vodall@hpfcdq.UUCP (03/10/87)
<A blank line cuz everybody else puts one here> Ok, all you Coco/OS9 wizards, I've got a couple questions: 1. Has anybody ported Small-C to OS9 for the Coco? The Radio Shack C compiler looks great until I try and run it with the ram disk from an external terminal. It eats too much memory. 2. Has anybody written the routines to talk to the Radio Shack Plug 'n Power from OS9? The program pack is nifty but I'd like to change the settings from OS9 without having to power down the computer and plug in the pack. 3. Last, for now anyway, is there some way to make the SCFMAN goto a raw mode? I'm trying to do simple terminal programs but it's slow and it gags on bad control characters. I love the Coco, it's so close to being able to do so much... Thanks for the advice and suggestions! Bill Vodall
pete@wlbreng1.UUCP (03/14/87)
In article <300001@hpfcdq.HP.COM> vodall@hpfcdq.HP.COM (Bill Vodall) writes: > >Ok, all you Coco/OS9 wizards, I've got a couple questions: > >1. Has anybody ported Small-C to OS9 for the Coco? The Radio Shack > C compiler looks great until I try and run it with the ram disk > from an external terminal. It eats too much memory. > I sent that code all off to Steve Odneal (porter of Dyancomp Flex to the COCO, and author of Kansas City Basic, as well as the PRO/SCR hard disk hardware and software) and he got MOST of it going, but even with a public domain Macro assembler I sent him, he still has a LOT of work to do an turning it into a relocatable macro assembler, which a C compiler requires. Overall, you ARE better off with the MW compiler (at least IT exists!). Build a minimal bootfile with no RS-232 stuff (or no CCIO stuff, if using a remote tube), no printer, no pipes - no non-essentials for the edit/compile cycle). Also, the level II coco III will relieve your memory problem (512K is a MUST). >2. Has anybody written the routines to talk to the Radio Shack > Plug 'n Power from OS9? The program pack is nifty but I'd like > to change the settings from OS9 without having to power down the > computer and plug in the pack. I have a primitive little package that talks to the OLD cassette port attached PNP controller.. works great, and I could mail you source if you like. However, 'PAK' software was never written under OS9. I believe that there were some routines written up under RS-DOS assembly language that handle the pak. This might be enough to get you started. Also, there is some unix-based code called X-10 that was posted a while back that supports the RS-232 based 'X-10 Powerhouse Controller'. I bought one of these on a closeout from DAK for $19.95 (;^) a while back. I have yet to complete the port (I work on it occasionally). It looks like the OS9 port will be RELATIVELY painless. >3. Last, for now anyway, is there some way to make the SCFMAN goto a > raw mode? I'm trying to do simple terminal programs but it's slow > and it gags on bad control characters. Re: the RAW mode... sure. a) Use i$read/i$write vice using i$readln/i$writln (BASIC09 get/put instead of input & print). b) Turn off the appropriate path options by getting 2 copies of the path descriptor option section (32 bytes) using the i$getstt call, diddle the appropriate bytes (zero the bytes for QUIT and ABORT to prevent operator interrupts, for instance - see the DEFS files and look for the PD.??? for more detail), then send the diddled version back to the path with an i$setstt. When you're done mucking about, send the virgin copy back to restore the previous state. -- Pete Lyall Usenet: {trwrb, scgvaxd, ihnp4, voder, vortex}!wlbr!pete !wlbreng1!pete !wlpx!pwl Compuserve: 76703,4230 (OS9 SIG Sysop) OS9 (home): (805)-985-0632 (24hr./1200 baud) Phone: (818)-706-5693 (work 9-5 PST) ----------------------------------------------------------------------
ingoldsby@calgary.UUCP (03/15/87)
In article <300001@hpfcdq.HP.COM>, vodall@hpfcdq.HP.COM (Bill Vodall) writes: > > 3. Last, for now anyway, is there some way to make the SCFMAN goto a > raw mode? I'm trying to do simple terminal programs but it's slow > and it gags on bad control characters. > Yes, but don't mess with SCFMAN. I can't find a copy of a terminal program I have, but it seems to me that all you have to do is an SS.OPT setstat to set the end of record, end of file, abort, backspace, delete, etc. chars to null. This (I think) takes care of it. Terry ...ihnp4!alberta!calgary!ingoldsby
chmilar@calgary.UUCP (The Count) (03/19/87)
In article <300001@hpfcdq.HP.COM>, vodall@hpfcdq.HP.COM (Bill Vodall) writes: > 1. Has anybody ported Small-C to OS9 for the Coco? The Radio Shack > C compiler looks great until I try and run it with the ram disk > from an external terminal. It eats too much memory. A couple of years ago, there were at least two small-C compilers available for OS-9. They were advertised in various CoCo and OS-9 magazines. One was called 'Dyna-C', and the other was 'Dugger's Growing C'. They cost something like $70 U.S. Both were based on Hendrix's Small-C for the 8080, but with various extensions and enhancements (hence Dugger's GROWING C). I have never seen either of these products in action, so I can't tell you how big they are, or how long a compile takes. However, I would expect them to be much smaller than the Microware/McCosh C, but also much less complete. One of them had (I think) some 'extension' packages to allow some form of floating point arithmetic and other goodies. I remember reading, in 68' Micro, an article on the code generation of these two compilers, which was not too impressed with it. It seems that the compilers just used slightly modified code generation from the 8080 version. The 8080 does not have neat addressing modes of the 6809 for building and accessing stack frames, etc. However, these compilers did not use the 6809's capabilities, but rather, they had some very 'brain-damaged' and convoluted ways of doing things because that was the way it had to be done on the 8080. -- Michael Chmilar, University of Calgary - What the hell am I doing?