Learning TI-83 Plus Assembly (z80) [2 More Questions]

You've got TASM80.TAB, and you followed the instructions exactly, and the sample program wouldn't assemble?

Actually, it took me a long, long time to get my TI83-assembly rig set up properly (getting stuff to work with MirageOS properly was a bitch). I don't know exactly how I did it, but I can tell you it involved holy water.

The whole thing was lost in a hard drive crash, so I won't be able to help you much now. [smile]

Try looking around on TiCalc.Org. I'd bet that you can either find everything you need there or find links to it all.

On a more upbeat note, Z80 assembly is wicked fun, so don't give up.

Quote:

Original post by twix You've got TASM80.TAB, and you followed the instructions exactly, and the sample program wouldn't assemble? ...

The sample program also calls for #including ti83plus.inc. Since the file is bad, I get a lot of errors.

From the assembly log, I see there are 3 errors per line in the file. Damn... I wish I could copy and paste from command.com, I have to type it out myself:

ti83plus.inc line xxxx: Label not found: SomeLabel
ti83plus.inc line xxxx: Label value misalligned. SomeLabel
ti83plus.inc line xxxx: Unrecognized instruction. SomeLabel

All xxxx's and SomeLabel's are the same thing for each line, and all labels are what is written on that line.
Any ideas?

What exactly is wrong with the file? Where did you get it? A google search for ti83plus.inc yields TI's own website, which has a copy of the file that looks perfectly valid to me.

...maybe it's the assembler.

What would you recommend?

Spend a long, long time fiddling with it, and it will come. That's what I did. [grin]

You might have to go down to hexadecimal level and use an opcode chart to debug.

Download this.
It's a simple z80 IDE I wrote, it has an expample that should compile out of the box.
I've written loads of stuff for the TI-83 Plus, so if you need help just ask me!

Quote:

Original post by benryves Download this. It's a simple z80 IDE I wrote, it has an expample that should compile out of the box. I've written loads of stuff for the TI-83 Plus, so if you need help just ask me!

Downloaded. Seems that it WOULD work fine, except...

The following is copied and pasted from another assembler's sample program:

---------------------------------------------<font face=courier>.nolist#include "ti83plus.inc"#define	ProgStart	$9D95.list.org	ProgStart - 2	.db	t2ByteTok, tAsmCmp	b_call(_ClrLCDFull)          ;error here	ld	hl, 0	ld	(PenCol), hl	ld	hl, msg	b_call(_PutS)	;Display the text (and error here)	b_call(_NewLine)   ;error here	retmsg:	.db "Hello world!", 0.end.end</font>-----------------------------------------------------

There's an error on every line that says b_call. How would one change that to make this work?

And, if anyone knows why Virtual TI 3.0 beta says "EAccessViolation" every time I open it (and then closes abruptly), that'd be... nice.
Thanks

Last question still at large, and:

I just noticed that there are assembly applications, and flash applications. Does flash == assembly, or does flash == Ti-Basic, or is flash something totally different?

Quote:

Original post by v0dKA Quote: Original post by benryves Download this. It's a simple z80 IDE I wrote, it has an expample that should compile out of the box. I've written loads of stuff for the TI-83 Plus, so if you need help just ask me! Downloaded. Seems that it WOULD work fine, except... The following is copied and pasted from another assembler's sample program: ---------------------------------------------<font face=courier>.nolist#include "ti83plus.inc"#define ProgStart $9D95.list.org ProgStart - 2 .db t2ByteTok, tAsmCmp b_call(_ClrLCDFull) ;error here ld hl, 0 ld (PenCol), hl ld hl, msg b_call(_PutS) ;Display the text (and error here) b_call(_NewLine) ;error here retmsg: .db "Hello world!", 0.end.end</font>----------------------------------------------------- There's an error on every line that says b_call. How would one change that to make this work? And, if anyone knows why Virtual TI 3.0 beta says "EAccessViolation" every time I open it (and then closes abruptly), that'd be... nice. Thanks

VTI3 is in alpha and doesn't work. Use VTI2.5 Beta instead.
To get bcall(_xxx) to work, you need to add the line:

#define	bcall(label)	RST 28h \ .dw label

To the top of your source file. You appear to be using b_call() instead of bcall(), but it should be obvious as to what you need to change.
Also, Flash APP = signed program that executes from Flash ROM. No use of self modifying code, for example.

Flash = the Apps button, the blue one, you know.

All of the TI resources are for coding flash apps. TI's include file does not work with TASM. You have two options:

1) Use TASM and poke around the net for the correct files
2) Use ZiLog Studio and make use of SquishIt (check ticalc.org) to create programs instead of apps. Most of the tutorials on TASM are applicable, but TASM can't use B_CALL. ZiLog can. I think the TASM examples use a standard call or something, just use B_CALL when they're calling a system call.

In case it wasn't clear, I very much prefer option 2.


Oh, one other thing. Don't bother with VTI. TI itself ships a *perfect* emulator that works fantastically. You can get to it from the Ti-83 main page.

Which App's run faster in general, flash or assembly?

Quote:

Original post by Promit Flash = the Apps button, the blue one, you know. All of the TI resources are for coding flash apps. TI's include file does not work with TASM. You have two options: 1) Use TASM and poke around the net for the correct files 2) Use ZiLog Studio and make use of SquishIt (check ticalc.org) to create programs instead of apps. Most of the tutorials on TASM are applicable, but TASM can't use B_CALL. ZiLog can. I think the TASM examples use a standard call or something, just use B_CALL when they're calling a system call. In case it wasn't clear, I very much prefer option 2. Oh, one other thing. Don't bother with VTI. TI itself ships a *perfect* emulator that works fantastically. You can get to it from the Ti-83 main page.

- ti83plus.inc works flawlessly with TASM. I use it all the time.
- SquishIt is not required. Use DEVPAC8X instead (much better).
- TASM can use a bcall if you define it.
- ZDS is a pain in the arse to set up.
- Flash Debugger has awful key handling, and is crap for game development.

My "IDE" is basically a text editor that compiles through TASM and DEVPAC8X. All the files are already there. No hassle. No fancy set up.

Your ideas seem based on some of the really old TI-83 tutorials.

Quote:

Original post by v0dKA Which App's run faster in general, flash or assembly?

Flash = ASM program running from ROM, not RAM.
Bog standard programs running in RAM are a better bet; they're not in multiples of 16K so can be smaller, don't have to be signed, easier to debug &c.

Flash is assembly. There are mainly memory restrictions that are different for flash apps than for programs. Apps are always archived in ROM, whereas a program doesn't need to be. This usually means there's extra archive/unarchive handling code. A Flash app always takes up memory in integer multiples of the 16284 byte code page size. Programs don't have this restriction.

benryves -- I'm not qualified to say anything more. This was my experience, which was admittedly a while ago (2 years?). Plus I haven't got a whole lot to show for it. All I know is both ZiLog and TI Flash Debugger worked flawlessly for me. TASM, eh, not so much.

[Edited by - Promit on November 6, 2004 9:58:03 PM]

Quote:

Original post by Promit benryves -- I'm not qualified to say anything more. This was my experience

I know that, I realise that. However, for game development, most people prefer VTI as it handles multiple keypresses much better. That said, the memory emulation on VTI is crap (no support for ROM) and a few of the system interupts used in executing BASIC screw up.

Thank you, dear sirs. I can't check if everything works or not ATM, but hopefully it will...

EDIT: Question:
Would assembly programs be stored in RAM, or in archive?

[Edited by - v0dKA on November 6, 2004 7:02:19 PM]