atari800-users — Atari800 users

Re: [Atari800-users] Re: 65816 module progress and more

[Petr S. <pst...@so...>]

> Atari800 can have millions of users :-)

millions of angry users after the mapping change.

Anyway, with the new input I can imagine a "--traditional" switch that would restore the original keymapping while the new one would be default.

Also, we should try to detect for at least the F1 keypress (if not for
F9 - which is probably the most used key :) Something like "if you're in
800/130 mode and someone pressed F1 then pop up a window that shows the
remapped keys". Or generally open a warning window if someone pressed
F1-F4 on nonF1/F4 Atari.

Petr

Re: [Atari800-users] 65816 module progress and more

[Jacek <jp...@in...>]

On Thu, Dec 06, 2001 at 09:36:52AM +0100, Petr Stehlik wrote:
> > > 3 112's/0x70's at the beginning).  So, technically, a 384x262 (or 384x312 on
> > > PAL) mode should be physically possible on the Atari hardware. 
> 
> > done in SDL port (when Petr will update CVS)
> 
> I believe that you would have to change the ANTIC and GTIA as well to get the
> full emulation. I haven't looked through your patch carefully but I think you
> just display empty borders but don't let Antic/Gtia generate anything in
> there.

yes, sorry, it's to early morning to think clearly ;-)

-- 
Oh I see his face! Where is your star?
Is it far, is it far, is it far?
When do we leave?
I believe, yes, I believe                       "Stargazer" - Ronnie James Dio

Re: [Atari800-users] Re: 65816 module progress and more

[Jacek <jp...@in...>]

On Thu, Dec 06, 2001 at 09:34:27AM +0100, Petr Stehlik wrote:
> My opinion: let's rewrite the keyboard input and in the meantime run a
> poll on the sf.net whether to remap the F keys or not. Then do what most
> people want. What you think?

Atari800 can have millions of users :-) It was downloaded less than 2000 times
from sourceforge, but remember about distributions, mirrors, and cover CDs.
Only few people will answer on WWW. I think there is no problem with switching
from one mapping to another. We have another good reason to reorganize input
stuff.

-- 
Oh I see his face! Where is your star?
Is it far, is it far, is it far?
When do we leave?
I believe, yes, I believe                       "Stargazer" - Ronnie James Dio

Re: [Atari800-users] Re: 65816 module progress and more

[Nathan H. <ma...@ma...>]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Petr Stehlik" <pst...@so...>
To: "Atari800-users" <ata...@li...>
Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 3:34 AM
Subject: Re: [Atari800-users] Re: 65816 module progress and more


> On Thu, 2001-12-06 at 09:23, Nathan Hartwell wrote:
> > If it's something that will be a problem to the majority of the users,
then
> > it could always be branched into a separate emulator
>
> Branching the emulator would be the worst thing to do. I wonder why you
> still come with such weird ideas :-)

I'm a sick puppy, I guess.  :)

>
> My opinion: let's rewrite the keyboard input and in the meantime run a
> poll on the sf.net whether to remap the F keys or not. Then do what most
> people want. What you think?
>
> Petr

That'll work.

>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Atari800-users mailing list
> Ata...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/atari800-users

Re: [Atari800-users] 65816 module progress and more

[Petr S. <pst...@so...>]

> > 3 112's/0x70's at the beginning).  So, technically, a 384x262 (or 384x312 on
> > PAL) mode should be physically possible on the Atari hardware. 

> done in SDL port (when Petr will update CVS)

I believe that you would have to change the ANTIC and GTIA as well to get the full emulation. I haven't looked through your patch carefully but I think you just display empty borders but don't let Antic/Gtia generate anything in there.

> you can switch WIDTH_MODE with LALT+g (documented in README! :-))

Somebody with some free time could look at merging USAGE/usage1 (usage1
is up-to-date while USAGE contains some additional info). The hotkeys
should obviously be documented in the USAGE.

