elg@killer.UUCP (Eric Green) (12/10/87)
I've been playing with the C-128's CP/M since getting a 1750 RAM expander. One
thing I absolutely hate about it is that modem I/O is so slow and unreliable.
I notice in the [DEVICE] list that there's a 6551 ACIA listed as a choice.
That 6551 obviously must be in block 1, since the RAM expander is in block 2.
One thing I don't know, though, is what interrupt line CP/M expects. Shall I
connect the ACIA's interrupt line to the IRQ, or to the NMI? Informed people
want to know :-).
(BTW, Fred, pass this on to the DevPACK people -- WE WANT OUR DEVPACS!!!).
--
Eric Lee Green elg@killer.UUCP Snail Mail P.O. Box 92191
{cbosgd,ihnp4}!killer!elg Lafayette, LA 70509
"There's someone in my head, but it's not me...." -PFmclek@dcatla.UUCP (Larry E. Kollar) (12/11/87)
In article <2404@killer.UUCP> elg@killer.UUCP (Eric Green) writes: >I've been playing with the C-128's CP/M since getting a 1750 RAM expander. One >thing I absolutely hate about it is that modem I/O is so slow and unreliable. I'm using it right now, to read this newsgroup. For the last 20 minutes or so, I've been downloading things. No problems, and the 1750 works just fine. Of course, I'm going 300 bps with MEX. >I notice in the [DEVICE] list that there's a 6551 ACIA listed as a choice. >That 6551 obviously must be in block 1, since the RAM expander is in block 2. The following, reprinted w/o permission from Compute's "Mapping the C128," may explain. On page 493, describing addresses $de00-$deff: The original releases of CP/M (those dated prior to December 6, 1985) expect to find a UART chip here for RS-232 serial communications, which is why the RS-232 portion of those versions doesn't work. No expansion card with a UART at this address was ever introduced, and more recent versions of CP/M properly support RS-232 communications in the standard fashion (via software). I have a Dec. 8 version of CP/M, with the 1581 patch from the November issue of Transactor. My only gripe is that MEX can't handle my keyboard input as fast as I like to type. >(BTW, Fred, pass this on to the DevPACK people -- WE WANT OUR DEVPACS!!!). YEAH!!!!!!! While I got y'all's attention, why does Power-C 128 like to generate "Syntax Errors" on what appears to be perfectly good code? I'd be happy to post or mail fragments where it's been giving me grief. While the lack of copy-protection and the ability to generate standalone prgs convince me that Power-C is the way to go, Abacus is sure a LOT less fussy (and it supports the 1750 as well). Larry Kollar ...!gatech!dcatla!mclek My cats have their own opinions. My dog, however, agrees with anything I say.
elg@killer.UUCP (Eric Green) (12/12/87)
in article <2475@dcatla.UUCP>, mclek@dcatla.UUCP (Larry E. Kollar) says: > In article <2404@killer.UUCP> elg@killer.UUCP (Eric Green) writes: >>I've been playing with the C-128's CP/M since getting a 1750 RAM expander. One >>thing I absolutely hate about it is that modem I/O is so slow and unreliable. > I'm using it right now, to read this newsgroup. For the last 20 minutes or so, > I've been downloading things. No problems, and the 1750 works just fine. Of > course, I'm going 300 bps with MEX. I'm at 1200 baud. I look at the lights on my modem (an Avatex 1200), and watch the RD light flash, then a ^S on the SD and the RD stops, then a while later a ^Q on the SD and the RD starts again... the screen lay is at about 800 baud or so, I estimate, and the poor dear is being flow-controlled to death. And when I'm using PC Pursuit, where flow control and Xmodem don't both work at the same time, it drops characters (the only time I use CP/M and PC Pursuit is when I'm downloading something using IMP's 1K protocol -- hmm, anybody have the dox on how that 1K protocol works? I know it ain't Ymodem -- or is it?). > While I got y'all's attention, why does Power-C 128 like to generate > "Syntax Errors" on what appears to be perfectly good code? Hmm? Methinks you're talking about "ced". I used the "check" feature of "ced" to check my syntax maybe three or four times, and each time it said that a bunch of things were syntax errors -- when they compiled right away when I tried compiling them (e.g. the CASM posted to the net eons ago). I have had few problems with unwanted "syntax error" messages. I remember I had to move a few static variables in the "unshar" program that I downloaded from the net (in order to unshar CASM, of course!), but otherwise it compiled remarkably well for something never intended to run on a "toy" computer. -- Eric Lee Green elg@usl.CSNET Snail Mail P.O. Box 92191 {cbosgd,ihnp4}!killer!elg Lafayette, LA 70509 "There's someone in my head, but it's not me...." -PF