Maybe not, but I think that being able to edit text using M100 is possibly
more convenient than using an editor in CP/M.
In any case, the REX disk and the CP/M disk can be separate.

On Tuesday, March 2, 2021, Philip Avery <[email protected]> wrote:

> Hmm, not sure I follow. I don't see value in transferring from CP/M disk
> to M100 disk. But I do see value in having a REXCPM machine able to do CP/M
> *and* do your internal disk in M100 mode.
>
> Philip
>
> On 2/03/2021 11:55 am, Stephen Adolph wrote:
>
> Hi Philip,
> So, my goal here is a common function for both flash and ram versions.
> Maybe as a adjunct we could add transfer to and from the cpm disk.
> ..steve
>
> On Monday, March 1, 2021, Philip Avery <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> This sounds interesting Steve. I'm sure I could put enough smarts into
>> M100 CP/M so that it could co-exist with a M100 "disk drive". Particularly
>> if your disk is at the end of CP/M disk, ie the upper REX blocks. I could
>> set the end-point of CP/M disk to be below M100 Disk.
>>
>> Philip
>>
>> On 2/03/2021 7:33 am, Stephen Adolph wrote:
>>
>>> Quick note just to say that I have got a plan now, and have started
>>> coding, for how to implement an internal "disk drive" using both REX# and
>>> REXCPM.  This is the last major hurdle that I have wanted to overcome for a
>>> long time.
>>>
>>> Basically, the user can identify some of the 32k blocks to be allocated
>>> to form a disk.  There will be an upper limit of 16 blocks in the disk, for
>>> a total of 512kB.  There will be support for up to 31 directories (nested)
>>> and thinking 256 files total.  Organization will be based on 128 byte
>>> sectors.
>>>
>>> Anyhow that is the plan.  Not sure when I will get it done but I'm on
>>> the way now.  Looking forward to seeing this through to fruition.
>>>
>>> Steve
>>>
>>
>>
>

Reply via email to