Info-IBMPC@USC-ISIB.ARPA (Info-IBMPC Digest) (02/13/86)
Info-IBMPC Digest Wednesday, 12 February 1986 Volume 5 : Issue 21
This Week's Editor: Billy Brackenridge
Today's Topics:
Review of "Schmeme" Lisp
AT&T PC 6300 Expansion
Now How About Specs for 1-2-3 Device Drivers?
SHELL, Modula2 Software Development System
Fansi Console and Shell from Dr. Dobbs
Turbo Board Comparison?
monochrome monitor query
Removing non-DOS Partitions from AT Disk
LINK Option /E vs EXEPACK
PC-DOS 3.1 and "echo off"
CGA: 2 More Palettes in Medium Res
Re: File truncation under PC-DOS
Co-Processor Board Inquiry
WordPerfect and the LaserJet
CHMOD Woes
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue 11 Feb 86 22:38:38-CST
From: Rob Pettengill <CAD.PETTENGILL@MCC.ARPA>
Subject: Review of "Schmeme" Lisp
I recently purchased an implementation of the Scheme dialect of
lisp for my PC. I am familiar with GC Lisp, IQ Lisp, and Mu Lisp
for the PC. I use Lambdas and 3600s with ZetaLisp at work.
TI PC Scheme is a very complete implementation of scheme for the
IBM and TI personal computers and compatibles. It combines high
speed code execution, a good debugging and editing environment,
and very low cost.
The Language:
* Adheres faithfully to the Scheme standard.
* Has true lexical scoping.
* Prodedures and environments are first class data objects.
* Is properly tail recursive - there is no penalty compared
to iteration.
* Includes window and graphics extensions.
The Environment:
* An incremental optimizing compiler (not native 8086 code)
* Top level read-compile-print loop.
* Interactive debugger allows run time error recovery.
* A minimal Emacs-like full screen editor with a scheme mode
featuring parethesis matching and auto indenting of lisp code.
* An execute DOS command or "push" to DOS capability - this is
only practical with a hard disk because of the swap file PCS writes.
* A DOS based Fast Load file format object file conversion utility.
* A fast 2 stage garbage collector.
First Impressions:
Scheme seems to be much better sized to a PC class machine than
the other standard dialects of lisp because of its simplicity. The
TI implementation appears to be very solid and complete. The compiled
code that it produces (with debugging switches off) is 2 to 5 times
faster than the other PC lisps that I have used. With the full screen
editor loaded (there is also a structure editor) there seems to be
plenty of room for my code in a 640k PC. TI recommends 320k or 512k
with the editor loaded. The documentation is of professional quality
(about 390 pages), but not tutorial. Abelson and Sussman^2's "Structure
and Interpretation of Computer Programs" is a very good companion for
learning scheme as well as the art and science of programming in general.
My favorite quick benchmark -
(define (test n)
(do
((i 0 (1+ i))
(r () (cons i r)))
((>= i n) r)))
runs (test 10000) in less than 10 seconds with the editor loaded - of course
it takes a couple of minutes to print out the ten thousand element list
that results.
The main lack I find is that the source code for the system is not
included - one gets used to that in good lisp environments. I have
hit only a couple of minor glitches, that are probably pilot error,
so far. Since the system is compiled with debugging switches off
it is hard to get much useful information about the system from
the dubugger.
Based on my brief, but very positive experience with TI PC scheme and
its very low price of $95 - I recommend it to anyone interested in a
PC based lisp. You can order from Texas Instruments at 1-800-TI-PARTS.
(Standard disclaimers about personal opinions and having no commercial
interest in the product ...)
Rob Pettengill
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 12 Feb 86 05:56:59 cet
From: 10409813%WSUVM1.BITNET@WISCVM.WISC.EDU
Subject: AT&T PC 6300 Expansion
I have an AT&T PC 6300 and would be interested to hear from other
owners concerning expansion. I am looking into an expanded memory
board, and I believe AT&T makes one which would take advantage of the
16-bit data bus. Does anyone have any experience with this product?
