Oh, yes, sorry, I hope I wasn't unclear in my previous message; the only
similarity between 6800 and 6502 is the general machine architecture and
programming modality (they also share many assembly mnemonics). The 6800
and 6502 are not op-code or pin compatible.
I just referenced the Quinn text because I think it's pretty good for the
high-level concepts and I'm not aware of any similar publication dedicated
to the 6502 specifically.
Best,
Sean
On Sat, Aug 16, 2014 at 11:01 AM, Dave Caroline <dave.thearchivist at
gmail.com
wrote:
> It is electrically different to the 6800 not to confuse the two chips,
> different clock etc
> There was a Rockwell version too
>
> Dave Caroline
>
> On 16/08/2014, Sean Caron <scaron at
umich.edu
wrote:
> > Hi A.P,
> >
> > The data sheets are out there; I've seen about three different datasheets
> > for the 6502 floating around, one is the original MOS preliminary,
> there's
> > a Synertek one, and there's the brand new one from WDC. I'm sure you
> could
> > find more if you hunted around.
> >
> > It's all the same op-codes and addressing modes; except in the currently
> > shipping 65C02(S) they added a few instructions and filled out a few pins
> > that aren't present in the earlier revs. So if you are working with an
> > older 6502, use the older datasheet; if you just went out and got a brand
> > new one from WDC, use the new data sheet.
> >
> > Other than that, any old 6502 data sheet is about as definitive as it
> gets
> > :)
> >
> > If you are talking about assembler macros and stuff like that, I'm sure
> > there are as many variants as there were assemblers, little to no
> > standardization there from my experience, LOL. But regardless of the
> > computer, it's the same 6502 and same op-codes underneath.
> >
> > I'm in the middle of doing a little 6502 SBC right now so I've been
> poring
> > through these publications quite a bit over the course of the last few
> > weeks ;)
> >
> > Another neat reference is 'The 6800 Processor' by Jack Quinn, I know
it's
> > not 6502-specific but the two CPUs were so similar, there's a lot of
> > relevance... nice book discussing the programming model on these CPUs
> > including a very thorough treatment on hand-assembly which I found to be
> > quite educational.
> >
> > Best,
> >
> > Sean
> >
> >
> >
> > On Sat, Aug 16, 2014 at 9:45 AM, A. P. Garcia <
> a.phillip.garcia at gmail.com>
>
wrote:
> >
> >> Was there more or less a standard or reference 6502 assembly language
> >> (e.g.
> >> from MOS) with regard to syntax and pseudo ops? With the cpu being used
> >> in
> >> so many different computers, and so many vendors writing their own
> >> assemblers for each platform, did the assemblers tend to resemble each
> >> other (besides the instruction set), or did everyone tend to do their
> own
> >> thing?
> >>
> >
>