remove http://neil.franklin.ch/ Hacker, Unix Guru, El Eng HTL/BSc, Sysadmin, Archer, Roleplayer - Intellectual Property is Intellectual Robbery