and the
vendors would make sure they were there.
This is fine if you're a large company and can specify the 'undocumented'
behaviour of a chip. For a one-off hacker like me, it's a little more
dangerous.
You werent reading. Also you missed that due to popular request for 8085
and z80 it's pretty much if they aint there it must not be a 8085 or z80!
They are defacto supported as a result and a hobbiest can rely on their
presence.
AFAIK, all Z80s did the same thing with undocumented
opcodes, and it was
safe to rely on them. But I've met devices (not CPUs specifically) where
later/second-source versions have had different behaviour under
'undocumented' conditions, so I learnt the hard way to be careful.
My reference for 8085 and z80 is however limited to them but, for all
vendors of those parts (and versions thereof) that I know of it's true.
Timing differnces are more common.
allison