retrohackers.com http://retrohackers.com/ |
|
ROM hacking with restrictions: what would YOU add? http://retrohackers.com/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=667 |
Page 1 of 1 |
Author: | gsteemso [ Sun Aug 30, 2015 10:32 am ] |
Post subject: | ROM hacking with restrictions: what would YOU add? |
I already have a thread about this on the replacement for The Forum that Vanished, but I named it poorly and I suspect that many of those who might have been interested in posting to it didn’t even look at it. Basically, I am motivated to devise an improved ROMset for my Commodore 128s. Things I have already determined that it should contain are:
None of the foregoing is especially contentious as far as compatibility is concerned, though I admit the same cannot be said of the potential licensing issues. Alas, other additions and amendments which might be made to the ROMs are more problematic from a compatibility perspective. For example, it is entirely feasible to extend the BASIC INPUT statement to be more useful and less messy, such as restricting it to a certain area on the screen (prompt goes here, user typing goes here and scrolls sideways up to the limit you specify instead of overflowing its area, error messages go here) instead of treating the display as an endless roll of printer paper that can’t be scrolled back, which I always found resulted in my screen contents being scrolled out of existence whenever there was an error in my input. Compatibility is maintained by placing all extra parameters between the PROMPT string and its terminal semicolon; should they be absent, the stock behaviour is expressed. It is even more desirable to add functionality that Commodore was kind of boneheaded for not including in the first place, such as the necessary Kernal and BASIC support to use an REU as a RAM drive, addressing it as a pseudo-serial device just like the keyboard, tape, RS-232, and screen. (An aside: While any device number not already known to be used for something else is acceptable for this purpose — which basically means you can’t use 0-3 and it is very unwise to use 4, 5, or 8-11 — I personally feel that it should be a single-digit number for ease of typing, and 7 is already in use by Brandon Bogle’s excellent Flyer device, which leaves 6. In theory, as far as Commodore was concerned, all four of device numbers 4-7 are normally used by printers, but in these nearly-paperless times, it seems very unlikely to me that anyone would have more than two printers hooked up at once to the same Commodore. Heck, if you’re using a Centronics adapter to hook up a PC-compatible printer, its device number is likely to be much higher than that anyway.) Other BASIC extensions that have been suggested include FETCH and STASH analogues for VDC RAM, and AgentFriday has one for C64 BASIC 2.0 called modBASIC that allows local variables and improved parameter passing syntax. If I were not already buried deep under a heap of retrocomputing projects I have been Not Getting Done, I would dearly love to modify that for BASIC 7 (or 7.80; pretty much the same thing). What else would you add, and why? Assume that your only constraints are: (1) it has to be tangibly useful or helpful, and (2) it cannot break existing software. |
Author: | RaveGuru [ Fri Sep 04, 2015 12:47 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: ROM hacking with restrictions: what would YOU add? |
Very interesting ideas. I had some similar ideas for C64 but using a cartridge, such as RR. I hope anyone who's a bit C128 literate will be inclined to help out ![]() |
Author: | gsteemso [ Sat Sep 19, 2015 8:51 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: ROM hacking with restrictions: what would YOU add? |
I like the cartridge idea, but on the other hand, what do you do if you want to use a different cart at the same time? (or three others if you have a cart port expander!) I'm beginning to think that a function ROM might be the smartest way to go about it. It could easily occupy a slot in the Megabit adapter, for example. |
Author: | RaveGuru [ Thu Oct 01, 2015 6:02 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: ROM hacking with restrictions: what would YOU add? |
You're right, a dedicated ROM would be more flexible, provided it can be a Flash ROM so that it can be updated/reprogrammed by software. My idea of a modular ROM for RR is found further down this sub-forum. A bit dated but perhaps time for a revisit ![]() viewtopic.php?f=8&t=136 |
Page 1 of 1 | All times are UTC + 1 hour [ DST ] |
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group https://www.phpbb.com/ |