Recommendation for Code/Text Editor?

Programming and debugging directly in machine language is not hard to learn, provided that the instruction set is somewhat regular, e.g. certain bits in the op-code control the ALU functions, while others control register selection and so on. Some computers had the switches and lights grouped together according to functionality with front panel colour coding for most important instruction formats.

For instance, it would appear as if the PDP-11 instruction set was designed with octal program writing and debugging in mind, since each logical group consisted of 3 bits and a single bit to the left. Other architectures (e.g. IBM360) favoured grouping into 4 bits and thus the use of hexadecimal in the documentation.

In microprocessors, the opcode can be easily split into 2+3+3 bit groups, and thus it is quite natural to represent the op-codes in octal. The register code (3 bits) occupied one or two octal digits. The early 8080 documentation used the octal notation, but later on, Intel switched for some strange reason from octal to hexadecimal in the documentation, making assembly language programming and debugging much harder, since you had to remember every opcode explicitly e.g. 64 (63?) MOV op-codes separately.

Paul

Reply to
Paul Keinanen
Loading thread data ...

I spent a lot of time programming the 8080A, HP 21xx series, and PDP-11 in machine code. Can't say I remember it all, now, though the PDP-11 does tend to stick better for me. I did love the HP 2100 style front panel with the soft switch/light combo panel and liked (somewhat less) the PDP-11 panel. I also still have some of the early 8080 application note manuals, I believe in octal notation.

If anyone has an HP 21MX or a 2116 processor floating around that may still work.... It would be fun to have. I wonder if any of these systems are still floating about. Great teaching tool for those interested in finding out the hard way why stacks are so nice to have (the 2114/2116 didn't have stacks and stored the return address in the first location of the subroutine.)

Jon

Reply to
Jonathan Kirwan

... snip ...

--
"If you want to post a followup via groups.google.com, don't use
 the broken "Reply" link at the bottom of the article.  Click on 
 "show options" at the top of the article, then click on the 
 "Reply" at the bottom of the article headers." - Keith Thompson
Reply to
CBFalconer

: Kevin was right, at least for systems supporting some kind of file : system. It's teco. You can edit and hunt the wumpus at the same : time.

M-x doctor

But then some would claim emacs users need psycho-therapy :-) I wouldn't know, I've been using since the mid-80's. I use vi and variants for much sysadmin type work, but am still happier programming C in emacs.

Reply to
J Jackson

Why not move on to PDP-8's: the page size is smaller (128 words) and the instruction set is minimal, and the whole thing uses just 12 bits.

Been there - used that. (Also Honeywell DDP-312, with pretty similar limitations.)

--

Tauno Voipio
tauno voipio (at) iki fi
Reply to
Tauno Voipio

For General Automation, I had to write the bootstrap for 16 different devices, and the code to zero out the parity-protected RAM, and I had an entire 256 (16-bit) words to do it. They expected to get perhaps 6 or 7 devices supported, but I gave them all 16 - and I had 3 words to spare.

So I asked them if they needed an editor or assembler put in the boot ROM.

--
#include 
 _
Kevin D Quitt  USA 91387-4454         96.37% of all statistics are made up
Reply to
Kevin D. Quitt

I can't resist. You can copy con hello.com and it will work. Note, there are no tabs, and that all lines start either with spaces or capital 'C', or with nothing. Line termination is .

---------------8

Reply to
Kevin D. Quitt

What is the Honeywell DDP-312 ? I guess this must have been a typo.

Apparently you are referencing to the DDP-316/516.

Paul

Reply to
Paul Keinanen

Yes - it was DDP-112, sorry.

No. DDP-316/516 was a 16 bit thing. DDP-112 was the low-end attempt of Honeywell to kick the PDP-8's.

--

Tauno Voipio
tauno voipio (at) iki fi
Reply to
Tauno Voipio

Because I actually love the front panel on the HP and do NOT love the front panel on the PDP-8. I've programmed the 8, as well. But I like the HP. Would like to have one to play with, some day.

