From owner-freebsd-hackers Tue Jan 8 15:36:24 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from rwcrmhc52.attbi.com (rwcrmhc52.attbi.com [216.148.227.88]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 832FB37B427 for ; Tue, 8 Jan 2002 15:36:13 -0800 (PST) Received: from bmah.dyndns.org ([12.233.149.189]) by rwcrmhc52.attbi.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.27 201-229-121-127-20010626) with ESMTP id <20020108233613.DTZ20395.rwcrmhc52.attbi.com@bmah.dyndns.org>; Tue, 8 Jan 2002 23:36:13 +0000 Received: (from bmah@localhost) by bmah.dyndns.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id g08NaCw78995; Tue, 8 Jan 2002 15:36:12 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from bmah) Message-Id: <200201082336.g08NaCw78995@bmah.dyndns.org> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.5 07/13/2001 with nmh-1.0.4 To: Matthew Dillon Cc: Terry Lambert , D J Hawkey Jr , freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Oh my god, Google has a USENET archive going back to 1981! In-reply-to: <200201082314.g08NExK62190@apollo.backplane.com> References: <20.21dd4868.296bb1c2_aol.com@ns.sol.net> <3C3A810A.C616A903_mindspring.com@ns.sol.net> <200201081104.g08B4i309583@sheol.localdomain> <200201082138.g08LcFS61637@apollo.backplane.com> <3C3B7997.205E404A@mindspring.com> <200201082314.g08NExK62190@apollo.backplane.com> Comments: In-reply-to Matthew Dillon message dated "Tue, 08 Jan 2002 15:14:59 -0800." From: "Bruce A. Mah" Reply-To: bmah@FreeBSD.ORG X-Face: g~c`.{#4q0"(V*b#g[i~rXgm*w;:nMfz%_RZLma)UgGN&=j`5vXoU^@n5v4:OO)c["!w)nD/!!~e4Sj7LiT'6*wZ83454H""lb{CC%T37O!!'S$S&D}sem7I[A 2V%N&+ X-Image-Url: http://www.employees.org/~bmah/Images/bmah-cisco-small.gif X-Url: http://www.employees.org/~bmah/ Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2002 15:36:12 -0800 Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG If memory serves me right, Matthew Dillon wrote: > But, do you know what '02' does? On an original 6502? The 6502 > was a hardwired processor, which means that even the hex codes that > didn't have an official instruction did things. Weird things to be > sure, but things nontheless. They cleaned it up later on (in the 816) > but not in the PET/C64 era and not on the 6502 based 65xx series. I'm not sure I've ever heard anyone ever call the 65816 a cleaned-up version of anything. Talk about a Jeckyl and Hyde processor! (For the uninitiated, it had these mode bits where you could set parts of the processor to be either 8-bit or 16-bit mode, along with things like the 8086's segment registers to give you this pseudo-24-bit addressing. I think they finally did use all 256 opcodes on that one.) Oh yeah, I think someone had to do some amount of "clean up" for the 65C02 since it had a few more (defined) opcodes than the original 6502. [Centipede game] Ob-65XXX hack: I once wrote a spreadsheet, starting from a numerics package, ProDOS, and a GUI toolkit. In assembler. Doing the infix expression parser was especially fun. If anyone remembers Pinpoint Publishing and their still-borne "Digit", well, that was it. I still have my code, in a couple of two-inch binders somewhere. > Somebody somewhere has a complete list of unsupported instructions > that nevertheless do interesting things. I have this odd feeling that such a list was either in the Zaks book or one of the Apple ][ reference manuals. Bruce. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message