I would also like to find out about other boards for the AT&T which
take advantage of the 8086's 16-bits. (Graphics, ports, etc.)
On an unrelated note, does anyone have a screen dump routine for the
TOSHIBA P1340? I have FRIEZE (comes w/PC PAINTBRUSH) and it seems to
support as many printers as any, and it does not support the P1340. I
have written (not entirely successfully) my own driver, but would most
insterested in seeing what others have done. Ultimately, I would like
to be able to dump AT&T 640x400 monochrome, but would settle for a
routine which expects a CGA.
Thanks,
Eric Schneider 10409813@wsuvm1.BITNET
or eric@wsu.CSNET
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 12 Feb 86 05:17 ???
From: LBAFRIN%clemson.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA
Subject: Now How About Specs for 1-2-3 Device Drivers?
Plaudits to the kind soul who contributed the 1-2-3 worksheet file format
specification to the Info-IBMPC archives.
Would it also be possible to obtain for the archives a copy of whatever
specs Lotus may have for writing 1-2-3 device drivers?
Just wondering...
-- Larry Afrin
Dept. of Computer Science
Clemson University
================================
Please send replies, if any, to:
lbafrin@clemson.csnet or
lbafrin%eureka@clemson.csnet or, as a last resort,
any reasonable-looking string with
"lbafrin", "eureka", and "clemson" in it
(And I'm told that Usenet fans can try ihnp4!seismo!clemson.CSNET!lbafrin)
I disclaim everything anybody ever said about anything.
------------------------------
Date: Feb 10 1986
From: Hermann Willers <G95%DHDURZ2.BITNET@WISCVM.WISC.EDU>
Subject: SHELL, Modula2 Software Development System
1. Did anyone try successfully to put COMMAND.COM into an other
directory than the root ? I tried, but the SHELL command in
CONFIG.SYS did'nt work. "missing or defective command interpreter"
(or so) was the message. My system is an Olivetti M24, MSDOS 2.11,
version to support 720 K drives (M24 = AT&T 6300). Does it under
these conditions always fail or did I miss something too obvious ?
2. Does anyone know, if the M2SDS has nice features like
INLINE (as Turbo-P.), interruptcalls, the capability of executing
as an interrupt service routine, include files (optional),
including EXTERNAL code, absolute variables,
short: the things one wouldn't want to miss in T.P.
Please reply directly to me, since I see only someone else's
copy of INFO-IBMPC and this is VERY irregular.
Thanks in advance for your time and effort !
Hermann Willers
G95@DHDURZ2.BITNET
Heidelberg, FRG
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 12 Feb 86 13:30 EST
From: Hess@MIT-MULTICS.ARPA
Subject: Fansi Console and Shell from Dr. Dobbs
To: info-ibmpc@USC-ISIB.ARPA
Message-ID: <860212183030.376476@MIT-MULTICS.ARPA>
For the person who wanted a faster ANSI driver, there is FANSI-CONSOLE,
which is shareware of some sort. Not freeware, but not expensive
either. Try Hersey Micro Consulting (or "no Smoking Software"?) in Ann
Arbor, MI.
For the person who wanted to create a shell to replace COMMAND.COM, try
looking at last month's and this month's Doctor Dobbs Journal. They
claim to have a disk available, with source code (MS-C) and executable
shell. Try DDJ in Palo Alto, CA.
Brian
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 12 Feb 86 13:32 EST
From: Hess@MIT-MULTICS.ARPA
Subject: Turbo Board Comparison?
Can someone with a Victor plug-into-socket board estimate the speed-up
via Norton tests? I recall that the most recent message about it
described mostly installation stuff. Joe Newcomer's note about his
turbo card and an advertisement from Victor sparked my interest.
Brian
------------------------------
Date: 12 Feb 1986 12:09:49 PST
Subject: monochrome monitor query
From: Laurence I. Press <SWG.LPRESS@USC-ISIB.ARPA>
Does anyone know a source for schematics and parts for
the IBM monochrome monitor?