Petr

Re: [Atari800-users] Re: 65816 module progress and more

[Petr S. <pst...@so...>]

On Thu, 2001-12-06 at 09:23, Nathan Hartwell wrote:
> If it's something that will be a problem to the majority of the users, then
> it could always be branched into a separate emulator

Branching the emulator would be the worst thing to do. I wonder why you
still come with such weird ideas :-)

My opinion: let's rewrite the keyboard input and in the meantime run a
poll on the sf.net whether to remap the F keys or not. Then do what most
people want. What you think?

Petr

Re: [Atari800-users] Re: 65816 module progress and more

[Nathan H. <ma...@ma...>]

If it's something that will be a problem to the majority of the users, then
it could always be branched into a separate emulator.  Naming the emulator
would be the trick, though.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Petr Stehlik" <pst...@so...>
To: "Atari800-users" <ata...@li...>
Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 3:19 AM
Subject: Re: [Atari800-users] Re: 65816 module progress and more


> remapping F1-F5 keys:
>
> > Compile-time option?
>
> no! Never. This wouldn't be an optional extesion. It would be something
> that breaks the line of Atari800 development (at least from end user
> POV). If it should happen then it must be done in all ports at once,
> with great version number bump and a HUGE WARNING in the README and such
> step would also be irreversible. So let's think three times (twice is
> not enough) before doing it.
>
> Petr
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Atari800-users mailing list
> Ata...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/atari800-users

Re: [Atari800-users] Re: 65816 module progress and more

[Petr S. <pst...@so...>]

> but I think all input changes should be made after rewriting common input
> stuff, becouse all ports must be modified at once

agree.

Petr

Re: [Atari800-users] Re: 65816 module progress and more

[Petr S. <pst...@so...>]

remapping F1-F5 keys:

> Compile-time option?

no! Never. This wouldn't be an optional extesion. It would be something
that breaks the line of Atari800 development (at least from end user
POV). If it should happen then it must be done in all ports at once,
with great version number bump and a HUGE WARNING in the README and such
step would also be irreversible. So let's think three times (twice is
not enough) before doing it.

Petr

[Atari800-users] SysInfo v2.03 by Draco

[Nathan H. <ma...@ma...>]

Anyone in here able to tell me if that sysinfo program requires a specific
65816 ROM OS in order to function if a 65816 is detected?  I have what
appears to be fully operation 65816 emulation (in the 6502 emulation mode of
the 65816, actually).  I can boot and run various diagnostics, but when I
run that sysinfo, it does the loading/relocating part and then "halts" in a
blank screen.

Re: [Atari800-users] Re: 65816 module progress and more

[Jacek <jp...@in...>]

On Thu, Dec 06, 2001 at 08:58:21AM +0100, Petr Stehlik wrote:
> BTW, I still believe that the F1=Help makes sense because most Joe Average
> Users will press the F1 when launch it for the first time - even without
> reading documentation - just due to common behaviour of other (DOS/Win)
> applications.

I never used F1-F4 keys on Atari (I had 800XL, now I have 65XE), but I think it
should be mapped to real F1-F4, it's more natural :-)
user _should_ read documentation, it's his choice, if he didn't - he will lose
many features
but I think all input changes should be made after rewriting common input
stuff, becouse all ports must be modified at once

-- 
Oh I see his face! Where is your star?
Is it far, is it far, is it far?
When do we leave?
I believe, yes, I believe                       "Stargazer" - Ronnie James Dio

Re: [Atari800-users] Re: 65816 module progress and more

[Nathan H. <ma...@ma...>]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Petr Stehlik" <pst...@so...>
To: "Atari800-users" <ata...@li...>
Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 2:58 AM
Subject: Re: [Atari800-users] Re: 65816 module progress and more


> > > "Note: The function keys will eventually be changed to a more logical
> > > order."
> >
> > Somehow I doubt that I'm the first to come up with the key mapping ideas
I
> > have.
>
> In the last four years - yes, you're the first.

Well, maybe to first to voice it publicly in the last four years.

>
> BTW, I still believe that the F1=Help makes sense because most Joe Average
Users will press the F1 when launch it for the first time - even without
reading documentation - just due to common behaviour of other (DOS/Win)
applications.
>
> Petr

Compile-time option?

