> From: Christopher Smith
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: David Woyciesjes [mailto:DAW@yalepress3.unipress.yale.edu]
>
> > ...and now some flashbacks to the DB15 - DE15 naming convention
> > thread...Eeek!
>
> I vote that we hereafter call the DE15 "ZQ32," and the Macintosh, to
> avoid confusion, can be "Grundey."
>
> Chris
>
huh? Where did you get that from?
--
--- David A Woyciesjes
--- C & IS Support Specialist
--- Yale University Press
--- mailto:david.woyciesjes@yale.edu
--- (203) 432-0953
--- ICQ # - 905818
Mac OS X 10.1 - Darwin Kernel Version 5
Running since 01/22/2002 without a crash
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Chris [mailto:mythtech@mac.com]
> I know you like to make sure your grammer and spelling is
> correct, so I
> figured I should point out the painfully mistake you have been making
> thru all your conversations.
Wow, that's almost as good a quote as the previous one about Dick being
a "pain in the ass..."
Chris
Christopher Smith, Perl Developer
Amdocs - Champaign, IL
/usr/bin/perl -e '
print((~"\x95\xc4\xe3"^"Just Another Perl Hacker.")."\x08!\n");
'
From: Fred Cisin (XenoSoft) <cisin(a)xenosoft.com>
>Allison is, of course, absolutely correct.
>ST506/412, what is often sloppily called "MFM" provides a set of signals
;) call it the right thing and duh the're baffled. Better to obscure.
>> The problem with EDSI was it sued the same cables as MFM IE: the pair
> ^^^^
>We live in a litigious society.
Let e'm, they still have to prove I'm not isdlexyc. ;)
>> of 26 pin and 34pin. The interfaces however were toally incompatable.
> ^^
>Odd. Mine seem to have 20
Ok, sumptin like that. Blame it on prescription drugs for this @#$%^&!!!
bug.
Allison
On May 6, 8:21, Loboyko Steve wrote:
> I obtained a bunch of 2708 UVEPROM's, and I'd like to
> be able to program them. As you may know, they require
> a different algorithm than the 2716 and on, and three
> voltages, +5, +12, and -5.
>
> I'm building a little board that will program 1/2 (the
> upper or lower) of a 2716 to a 2708 (I can program
> 2716's). But I can't find a description of the
> algorithm that is detailed enough. What I think I know
> is:
>
> 1. The /OE line must be high
> 2. select address and data (start at addr 0)
> 3. bring PGM line from 0 to 27 volts for 1 mSec, then
> drop back to 0 (this seems very strange)
> 4. repeat 100 times per address (not all at once,
> increment the address lines and loop to avoid
> "overheating" a byte.
> 5. drop /OE and verify.
My 1976 Intel databook differs slightly from that.
1. raise /CS (pin 20) to +12V
2. select address and data
3. not less than 10 microsecs later, apply programming pulse to pin 18
4. hold address and data for at least 1 microsec, then move on to next
5. repeat for required number of iterations
6. drop /CS to normal (*without* changing the address) and verify.
The required number of iterations depends on the width of the program
pulse. Minimum pulse width is 0.1ms, max is 1ms. The spec calls for a
total of 100ms programming time per location.
V(IHP) on pin 18 is 25V (min) to 27V (max)
I(IPL) on pin 18 is 3mA
I(DD) is 50mA (typical) to 65mA (max) -- Vdd (+12V +/- 5%) supply current
I(CC) is 6mA (typical) to 10mA (max) -- Vcc ( +5V +/- 5%) supply current
I(BB) is 30mA (typical) to 45mA (max) -- Vbb ( -5V +/- 5%) supply current
Yes, these are almost identical to the read currents.
> 3. bring PGM line from 0 to 27 volts for 1 mSec, then
> drop back to 0 (this seems very strange)
Why does that seem strange? It's the programming pulse, which overcomes
the barrier imposed by the floating gate on the EPROM cell. It needs to be
high enough to overcome the barrier potential, and you don't want address
or data changing while that is possible.
--
Pete Peter Turnbull
Network Manager
University of York
Steve,
That sounds bogus. I'd have to check and I'm not at home.
Memory says that the 2708 was one of the first with the
relatively easy program sequences but the 1mS*100 sounds
strange for that part.
Allison
-----Original Message-----
From: Loboyko Steve <sloboyko(a)yahoo.com>
To: classiccmp(a)classiccmp.org <classiccmp(a)classiccmp.org>
Date: Monday, May 06, 2002 11:38 AM
Subject: 2708 Programming Algorithm?