Jon

Reply to
Jonathan Kirwan

encoding...)

no tabs,

Line

(*O/*_/

Reply to
CBFalconer

Interesting, I'll have to try compiling that.

By the way, Turbo Pascal is NOT ISO Pascal, as the comments state.

Kev>

no tabs,

Line

(*O/*_/

Reply to
Scott Moore

I'm mortified. I published the uncorrected version. It's trivial to fix the C portion (using puts instead of printf, etc.).

Wish I had anything to do with it.

Was it in 1991? I'll add a disclaimer.

-- _ Kevin D. Quitt snipped-for-privacy@Quitt.net 96.37% of all statistics are made up

Reply to
Kevin D. Quitt

PascalP handles it:

[1] c:\c\polyglot>pascalp polyglot.c PASCALP (pasctext, pasclist, prr, ef, output) [parm] V 3.1.9T 47000 0:d CuG #(* **** ^116 116. ** WARNING ** possible unclosed earlier comment

NO. ERRORS=0 WARNINGS=1 Program size(pcode bytes)=42

and generates the following code:

[1] c:\c\polyglot>type polyglot.tic .PGM POLYGLOT .MAI POLYGLOT POLYGLOT: .ENT 1,@4 .PCL 74 .LCA 'hello polyglots' .LDCI 15 .LDCI 15 .LDOA -12 .CSP WRS. .PAR 4 .LDOA -12 .CSP WLN. .PAR 1 .PCL 80 .STP @4=0 END
--
 Some informative links:
   news:news.announce.newusers
   http://www.geocities.com/nnqweb/
   http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
   http://www.caliburn.nl/topposting.html
   http://www.netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html
Reply to
CBFalconer

But PascalP is ISO standard, and accepts it as valid.

-- Some informative links: news:news.announce.newusers

formatting link
formatting link
formatting link
formatting link

Reply to
CBFalconer
[lots of amusing lines edited out]

I believe you. I recall an old mate from my company (even older than I) when, a few years ago, he was listening to a bicycle race program on the radio. It was the Spanish Tour. Then, suddenly, when the ciclysts where aproaching a town he already knew very well, a curious interference became audible and he jumped over his seat:

- Hey! That's a [device he have programmed many years ago]!

- How do you know it? It could be anything...

- No, no, no! It IS a [device he have programmed many years ago]! It is calling the SCADA through its V.21 modem! I know the exact sequence of piooos and wooois!

He also used to whistle into the couplers to call his beloved children, when testing a new communicaction link...

Reply to
Ignacio G.T.

Nope, it never was.

Reply to
Scott Moore

I thought you lost PascalP ?

Reply to
Scott Moore

Back around 1970 we had contests to see who could fool which DTMF (touch-tone) dialling decoders, by creating various wierd howls and disgusting sounds. It was quite easy to cause false hits on the expensive multiple band-pass filter types of the day. I was developing a one-chip version for our own PBX system at the time, which did much better.

My system split the incoming sound into high and low bands, and then created zero crossings through two Schmidt triggers. The trigger hysteresis was controlled by a peak rectifier in the other band, thus controlling relative volumes, and that was the end of analog processing. The rest depended on moving averages on the period measurements, and was implementable in the (cheapest at the time) P-channel dynamic MOS logic. The breadboards were built out of the brand new CMOS logic family.

--
 Some informative links:
   news:news.announce.newusers
   http://www.geocities.com/nnqweb/
   http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
   http://www.caliburn.nl/topposting.html
   http://www.netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html
Reply to
CBFalconer

I have some executables left. The source is gone.

--
 Some informative links:
   news:news.announce.newusers
   http://www.geocities.com/nnqweb/
   http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
   http://www.caliburn.nl/topposting.html
   http://www.netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html
Reply to
CBFalconer

ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.