Re: Need help on modifying and assembly of a small program!

From: Beth (BethStone21_at_hotmail.NOSPICEDHAM.com)
Date: 02/18/05 

Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2005 15:58:38 GMT

> BS>
> itself...indeed, the C64 was a "multi-processor" too, in that the VIC
> video
> chip and SID sound chip were actually rather advanced for the time and
>
> EB>
> Pardon moi for being pedantic, but... the VIC appeared in the VIC-20
> and included sound processing circuitry -- so it handle both graphics
> and music for that machine. The chip that appeared in the C-64 {note
> the dash} was the VIC II -- which excluded the sound processing
> circuits.

You are being very pedantic...if you hadn't spotted it: Commodore had a
silly practice of giving their chips "human names"...such as VIC (as in
"Victor" :) and SID (as in "Sidney")...

It was the VIC-II (or "MOS 6567/6569 video controller", in the boring
technical version...just to "out-pedantic" you there ;)...but it's common
custom in C64 circles to merely call it "VIC", to milk the "person's name"
joke for all its worth ;)...

Putting "C-64" into Google, Google replies "did you mean C64?"...so,
Google - having indexed the entire web - thinks you're wrong too...all the
websites I see here have "C64" not "C-64"...

> BS>
> I also had an Atari ST...
>
> EB>
> Do you remember a gem called AMOS Basic being available for that
> machine?

No; And I'll tell you why: AMOS was the Amiga version...it was called STOS
(yeah, like the x86 machine instruction ;) for the Atari ST...I guess the
"OS" part was because they did basically replace the standard GUI OS ("GEM"
on the ST...yeah, the same Digital Research GUI as did make a small
appearance on the PC :) for the older-style "BASIC interpreter"
command-prompt thing...

> BS>
> I think - like the acronym "BASIC" itself - there was an attempt to
> "retrofit" it as initials, to pretend that it "meant" something that
> explained the "A" in the wrong place, rather than just that it was
> simply
> misspelt by Bill...but, nope, just like "BASIC", these weren't
> originally
> intended to be acronyms at all...that whole "Beginner's All-purpose
> Symbolic Instruction Code" nonsense? It didn't "mean" anything
> originally,
> they tried to join onto the "fad" that things "stood for" other things
> later on and "retrofitted" it as an acronym...I mean, come on:
> "all-purpose"? Hyphenated just to "make it fit"? And what programming
> language is ever called an "instruction code"? And aren't they all, by
> definition, "symbolic"? It doesn't mean anything useful...only
> "Beginner's"
> has "useful information" in it...it's just a poor attempt at a
> "retrofit",
> after the fact...truth is, Bill can't spell but he tried to "patch"
> over it
> by pretending it was misspelt purposefully...yeah, right
>
> EB>
> Felbercarb! How do you spell Basic? "Bsaic" perhaps? The
> "Beginner's" phraze was being used long before the "ABASIC", "BASICA"
> {the EXTRA "A" obviously trying to signify "Advanced"} became a splash.

No, no...talk about the attention span of a gnat...

What Bill couldn't spell was "KERNAL" (sic), not "BASIC"...the bit about
BASIC is a "digression" to demonstrate the "retrofit after the fact"
practice in its most famous example...you haven't quote far enough back -
it's a long section - to see that I was talking about "KERNAL"
misspellings...

Ah, perhaps BASIC was a bad example because Mr.Bill is also connected to
BASIC and that's probably what's confused you there...

Also, I sit corrected: I had read an early "Jargon File" entry that claimed
BASIC was a "backronym", which I mentioned there...apparently, though, that
entry was in error (checking it with Google and the updated version of the
"Jargon File" which features a "retraction" of its earlier error) and it
did always stand for "Beginner's All-purpose Symbolic Instruction
Code"...which, I'm sorry, just means that they were desparate to make it
fit into a nice acronym because that's just so totally lame...

> BS>
> {Linux vs Windows issues}
>
> EB>
> Is it possible to move the HD from the Linux box to the Windows box and
> leave the Windows HD where it is -- have a dual-boot system?

They both already have two hard drives installed, unfortunately...well, the
Linux machine's second hard drive just blew up recently so there's room
there but that's heading in the opposite direction...and we can't go doing
that, of course, because of stupid old Microsoft's "activation"
nonsense...anyway, the machines aren't equal...I doubt the other could run
XP... at least, not smoothly (because even this better machine has its
problems)...

Look, I know what to do...I just need to get an ethernet card and a cable
for the Linux box (to explain to those who've been moaning, as per usual:
The cable modem can be connected by USB or ethernet...neither of these
machines has built-in ethernet (the "newer machines" may have these things
built-in to the motherboard and stuff but these are not "newer machines" of
that description)...hence, I connect the modem with USB to Windows...Linux
doesn't have support for cable modems via USB (I Googled, no luck)...via
ethernet, yes, of course...but, correct, connecting a cable modem by USB is
a "new" and "unusual" thing, so Linux has yet to cater for this (I did look
this up on Google before)...anyway, the "answer" is simple: I need to get
an ethernet card and a cable then I can connect the Linux box
instead...yes, exactly that simple...so CALM DOWN, folks...and this is what
I'll do the next time I go shopping at a computer store, probably, as I
don't think a "cheap" ethernet card and cable are going to be that
expensive, right? :)...

"More haste, less speed"; If I go swapping hard drives around, then I'll
just probably screw up my system, have to do bloody "activiation" 20 times
(and then Microsoft start "prying" into my business, thinking I'm making
pirate copies or something), GRUB will be on all the wrong hard drives for
"dual booting" and so on and so forth...when, instead, the far simpler
thing is to just _WAIT_ - yes, some patience - and then I'll go get a card
and a cable in a while and that solves it all...so, calm down...take deep
breaths, everyone...

But, as I said to Frank, the fact that the Linux machine currently runs X
like a snail (not enough RAM) and at a crap resolution (that's because of
the monitor being ancient...you know, it's all very "pre-decimal"...though
the graphics card is okay and I've got the OpenGL drivers for it so that'll
all be just swell once I get a "post-caveman" monitor, capable of a
reasonable resolutions :) is really of more immediate benefit to working on
LuxAsm...

You know, I _CAN_ access the internet now (well, obviously...or you
couldn't be reading this :) and I can do CVS (because that's what NoDot's
complaining about) and, in fact, the mailing-list problem has nothing to do
with this but a SourceForge "boycott" of Microsoft...but, yes, the Linux
connection would just be "nicer"...but it's not "essential"...on the other
hand, if I run too many programs in X, then it gets to "punch the screen"
levels of annoyance at times, waiting ages for it to do anything
useful...this, in the context of working on LuxAsm, is more "essential" to
get fixed or, simply, it so annoys me waiting for it to do anything, I get
"put off" doing much of any work with that machine...

[ Note: Consider this all _RHETORICAL_...I'm NOT asking for anyone's
"opinions"...I'm merely informing Frank and the LuxAsm guys of the
"situation"...I'm sure _you_ might personally be able to connect your modem
to King Kong's elbow or whatever...I don't really care...this isn't really
an "invite to the group" to discuss this, in that sense, but rather, as the
mailing-list doesn't work at the moment, I've got to talk to Frank about
this stuff via the group for the time being...so, this isn't in the usual
nature of the newsgroup postings where I'd be posting to ask for opinions
and stuff...I don't mind the conversation but, well, the original intention
was only to talk to Frank... ]

Beth :)

Quantcast