> >Most new functions are 16-bit extensions (16-bit add). Those could also
have
> >been added to the Z180. Not only DIV, but also RLCW HL - ANDW HL,BC -
NEGW
> >HL - SUB SP,nn and things like PUSH nn - EX BC,DE etcetera.
> >So you are still quite wrong here, although I now understand what you
mean.
>
> I do not think they are "so" important, since they never were missed by
> me... (-; This type of thing will take away the "register selection"
task... (-;
RLCW HL... Oh holy!!! I used it so often...
Anyways, ofcourse you can program around. You always can. But those are
easier.
By the way, there are no new 32-bit calculation registers... I think the
16-bit ones can be extended to 32-bits using DDIR's though.
> >> These I really need to read.
> >It's really nothing much new from the Z80. Once you know the Z80, and you
> >know which instructions have been added and you know about internal I/O
and
> >traps, you've pretty much covered it all...
>
> This is very good, because I talked with Ademir and ACE002 will REALLY be
> a MSX2+ Ultra Fast... Maybe a MSX TR ultra fast. With some hardware
> add-ons that may be placed everywhere. 100% compatible with previous
> MSX2+ computers. No new "commands".
Perfect.
> BTW, he talked me about some hardware changes on Z180 I already know,
> but I was not aware that he was using. A new feature that he will probably
> add (and this will be not compatible with computers that doesn't use Z180)
> will be the HighSpeed Serial Ports, that are ready inside the computer.
> The speed goes up to 2Mbit/s. I think it's pretty nice... to plug on a PC
and
> share hardware. (-;
Well that's nice. It will only cause incompatibility with dedicated apps, so
that's not really a problem to me.
> >EduCAR is not MSX.
>
> No. But it's based on the same idea... but without all the MSX limitants.
(-;
> BTW, LPE Z380 "Enhanced Mode" is not MSX also. (-; Or better, it's so MSX
> as EduCar.
Fact is, EduCar will be not compatible with old soft. LPE's Z380 is also not
compatible with old soft, therefor it isn't MSX either. The MSX3 I am
sending 'specs' about recently IS a 'new' MSX.
> >And as I stated above, most new instructions could also have been added
to
> >the Z180... They have nothing to do with the extended address range etc.
>
> Yes, you are right. Some. But they are absolutely NOT 200% more than
> Z80 instruction set!
I never stated that at all. I don't think even the entire instruction set is
200% more that the Z80 instruction set.
> >> That's point of view. (-;
> >I am trying to say that although it might execute some turboR programs
> >correctly where the Z380 doesn't, that's an advantage. But it must at all
> >cost be prevented that those instructions are also being used in newer
> >software.
>
> Well... I don't know, because maybe we will have a new MSX, that may
> be produced, that supports those instructions. (-; A new FAST MSX2+
> (or a new FAST MSX TR!) ((((-;
The Z380 is at the moment the only candidate for a new MSX. Creating an own
processor is too much work, if we do that it will take another three years
only to create the processor (or something like that). And that's stupid if
there already is a fit candidate.
> >> I don't know how this comparison was made.
> >Me neither, but it includes the benefit from the extended instruction
set.
> >I guess they made several small programs, all optimized for their
> >appropriate processor, and then measured the results.
>
> If it was, it was not a fair comparison. Look at the restrictions
Ricardo has
> made to compare ADVRAM with the standard VDP operations. If he do a
program without
> those restrictions, ADVRAM will look a lot faster, which will be not
reality
> in the "normal operation". It compares the overal performance, but not the
> performance with the same code at the same clockspeed (which would give us
> the real boost from changing from one to another processor).
This was only a short note I bumped into somewhere. There is an entire
42-page PDF in which the Z380 is compared with several other processors.
> A note: you may notice that code optimized for Z380 (even using only
> Z80 code) will be slower on a Z80 than the same code optimized for
> Z80. If they have done this, of course Z380 will show a biiiiiiiiiiig
> performance compared to Z80 and Z180... (-;
Probably.
> And, of course, for Z380 only programs, this comparison *is* valid.
> But it's not Ademir's target.
I am not talking about Ademir' project.
> >> >If it's already there, they must (otherwise they can't run new
European
> >> >software anymore).
> >> I think they're not "that worried" about this. (-;
> >Wouldn't they??? I doubt it...
>
> I don't. For years they'd done their own software. And it's good
software.
> They doesn't like english. Their culture is different. I'm not saying it's
> worst or better. I'm just saying it's different. And the same goes for
> us, here, in Brazil.
It's a bad thing. I hope at least Brazil and Europe can sync their MSX
activities.
~Grauw
--
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><<<<<<<<<<<<<<
email me: [EMAIL PROTECTED] or ICQ: 10196372
visit my homepage at http://grauw.blehq.org/
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><<<<<<<<<<<<<<
****
MSX Mailinglist. To unsubscribe, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
and put "unsubscribe msx [EMAIL PROTECTED]" (without the quotes) in
the body (not the subject) of the message.
Problems? contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More information on MSX can be found in the following places:
The MSX faq: http://www.faq.msxnet.org/
The MSX newsgroup: comp.sys.msx
The MSX IRC channel: #MSX on Undernet
****
