[Coco] 3rdPart Editor

[Gene Heskett]

On Sunday 16 December 2018 14:40:38 Bill Gunshannon wrote:

> On 12/16/18 2:22 PM, Gene Heskett wrote:
> > On Sunday 16 December 2018 13:52:56 Bill Gunshannon wrote:
> >> On 12/16/18 1:19 PM, Gene Heskett wrote:
> >>> On Sunday 16 December 2018 11:42:50 Bill Gunshannon wrote:
> >>>> Just out of curiosity, has anyone ever built the version of the
> >>>>
> >>>> Unix editor "ed" that is in the 3rdparty/packages directory?
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Additionally, is there any documentation on the "make"
> >>>>
> >>>> command packaged with the C Compiler?  It does not seem to
> >>>>
> >>>> take any syntax used by other versions of make.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> bill
> >>>
> >>> That to me is an odd comment Bill, its the first make I ever used,
> >>> and it always did what I asked. But it doesn't have all the bells
> >>> and whistles the current *nix make has.
> >>
> >> Odd comment?  Why?  I tried it with the "ed" editor.  Does
> >>
> >> a lot of weird stuff including inserting flags for the C Compiler
> >>
> >> that are not anywhere in the makefile itself.  Doesn't seem to
> >>
> >> recognize the section labels at all.  (Like all: clean:, etc. )
> >>
> >> Example:
> >>
> >>
> >> make all
> >>
> >> make: Can't find source file to make "all.r"
> >>
> >>
> >> It's fun to play with it again (I have my system running with two
> >>
> >> decent sized IDE disks!) but I am finding very little that works as
> >>
> >> expected.
> >>
> >>
> >> Got "ed" built, but not using either the scripts or the makefile
> >>
> >> provided.  Working on SmallC.
> >
> > Part of that may be smallC, it would/could be a lot different from
> > either of the K&R reference books.
>
> Not a lot different. I've been using it since the original version
>
> published in Dr. Dobb's lo those many years ago.
>
> >                            The coco's C is pretty much the original
> > K&R
>
> The only C there is.  Everything else is a derivative and should
>
> have been given a new name.  :-)
>
> > minus much of the bit twiddling, meaning you have to write your own.
> > Not a big deal. The 6x09's not having a "barrel shifter" makes the
> > hand tweaks much more attractive as the default is a one bit at a
> > time loop, eg long shifts take a long time. There are ways to throw
> > away the time for 8 bit and up shifts. Paul Jerkatis was run off
> > this list 20 years ago because his idiot of a CS prof said it
> > couldn't be done. I sent a short 6 or 7 line code snippet as proof.
> > He was determined there was a side effect, but the only side effect
> > was doing an 8 bit shift in less time than the compilers default
> > method for a 1 bit shift.
> >
> > That diff would be enough to chase me off of smallC
>
> Can't imagine why.  It's still a fun compiler to play with.  It
>
> takes C source and generates assembler.  The 6809 version
>
> was for Flex so it will take a little work to get to the executable
>
> stage, but I am seeing the results of the source compiled
>
> using the OS9 C Compiler being pretty much non-functional
>
> which is interesting because as I said, it really does nothing
>
> but read in a text file and output a text file.  But it is unable
>
> to parse even a simple 3 line C program.   And yet, it has
>
> worked on all the other systems I have ever tried compiling
>
> it on.
>
> >                                                       regardless of
> > the hardware you're useing, which I gather is not a real coco. What
> > I'm writing here _always_ assumes its a real coco. I've never had
> > the urge to try any of the emulators. My fault probably Bill, but
> > there it is. :)
>
> While I have used emulators (for a lot of different architectures)
>
> I prefer the real thing and that is what I am running  on now.
>
> COCO3 with 512M memory, SuperIDE with two drives, SDC, 2
>
> floppies on an FD502 all plugged into an upgraded MPI.
>
> I guess I just finding it interesting that so much stuff does not
>
> seem to work either as advertised or as expected.  It took
>
> a lot to get the IDE drives working and I still haven't got the
>
> SCSI to work.  Drivewire is fun, but it requires a PC and if
>
> your going to use a PC anyway, why bother with the COCO. :-)
>

Still, Bill, everybody and his kid has an old pc or 2 or 3. Put linux and 
drivewire on one of them and make it do something usefull. :) Like serve 
as storage with a 10 megabyte floppy image? I've had zero problems with 
that here. Could probably work with a 100 meg disk image, or even bigger 
if the cluster size going up didn't break it. I put that code that Kevin 
Darling so helpfully removed in one of his Christmas presents back into 
rbf when I did the first rework for 6309's a couple decades way back 
when, and proved it worked when a 720k 5.25 disk was formatted up a 32 
sector clusters, which is a bigger cluster that I' m running on one of 
my 1GHz Seagates right now.

> Still, all good fun.

Getting down and back up the basement stairs where my coco3 is running 
right now, isn't the fun it was 25 years ago. Crushed disks in my back = 
sciatic pain in both in both hips.

So thats one fun deterrent here at the coyote.den, sad to say.

-- 
Cheers & Merry Christmas Bill, Gene Heskett
--
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
 soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
Genes Web page <http://geneslinuxbox.net:6309/gene>