>I obtained a bunch of 2708 UVEPROM's, and I'd like to
>be able to program them. As you may know, they require
>a different algorithm than the 2716 and on, and three
>voltages, +5, +12, and -5.
>
>I'm building a little board that will program 1/2 (the
>upper or lower) of a 2716 to a 2708 (I can program
>2716's). But I can't find a description of the
>algorithm that is detailed enough. What I think I know
>is:
>
>1. The /OE line must be high
>2. select address and data (start at addr 0)
>3. bring PGM line from 0 to 27 volts for 1 mSec, then
>drop back to 0 (this seems very strange)
>4. repeat 100 times per address (not all at once,
>increment the address lines and loop to avoid
>"overheating" a byte.
>5. drop /OE and verify.
>
>
>Does anybody have an authoritative description, and a
>current requirement for the +5, +12, -5, and
>programming pulse? Thanks.
>
>__________________________________________________
>Do You Yahoo!?
>Yahoo! Health - your guide to health and wellness
>http://health.yahoo.com
>From: "Jay West" <jwest(a)classiccmp.org>
>
>
>And then posts like this always spread like wildfire as another user or two
>chimes in "Hey, I just joined here and started getting spam too!" Geeze -
>look at the sample size people.
>
Hi Jay
I re-joined here about 1 month ago and haven't seen any
spam other than the noise level of this group.
Dwight
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Allison [mailto:ajp166@bellatlantic.net]
> I disagree. The UCSD version was an excellent teaching tool but
> slower than sludge due to the P-code thing. Later implementations
> namely JRT and Borland were very useful tools.
I'm also of that opinion. I like Pascal, and Modula, and Oberon...
Chris
Christopher Smith, Perl Developer
Amdocs - Champaign, IL
/usr/bin/perl -e '
print((~"\x95\xc4\xe3"^"Just Another Perl Hacker.")."\x08!\n");
'
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sellam Ismail [mailto:foo@siconic.com]
: reply ( originalmessage -- newdrivel)
">" . .
> function reply(void)
> {
> > > 20 C MY GRIPE WITH PASCAL WAS THAT IT WAS ALL ONE PROGRAM
> > > 30 C EVERY FORTRAN AFTER II COULD HAVE MODULES DEFINED
> > (* Pascal had adherents early, but it remained a teaching
> > language until the early 1980s. Although Turbo Pascal
> > didn't permit modules, it did provide $INCLUDE files,
> > and depending on the application area, you could often
> > accomplish the same thing using includes. *)
> // What about the "uses" directive? I didn't program in
> Pascal a whole
> // lot but I remember when I did need something like a
> graphics library
> // I "use"d it.
(I remember the directive, but it's been a long time since)
(I've used it.)
"too" " " "Me"
> > > 100 STOP
> > END.
> }
;
Christopher Smith, Perl Developer
Amdocs - Champaign, IL
/usr/bin/perl -e '
print((~"\x95\xc4\xe3"^"Just Another Perl Hacker.")."\x08!\n");
'
> >The MAC, for example,
>
> I have been ignoring this, but I just can't any more.
[..spelling lession snipped..]
There is one acceptable situation wherein one would capitalize
the name of the Mac...
WHEN SHOUTING!
;)
> "Douglas H. Quebbeman" wrote:
>
> > My Data Structures prof lamented the fact (by his observation)
> > that most people write Pascal in its FORTRAN subset...
>
> 10 C WHAT SUBSET IS THAT?
(* The subset wherein everything is type in UPPER CASE
and no variable names were longer than six characters. *)
> 20 C MY GRIPE WITH PASCAL WAS THAT IT WAS ALL ONE PROGRAM
> 30 C EVERY FORTRAN AFTER II COULD HAVE MODULES DEFINED
(* Pascal had adherents early, but it remained a teaching
language until the early 1980s. Although Turbo Pascal
didn't permit modules, it did provide $INCLUDE files,
and depending on the application area, you could often
accomplish the same thing using includes. *)
> 40 C .NOR. COULD YOU EVER FIGURE OUT
> 50 C WHEN TO PUT A SEMI-COLEN .OR. .NOT. AT THE END OF A
> 60 C STATEMENT
(* Oh, IIRC, the semicolon is a STATEMENT TERMINATOR in Algol;
in Pascal, it's statement seperator. That should make it clear. *)
> 100 STOP
END.
-Douglas Hurst Quebbeman (DougQ at ixnayamspayIgLou.com) [Call me "Doug"]
Surgically excise the pig-latin from my e-mail address in order to reply
"The large print giveth, and the small print taketh away." -Tom Waits