Thanks,
Larry Press
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 12-FEB-1986 12:31 PST
From: Mike Iglesias <MIGLESIAS%UCIVMS.BITNET@WISCVM.WISC.EDU>
Subject: Removing non-DOS Partitions from AT Disk
We have an AT w/20mb hard disk. We had a copy of PC/IX on loan
about a year ago, and we tried to install it, but for some reason
that I can't remember right now, it didn't work. We don't have
PC/IX anymore, and we want to get rid of the PC/IX partition on the
hard disk so we can have a 20mb DOS partition again. I've tried
using FDISK to remove the PC/IX partition with no success. Is there
a way to get rid of the PC/IX partition without having PC/IX?
Thanks,
Mike Iglesias
University of California, Irvine
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 12 Feb 86 04:14:42 PST
From: Ya'akov_Miles%UBC.MAILNET@MIT-MULTICS.ARPA
Subject: LINK Option /E vs EXEPACK
By comparing the sizes of the (packed) files generated from LINK ver 3.02
and the /E option with the size of the .EXE file manually packed with the
(scarce and infrequently distributed) utility EXEPACK, I have come to the
conclusion that LINK ver 3.02 option /E generates EXACTLY the same size
file as manually running EXEPACK on a regular .EXE file output by LINK...
Since LINK is easy to get, whereas EXEPACK is only distributed with an
(expensive) subset of Microsoft packages, I heartily recommend using LINK
and /E. Also, the LINK with /E does not involve the hassle of intermediate
files, and appears to bind at the same rate as LINK without /E. There is only
one slight problem with packed files, namely SYMDEBUG does not know how to
use them. In reality this is no problem, you link without /E while developing
and then release the final product packed. Also, in higher level languages
(such as Quick-Basic), who cares about the Symbolic Debugger, anyway...
While on the topic of Quick-Basic, when is Microsoft going to improve their
manual so as to mention that you have to link to GWCOM.OBJ to get the
serial I/O ports to work, and what the file SMALLERR.OBJ is good for?
It would also be nice if the /V and /W switches to BASCOM worked as the
manual said they did. (/V works like /W is supposed to, /W produces junk)
Also, a BREAK or a FRAMING ERROR to the serial I/O port crashes Quick-Basic
------------------------------
From: 2212msr%whuts.UUCP@BRL
Subject: PC-DOS 3.1 and "echo off"
Date: Tue, 4-Feb-86 10:15:45 PST
nather@astro.utexas.edu writes:
"For several reasons (none very good) I'd like to use PC-DOS 3.1, but not at
the expense of bat-chatter. If anyone knows how to patch the 3.x command.com
so it runs .bat files silently, please send it to me, or post it to the net.
The patch for 2.x I am using does not work on 3.x (*sigh*). I have a kludge
that erases the "echo off" which is echoed when the batch command "echo off"
is executed, but it is irritating after getting used to the real thing."
This patch changes echo default to echo off (DOS 3.1 only!).
debug command.com
-e 1967<cr>
xxxx:1967 01.00<cr>
-w <cr>
writing xxxx bytes
-q<cr>
Max S. Robin
AT&T Bell Laboratories
Rm. 3E-318A
Whippany, NJ 07981
201-386-6865
email:whuxg!2212msr
------------------------------
From: farren%well.UUCP@brl
Subject: CGA: 2 More Palettes in Medium Res
Date: Sun, 9-Feb-86 10:44:51 PST
jan@looking.UUCP (Jan Gray) writes:
"From the documentation I've seen, there are only two medium res colour
palettes, one with black, red, green, yellow, and the other black, magenta,
cyan, white. However, Turbo Pascal can set another two palettes with "high
intensity" colours. How is this done? The BIOS Video Set Palette call
doesn't seem to be able to set palette 2 or 3. Is there a BIOS call to do
this? Is there a (much less portable) IO address to poke?"
You can get the high-intensity palette by setting the background color to a
high-intensity color (Probably black, that's usually the most common choice).
To do this, you use the normal BIOS call, INT 10H, with AH set to 0BH, BH set
to zero, and BL set to 8 (high intensity black). Likewise, if BL is set to
zero, you will get the low-intensity pallette.
