25 Aug
2000
25 Aug
'00
9:18 a.m.
> Particularly the PC-6 -- I'm very curious
about that one. I wasn't too
> impressed with the PC-2, but I love my PC-4.
The PC6 was a disapointment :-(. It's a Casio
clone, of course (I forget
which model). It's got the same BASIC (essentially) as the PC4, with the
same 10 'program areas' and common variables for all programs. It does
have more memory (8K IIRC).
PB 1000 ?
The 'assembler' is a cheat!. It's not an
assembler for the PC6's CPU,
it's an assembler for a mythical 16 bit CPU. There's also a simulator for
said CPU in the machine so you can run your 'assembly language' programs.
But it's pretty limited in what it can do, and you certainly can't access
hardware features of the PC6.
Well, as you prefer - I thought of the assembler as quite nice
tool to write programs with faster execution than in basic,
and you could access (most?) hardware - I did some nice graphic
games with it, impossible in basic.
Also, when is an assembler real ? Maybe with an exeptinon of
early PDP8s, where the coding did realy trigger the hardware
parts, Assm is almost always just an abstraction layer one or
two layers above the real gates. In some architectures real
implementations are an exeption...
Gruss
H.
--
VCF Europa 2.0 am 28./29. April 2001 in Muenchen
http://www.vintage.org/vcfe
http://www.homecomputer.de/vcfe