>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Atari800-users mailing list
> Ata...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/atari800-users

[Atari800-users] compilation warnings

[Jacek <jp...@in...>]

When I compile Atari800 with -Wall and -pedantic I see two types of warnings:

in cpu.c:
warning: ANSI C forbids `&&'
(and goto)
but I understand cpu stuff is "hard-coded"

in antic.c:
pointer targets in initialization differ in signedness

shouldn't we fix that? I can do it in anytime, just let me know if it doesn't
break anything.

-- 
Oh I see his face! Where is your star?
Is it far, is it far, is it far?
When do we leave?
I believe, yes, I believe                       "Stargazer" - Ronnie James Dio

Re: [Atari800-users] Re: 65816 module progress and more

[Petr S. <pst...@so...>]

> > "Note: The function keys will eventually be changed to a more logical
> > order."
> 
> Somehow I doubt that I'm the first to come up with the key mapping ideas I
> have.

In the last four years - yes, you're the first.

BTW, I still believe that the F1=Help makes sense because most Joe Average Users will press the F1 when launch it for the first time - even without reading documentation - just due to common behaviour of other (DOS/Win) applications.

Petr

Re: [Atari800-users] 65816 module progress and more

[Jacek <jp...@in...>]

On Wed, Dec 05, 2001 at 07:40:08PM -0500, Nathan Hartwell wrote:
> Of the 228 color clocks per scanline, the narrow playfield uses 128, normal
> uses 160, and wide uses 192.  The remaining clocks are the border.  The
> default display list, if I recall, starts with 24 blank scanlines (hence the
> 3 112's/0x70's at the beginning).  So, technically, a 384x262 (or 384x312 on
> PAL) mode should be physically possible on the Atari hardware.  Not that
> anything uses that, but if we're going to emulate the system, why not
> emulate it all the way.  Right?

done in SDL port (when Petr will update CVS)
you can switch WIDTH_MODE with LALT+g (documented in README! :-))

-- 
Oh I see his face! Where is your star?
Is it far, is it far, is it far?
When do we leave?
I believe, yes, I believe                       "Stargazer" - Ronnie James Dio

Re: [Atari800-users] Re: 65816 module progress and more

[Nathan H. <ma...@ma...>]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Petr Stehlik" <pst...@so...>
To: <a8...@so...>
Cc: <ata...@li...>
Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 2:38 AM
Subject: [Atari800-users] Re: 65816 module progress and more


> > 130XE.  I'm in the process of updating the antic.c module to generate
the
> > complete display that the ANTIC/GTIA is capable of producing.  I'll
gladly
> > share it with anyone interested.  Right now, my "patches" are a little
> > sloppy and I've left most of the code I'm replacing in the source, just
> > commented out.
>
> if you got bored by patching each new version of Atari800 for your
> changes then clean them up and submit for inclusion in the main source
> tree.

I might do that, along with the hopefully now 100% operation 65816 core.
I've added it in the same way the memory.[ch] files were done.  I have the
original 6502 code as cpu-02.[ch] and the new 65816 code as cpu-816.[ch],
816*.[ch], and opcodes.h.  The 65816 code is essentially a direct pull from
the XGS/32 source, so I need to make sure I edit each file and put some
credits in there for the original author.  I've considered merging the files
into just cpu-816.[ch], but that isn't entirely possible the way opcodes.h
is used.  Someone might want to take this 65816 module and change create a
6502 equivilent.  Basically, every opcode (in all 5 CPU modes of the 65816)
has it's own function.  An array of the functions is created and the main
CPU loop just calls the appropriate index (based on the offset calculated by
the CPU mode).

>
> BTW, I just found this in the original David's USAGE:
>
> "Note: The function keys will eventually be changed to a more logical
> order."
>
> So perhaps this is the call for reassigning the keys as you suggested?

Somehow I doubt that I'm the first to come up with the key mapping ideas I
have.  But it's nice to know it's "in the works" so to speak.

>
>
> Petr
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Atari800-users mailing list
> Ata...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/atari800-users

Re: [Atari800-users] 65816 module progress and more

[Petr S. <pst...@so...>]

On Thu, 2001-12-06 at 08:32, Nathan Hartwell wrote:
> I'm assuming it had to do mainly with speed.