Mike Farren
uucp: {your favorite backbone site}!hplabs!well!farren
Fido: Sci-Fido, Fidonode 125/84, (415)655-0667
------------------------------
From: rde@ukc.ac.uk
Subject: Re: File truncation under PC-DOS
Date: Tue, 4-Feb-86 01:08:02 PST
bright@dataio.UUCP writes:
"Anyone out there know a way to truncate a file to 'n' bytes in length without
going in and directly manipulating the FAT? I need a method that is
well-behaved."
Use function 42H (seek) to move the file pointer to the place you want the
file truncated. Then use function 40H (write) with a count of zero (CX=0).
This comes from the MS-DOS Programmer's Manual so it ought (!) to be well
behaved. Hope this helps.
Bob Eager
rde@ukc.UUCP
rde@ukc
...!mcvax!ukc!rde
Phone: +44 227 66822 ext 7589
------------------------------
Date: Wednesday, 12 Feb 1986 13:15:20-PST
From: watson%akov04.DEC@decwrl.DEC.COM
Subject: Co-Processor Board Inquiry
I would like to find out what a co-processor is and how it works. I have
requested information from suppliers that advertize such products in the
trade magazines but all I get is hype on their products. I would like to
know does the co-processor and system processor compute concurrently? How
do the processors communicate, do (all, most, some, none) of the popular
software work on the co-processor? How does the user control the 2
processors? Are there (one, two, several, many) different types of
co-processors? Which one is best? etc, etc, etc. If you are privy to this
information, I would very much appreciate hearing from you. I will try
to summarize the responses for other curious and/or confused souls out
there with the same interests. Thank in advance.
Rick Watson
------------------------------
Date: 12 Feb 1986 16:24:43 PST
Subject: Co-Processor Board Inquiry
From: Billy <BRACKENRIDGE@USC-ISIB.ARPA>
To: watson%akov04.DEC@DECWRL.DEC.COM
A co-processor as defined by Intel is a chip nearly pin for pin identical
to the processor chip. In the case of the PC/XT the main processor chip
is an Intel 8088 and the floating point co-processor chip is an Intel 8087.
When the main processor issues a special instruction the co-processor is
informed that the next few following bytes are instructions for the
co-processor to perform. Currently there are two co-processor chips made
by Intel. The 8087 does fast floating point arithmetic, the other is
a special chip that aids in implementation of stand alone word processors.
Intelwill soon announce a third co-processor chip that will
speed up graphics for PC applications.
There are also co-processor boards available for the PC. I suspect
this is what you were asking about and relabeled your query
accordingly. Some co-processor boards use the Intel family chips to
run DOS faster than a PC or AT. Others contain 68000s or National
320XX chips and run various flavors of Unix.
The subject is indeed confusing as no standard has emerged in this area.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 12 Feb 86 16:27 CST
From: XASSHOR%UCHIMVS1.BITNET@WISCVM.WISC.EDU
Subject: WordPerfect and the LaserJet
The reason WordPerfect will sometimes not print boldface on the
LaserJet even though there is a bold font available is this:
WordPerfect assumes that there is one printer command string for
turning on boldface. On the LaserJet there is both a primary font
and a secondary font available, and the command strings for working
with them are slightly different. By default, WordPerfect sends the
string for boldfacing the primary font. The fixes are obvious. --
Melinda Shore University of Chicago Computation Center
...!ihnp4!gargoyle!sphinx!shor XASSHOR@UChicago.Bitnet
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 12 Feb 1986 19:56 EST
From: LENOIL@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU
To: Craig Milo Rogers <ROGERS@USC-ISIB.ARPA>
Subject: CHMOD
CHMOD (PC-DOS interrupt function 43H) negligently trashes
register AX on a non-error return from subfunction 00H (Get File)
Not negligent at all. The DOS technical manual explicitly states
(somewhere) that AX is never preserved by an INT 21.
------------------------------
End of Info-IBMPC Digest
************************
-------