Ha! I remember writing 650x code by typing hex numbers into a memory monitor, calculating branch offsets in my head (no assembler with fancy mnemonics and labels required!).
Nice! You should be right at home then!
I spent years hand coding a 6800 system via hex keypad. I hear you about the branch offsets! I only know a little about the 6502 as compared to the 6800. I remember that the BSR relative branches were only inside that 256 byte page or something like that. The 6800 was not page dependant but still only +128/-127 offsets. The index register worked the opposite of the 6800. In 6800 the 16 bit index register could be used as a base with a relative offsets to it. I believe that was opposite in the 6502. LOL Later I switched to 6809 using OS9 multi-user/ multi-tasking Unix-like O/S. Paid $1000 for a 64K memory board populated to 16K bytes. I had to write my own HDD and floppy drivers to make it work. Funny how Windoze took 20 more years to even approach the multi-tasking system that had.
Been a long time! The hex codes are mostly gone from my mind now after hmmmmm... 36 years?
I miss those days too. My father ran an RCA 1802 processor. That thing didn't even have a standard subroutine call and return (JSR, RTS) instructions. We used to have competitions to see who could write code tighter to do the same job. Funnily enough, It was mostly less than 1% difference. 1 bit music was easier on the 1802 as every instruction took two clock cycles.
Man you would be good to "have a few beers with" !
Nice! You should be right at home then!
I spent years hand coding a 6800 system via hex keypad. I hear you about the branch offsets! I only know a little about the 6502 as compared to the 6800. I remember that the BSR relative branches were only inside that 256 byte page or something like that. The 6800 was not page dependant but still only +128/-127 offsets. The index register worked the opposite of the 6800. In 6800 the 16 bit index register could be used as a base with a relative offsets to it. I believe that was opposite in the 6502. LOL Later I switched to 6809 using OS9 multi-user/ multi-tasking Unix-like O/S. Paid $1000 for a 64K memory board populated to 16K bytes. I had to write my own HDD and floppy drivers to make it work. Funny how Windoze took 20 more years to even approach the multi-tasking system that had.
Been a long time! The hex codes are mostly gone from my mind now after hmmmmm... 36 years?
I miss those days too. My father ran an RCA 1802 processor. That thing didn't even have a standard subroutine call and return (JSR, RTS) instructions. We used to have competitions to see who could write code tighter to do the same job. Funnily enough, It was mostly less than 1% difference. 1 bit music was easier on the 1802 as every instruction took two clock cycles.
Man you would be good to "have a few beers with" !