A) speed and B) the borders hide stuff that should not be visible by intention (sprites etc).

> It could be done as a compile-time option, I suppose.

Right.

Petr

[Atari800-users] Re: 65816 module progress and more

[Petr S. <pst...@so...>]

> 130XE.  I'm in the process of updating the antic.c module to generate the
> complete display that the ANTIC/GTIA is capable of producing.  I'll gladly
> share it with anyone interested.  Right now, my "patches" are a little
> sloppy and I've left most of the code I'm replacing in the source, just
> commented out.

if you got bored by patching each new version of Atari800 for your
changes then clean them up and submit for inclusion in the main source 
tree.

BTW, I just found this in the original David's USAGE:

"Note: The function keys will eventually be changed to a more logical
order."

So perhaps this is the call for reassigning the keys as you suggested?


Petr

Re: [Atari800-users] 65816 module progress and more

[Nathan H. <ma...@ma...>]

I'm assuming it had to do mainly with speed.  Rendering all of that would
take nearly twice the overhead in the program, plus it would only benefit a
select few that really wanted it.  It could be done as a compile-time
option, I suppose.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Petr Stehlik" <pst...@so...>
To: "Atari800-users" <ata...@li...>
Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 2:27 AM
Subject: Re: [Atari800-users] 65816 module progress and more


> > 3 112's/0x70's at the beginning).  So, technically, a 384x262 (or
384x312 on
> > PAL) mode should be physically possible on the Atari hardware.  Not that
> > anything uses that, but if we're going to emulate the system, why not
> > emulate it all the way.  Right?
>
> the reasons were posted several times already. What a pity we don't have
> a history of this list.
>
> Petr
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Atari800-users mailing list
> Ata...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/atari800-users

Re: [Atari800-users] 65816 module progress and more

[Petr S. <pst...@so...>]

> 3 112's/0x70's at the beginning).  So, technically, a 384x262 (or 384x312 on
> PAL) mode should be physically possible on the Atari hardware.  Not that
> anything uses that, but if we're going to emulate the system, why not
> emulate it all the way.  Right?

the reasons were posted several times already. What a pity we don't have
a history of this list.

Petr

Re: [Atari800-users] 65816 module progress and more

[Nathan H. <ma...@ma...>]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Jacek Popławski" <jp...@in...>
To: <ata...@li...>
Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2001 7:28 PM
Subject: Re: [Atari800-users] 65816 module progress and more


> On Wed, Dec 05, 2001 at 07:06:58PM -0500, Nathan Hartwell wrote:
> > Also, I've noticed that the current antic.c code is not written to
display
> > the entire 228 color clock scanline as the ANTIC/GTIA actually create
it.
>
> What exactly is maximum possible screen size of Atari XL/XE ?  I remember
> biggest 1-bit mode in Atari Basic was 320x160 ? hm... after adding 8 it
was
> 320x180...? but that was standard mode, I remember I could change color of
> border, and few application can draw on that border. So... I use 320+2*8
width
> now, becouse I clip 2*12 pixels. You mean it is possible to use that 2*12
> pixels, too, yes? So I should set mode ATARI_WIDTH*ATARI_HEIGHT, without
> cliping that 2*12 pixels?
> I have 320/320+2*8 switch now, so I can extend it to
320/320+2*8/320+2*8+2*12.

Of the 228 color clocks per scanline, the narrow playfield uses 128, normal
uses 160, and wide uses 192.  The remaining clocks are the border.  The
default display list, if I recall, starts with 24 blank scanlines (hence the
3 112's/0x70's at the beginning).  So, technically, a 384x262 (or 384x312 on
PAL) mode should be physically possible on the Atari hardware.  Not that
anything uses that, but if we're going to emulate the system, why not
emulate it all the way.  Right?

