cctech Digest, Vol 62, Issue 34

Jeff Erwin jefferwin at gmail.com
Thu Oct 16 08:03:00 CDT 2008


>
> <snip>
> >
> Ok, Jeff, I am wondering what you might be referring to.  I think you
> might be thinking of PL/M-86, which I'm not that familiar with.


No, it's definitely PLM80 I am currently using.

>
>
> Intel, generally, would issue two manuals for PL/M-80 (and ASM-80 as
> well).  One manual is the PL/M-80 Programming Manual and one is the
> ISIS-II PL/M-80 Compiler Operator's Manual.  I have in front of me the
> "PL/M-80 Programming Manual", no. 9800268B, which is dated 1977, and the
> DATA construct is in it.  It is used at load time to set initial values
> of variables.  I believe that this manual applies to several versions of
> PL/M-80, including V4 and earlier ones.  It is basically a syntax manual.


Well...if you are going to let facts get in the way....
Your actual manual wins out over my rusty brain cells.  It is the manual
above, the Programmers Manual, that I lust after.

The one thing that seems to have changed from V3 to V4 is the following
statement:

In V3:   DECLARE HELLO DATA ('Hello world.');
in V4:   DECLARE HELLO (*) BYTE DATA ('Hello world.');

There are other subtle changes I have found.  I discovered these as I was
using older PLM source code for CPM as a programming example, and certain
constructs were being rejected by the V4 compiler.

I could also just be screwing something up.  I always reserve the right to
do that...


>
> I have the "ISIS-II PL/M-80 Compiler Operator's Manual", no. 9800300-04,
> dated 3/82.  It is the manual that was issued specifically for V4.0 of
> the compiler.  There are several "$" commands listed.  All those "$"
> commands are also listed in the V3.0/V3.1 version of that manual
> (9800300C).


I have this for V3, I  figured out the V4 compiler commands by going through
the PLM80 executable.  V3 used the $P=1 construct, V4 used the $CODE/$NOCODE
constructs which were a lot clearer.  The $P=1 model does not work with the
V4 compiler I have, the one with the overlays.

>
>
> The Programming Manual did not change from V3.0 to V4.0.  The language
> was really the same.  I programmed a lot in those days and I never had
> to change anything moving from V3 to V4.


It would be interesting to look up the DATA syntax above in V3 and V4 and
see what is confusing me.

>
>
> I think the main changes from 3 to 4 had to do with newer operating
> system environments.  Newer versions of ISIS-II could have more than the
> four or six or seven disk drives by allowing networked drive assignments
> up through :F9:.  File names could be longer, as well.  I think those
> were some of the differences from V3.x to V4.0.  But the language syntax
> was the same.
>
> >
> >>> Specifically, I am in need of:
> >>>
> >>> 98-00268B plm 80 programming manual, V4
> >>>
> >>> Thanks.
> >>>
> >>> Jeff Erwin
> >>>
> >>> By the way, I am running the ISIS-II emulator in a DOS box under
> windows,
> >>> itself an emulator.  Windows is running under Parallels on my Mac Pro
> >>>
> > which
> >
> >>> is running OSx.  Is it possible to get further from reality here??
> >>>
> >>>
> >
>
Can I offer to pay you for a copy of the two manuals you refer to above?

Jeff Erwin

>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 27
> Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2008 17:50:44 -0500
> From: wgungfu at uwm.edu
> Subject: RE: article ref to 50th birthday of video games
> To: "General Discussion: On-Topic Posts Only" <cctech at classiccmp.org>
> Message-ID: <1224111044.48f673c4a3527 at panthermail.uwm.edu>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> Except both are computer games, not video games, despite the PR move by
> some
> companies to push them as otherwise.  This was already all hashed out in
> the
> courts.
>
> Marty
>
> Quoting Paul_Koning at Dell.com:
>
> > Neat.  That predates the PDP-1 "spacewar" game, which I had thought of as
> the
> > oldest.  And it may still be the oldest video game on a digital computer.
> >
> >       paul
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: cctalk-bounces at classiccmp.org [mailto:
> cctalk-bounces at classiccmp.org] On
> > Behalf Of Brent Hilpert
> > Sent: Wednesday, October 15, 2008 4:17 PM
> > To: cctalk at classiccmp.org
> > Subject: article ref to 50th birthday of video games
> >
> > Old news for many here perhaps, but here's a writeup about physicist
> William
> > Higinbotham's creation of "Tennis-for-two" at Brookhaven Labs in 1958:
> >
> >   http://www.cbc.ca/technology/story/2008/10/15/tech-games.html
> >
> > Mentions how the initial inspiration came from reading the manual for an
> > analog
> > computer and how it could be used for ballistic trajectory calculations.
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 28
> Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2008 18:51:08 -0400 (EDT)
> From: Alexandre Lag?e-Jacques   <alexandre.laguejacques at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: Symbolics Genera (was "NEC SX-4B on Ebay")
> To: cctalk at classiccmp.org
> Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.1.10.0810151845510.2697 at localhost.localdomain>
> Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; format=flowed; charset=US-ASCII
>
> >>> It's a UNIX box, man.  The most (programmer-)friendly OS in
> >>> existence.  At least for even moderately technical people.
> >> There are UNIX-compatible people and non-UNIX-compatible people (cf
> >> Unix Hater's Handbook).
> >
> >Even aside from that, I'm not convinced.  I think Symbolics Genera is
> >arguably more programmer-friendly, though that could just be because I
> >find Lisp a much nicer language than C.  (There may be even better
> >OSes; that's just what I have personal experience with.)
>
> This message pertains to der Mouse's comment... Out of idle curiosity I
> looked up Symbolics Genera and the story of the Lisp machines...
> Fascinating! Any idea of how to get one's hands on such a machine? eBay is
> not forthcoming although they have been mentioned in some old messages on
> cctalk.
>
> - Alex
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 29
> Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2008 01:02:08 +0200
> From: "Stephane Tsacas" <stephane.tsacas at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: Symbolics Genera (was "NEC SX-4B on Ebay")
> To: "General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts"
>        <cctalk at classiccmp.org>
> Message-ID:
>        <ebdb53760810151602u51d44595o5939528172f405b7 at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> 2008/10/16 Alexandre Lagüe-Jacques <alexandre.laguejacques at gmail.com>
>
> > It's a UNIX box, man.  The most (programmer-)friendly OS in
> >>>> existence.  At least for even moderately technical people.
> >>>>
> >>> There are UNIX-compatible people and non-UNIX-compatible people (cf
> >>> Unix Hater's Handbook).
> >>>
> >>
> >> Even aside from that, I'm not convinced.  I think Symbolics Genera is
> >> arguably more programmer-friendly, though that could just be because I
> >> find Lisp a much nicer language than C.  (There may be even better
> >> OSes; that's just what I have personal experience with.)
> >>
> >
> > This message pertains to der Mouse's comment... Out of idle curiosity I
> > looked up Symbolics Genera and the story of the Lisp machines...
> > Fascinating! Any idea of how to get one's hands on such a machine?
>
>
> Check :
> http://www.unlambda.com/cadr/index.html
> Nice CADR emulator, works.
>
> Stéphane
> (Looking for a Nova switch key).
>
>
> End of cctech Digest, Vol 62, Issue 34
> **************************************
>



More information about the cctalk mailing list