Z80 TRAP and CP/M

[Don Y]

Brent Hilpert wrote:
> Don Y wrote:
>> Chuck Guzis wrote:
>>> On 4/4/2006 at 6:46 PM Don Y wrote:
>>>
>>>> I don't think they are the same beasts.  But, I think they (or
>>>> something with a P/N similar to that) sticks in my mind as a
>>>> viable alternative to Z80's at one time...
>>> Maybe you're thinking of the Zilog "official" part numbers.  The 8400 was
>>> the CPU, the 8430, the CTC; the 8470, the DART, etc.
>> No, this was a 3xxx part number.  And I am pretty sure it
>> was a Mostek part.  I know it wasn';t a "Z80" but it was
>> something that grabbed our interest at the time (we were
>> having problems getting certain Zilog peripherals...)
> 
> Mostek's #s for the Z80 family were MK388x:
>   MK3880 : Z80 CPU
>   MK3881 : PIO
>   MK3882 : CTC
>   etc.

Ah, OK.  But, IIRC, there is a very subtle difference between
the Zilog parts and the Mostek's.  But, I'm sure it was in some
really obscure aspect of the device, not the obvious characteristics
(the firm I was with at the time was fond of pushing the
envelope on designs... undoc'd opcodes, subtle timing hacks
in the hardware, etc.).

<shrug>  Dunno.  I just remember *needing* an alternate, looking
at their (Mostek) part and deciding it wasn't quite right...  :<

> (ref: IC Master 1982)
> 
> Presumably chosen by Mostek to be as close as possible to the MK385x, MK387x
> F8 family numbers just to make the probability of confusing everyone as high
> as possible.

No, *that* distinction goes to the bozos at TI with their
non-2732, 2732 (IIRC).  So, if you wanted what the rest of
the world called a 2732, you had to order a 2532!  (IIRC, 3
power supplies on their 2732..?)