>
> --
> They'll take your diamonds, and then give you steel
> You'll be caught in the middle of the madness
> Just lost like them                                 "All The Fools Sailed
Away"
> And part of all the pain that they feel                     - Ronnie James
Dio
>
> _______________________________________________
> Atari800-users mailing list
> Ata...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/atari800-users

Re: [Atari800-users] 65816 module progress and more

[Jacek <jp...@in...>]

On Wed, Dec 05, 2001 at 07:06:58PM -0500, Nathan Hartwell wrote:
> Also, I've noticed that the current antic.c code is not written to display
> the entire 228 color clock scanline as the ANTIC/GTIA actually create it.

What exactly is maximum possible screen size of Atari XL/XE ?  I remember
biggest 1-bit mode in Atari Basic was 320x160 ? hm... after adding 8 it was
320x180...? but that was standard mode, I remember I could change color of
border, and few application can draw on that border. So... I use 320+2*8 width
now, becouse I clip 2*12 pixels. You mean it is possible to use that 2*12
pixels, too, yes? So I should set mode ATARI_WIDTH*ATARI_HEIGHT, without
cliping that 2*12 pixels?
I have 320/320+2*8 switch now, so I can extend it to 320/320+2*8/320+2*8+2*12.

-- 
They'll take your diamonds, and then give you steel     
You'll be caught in the middle of the madness     
Just lost like them                                 "All The Fools Sailed Away" 
And part of all the pain that they feel                     - Ronnie James Dio

[Atari800-users] 65816 module progress and more

[Nathan H. <ma...@ma...>]

As a few may be aware, I have been working on porting the 65816 CPU
emulation from the XGS/32 (Apple IIgs emulator) project.  I seem to have it
done, but I have discovered a flaw with my plan.  The current Atari800
project relies upon unused opcode values in order to use native C code to
emulate certain functions of the Atari system.  There are no unused opcode
values in the 65816 CPU, so all of those "escape" functions have to be
disabled.  There is the possibility of somehow tying these "escape"
functions to the COP instruction, but I have not looked into anything like
that.  Instead, seeing as how the only "escape" functions that are being
added are to enhance screen/keyboard/disk I/O, handle printing, and
introduce an H: device (that doesn't work with any version of SpartaDOS that
I've tried), I was thinking of adding a virtual PBI device (similar to the
MIO or BlackBox).  Being a virtual PBI device, activating the appropriate
device bit could  trigger "intercept" routines that perform the appropriate
functions in native C.  Of course, a dummy PBI ROM would be coded to allow
software to "see" it and respond accordingly.  For that matter, the
MIO/BlackBox ROM image could be used for this function.  Instead of
partitions on a real hard drive, individual ATR files could be used to
represent each partition.

Also, I've noticed that the current antic.c code is not written to display
the entire 228 color clock scanline as the ANTIC/GTIA actually create it.
Is there any reason why we clip the left and right sides?  It'd be cool, but
not required I guess, if the entire display (including the full borders) was
available for those of us capable of and/or willing to enable a large enough
display.  512x384 would cover it as 228 color clocks expands out to 456
"pixels", and NTSC/PAL goes to 262/312 scanlines.  Anyone else interested in
the full display?

Re: [Atari800-users] hello?

[Nathan H. <ma...@ma...>]

In that case, umm, oops?  :)

----- Original Message -----
From: "Petr Stehlik" <pst...@so...>
To: "Nathan Hartwell" <ma...@ma...>
Cc: "Atari800-users" <ata...@li...>
Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2001 3:28 AM
Subject: Re: [Atari800-users] hello?


> On Tue, 2001-12-04 at 23:45, Nathan Hartwell wrote:
> > Umm.  You did?
>
> Yes, about two weeks ago when I tried to compare pros and cons of the
sf.net.
>
> > > I knew about this Reply-to problem and I announced it in the
> > > a8...@so... list. Nobody was reading me?
>
>

Re: [Atari800-users] hello?

[Petr S. <pst...@so...>]

On Tue, 2001-12-04 at 23:45, Nathan Hartwell wrote:
> Umm.  You did?

Yes, about two weeks ago when I tried to compare pros and cons of the sf.net.

> > I knew about this Reply-to problem and I announced it in the
> > a8...@so... list. Nobody was reading me?