On October 21, 2026 2:00:12 PM PDT, Alan Cox [email protected] wrote: On Wed, 21 Oct 2026 at 18:01, B 9 [email protected] wrote:
Ooh! That looks awesome, Alan! When you say Fuzix does “8085 syntax”, does that include the Intel ISIS II macros for assembly? No just 8085 syntax not macros and the like. Okay, thanks. Sorry for the ignorant question. I only just now learned that some 8085 assemblers do not use 8085 syntax. (Zasm uses Z80 syntax, for anyone as confused as I was.) I’m intrigued by Fuzix OS. Am I understanding correctly that you are running a custom-built 8085 machine with a self-hosting OS that is comparable to UN*X circa 1983? Would I be wrong to presume running Fuzix on a stock Model T is out of the question due to the lack of a Memory Management Unit? And am I right in thinking that the circuit surgery needed to add an MMU to a Model T is prohibitively invasive? I haven’t thought about MMUs since college, but I recall them being deeply intertwingled with the fundamental design of the system. (Then again, I’m pretty sure the professor also never taught us that you could make an MMU from just a latch, a MUX, and an AND gate.) You mentioned the Fuzix assembler might be useful for the Model T community. What about the Fuzix C Compiler? The webpage mentions that the compiler’s 8085 code runs several times faster on than the 8080 and that the 8085’s undocumented instructions “make a huge difference when executing high level languages.” That sounds nifty. When John makes his list of development environments and their pros and cons, is fcc one that should be considered as a cross-compiler? One last question: It looks like you already have fcc running on an 8085 system. How reasonable would it be to try to port it to run on a Model T? (Okay, perhaps “reasonableness” isn’t the right metric as the fact that I want to compile C on my Tandy 200 already demonstrates a lack of sound judgment. :-) —b9
