Re: Micral - France

[Ed via cctalk]

I like the MICRAL  808 computer...  if you have never seen  one  folks  
check out this link!
 
Ed#  
 
http://history-computer.com/ModernComputer/Personal/Micral.html
 
 
 
 
 
 
In a message dated 4/12/2017 10:15:49 P.M. US Mountain Standard Time,  
cctalk@classiccmp.org writes:

>From  earlest days:

Here in France and saw a Micral…Now there’s a classic  computer.
Originated in 1973; 8008 :) :)

Happy computing  all!

Murray  :)

Micral - France

[Murray McCullough via cctalk]

>From earlest days:

Here in France and saw a Micral…Now there’s a classic computer.
Originated in 1973; 8008 :) :)

Happy computing all!

Murray  :)

Re: If C is so evil why is it so successful?

[allison via cctalk]

On 04/12/2017 05:33 PM, Eric Smith via cctalk wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 9:55 AM, Sean Conner via cctalk <
> cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:
>
>>   Yeah, I'm having a hard time with that too.  I mean, pedantically, it
>> should be:
>>
>> #include 
>> int main(void) { return EXIT_SUCCESS; }
>>
>> where EXIT_SUCCESS is 0 on every plaform except for some obscure system no
>> one has heard of but managed to influence the C committee back in the late
>> 80s.
>>
> Returning zero from main to indicate success is perfectly valid according
> to the most recent three C standards.  ISO/IEC 9899:1990(E) §7.10.4.3,
> ISO/IEC 9899:1999(E) §7.20.4.3 ¶5 and ISO/IEC 9899:2011(E) §7.22.4.4 ¶5
> both requires that either 0 or EXIT_SUCCESS as an argument to exit() be
> considered success.  EXIT_SUCCESS may or may not be zero, but zero is
> considered success regardless of that.
>
> One annoyance with the way the standard defines the EXIT_x macros is that
> if you use other exit status values, including those from sysexits.h (not
> part of the C standard), it's possible that an intended failure status
> value might happen to match EXIT_SUCCESS on some standard-compliant
> implementation.
>
> §5.1.2.2.3 ¶1 of both :1999 and :2011 state that if execution reaches the
> closing brace of main without a return statement, that it is equivalent to
> returning zero, so even the return statement in this alleged non-portable
> example is unnecessary.
>
> On the other hand, the earlier ISO/IEC 9899:1990(E) §5.1.2.2.3 says that
> main returning with no value yields an undefined termination status.
>
> -- Eric "not a language lawyer but I play one on the internet" Smith

What the heck its religion.  So here's my stir...

BASIC, why is that the most universal language implemented on nearly every
micro and many other systems. 

Seriously it is a suck language but it gets work done.

The yabut, is its THE only language that is somewhat portable and
generally implemented
on most everything can be named.  Regardless of the CPU there basic on
it or for it.
Its been stuffed into 1k or EPROM if you can live with integers.   Can't
say that with
C until recently with cross compilers,  or Fortran, Pascal, Java, or
Perl.  The only
exception is maybe assembly but porting a program from say 6502 to z80 is a
major pain.

C isn't perfect.  Come to think of most of the languages are pretty much
in that boat.

Me,  Assembly the native machine knows it and if need be I can crank a
small program
by hand.  C is nice what you want some structure and still get close but
not quite
married to the iron.  Pascal is good, it will typecheck you sensless. 
Never saw Java,
Ruby, or python with anything under 32 bits.LUA is cool if you have
at least a meg
of ram.  The list goes and the problems go on.  In the end you use what
you  know
and what is available.

So I have a Tandy M100 with an 80C85, and 32K of ram... Pick  BASIC,
peak and poke
assembly (from inside basic) or out of choices.   Same for the PX-8 but
that runs a
Z80 and OS (CP/M) but even it is space constrained enough that without a
disk
C or any other compiler will not fit (even with the 120K ramdisk wedge) 
but BASIC
is in ROM. 

Sure the S100 machines run it well with lots of ram and disk.  Even
compilers
like BDS-C.  But with two floppys around 240 or 360K your in tight spaces
for that. 

So from a long term STAB (Society To Abolish Basic,  down with GOTO!) member
its often the only choice to get something done.

In the end its about getting something done.  If your being paid more so
and less
choice.

Allison

Re: WTB: DEC Rainbow Expansion Memory

[Chuck Guzis via cctalk]

On 04/12/2017 12:41 PM, Warner Losh via cctech wrote:
> For you and me both. I was getting read errors on my RX-50, so I
> tried to swap in a new drive, and now that's all I get as well. Guess
> I'll have to figure out another way to get the Venix/86R disks
> copied.


Got a PC with a 5.25" HD drive?  Use Dave Dunfield's ImageDisk under
MS-DOS and it'll do the job just fine.

I've done it myself.

--Chuck

Re: If C is so evil why is it so successful?

[dwight via cctalk]

I know most don't get it but I like Forth because it is easy to follow the 
program flow and easy to test. C has too much boilerplate to solve the problem 
of not being able to use white space to keep things organized.

One uses Forth like a combination assembler and high level language. Most all 
the stack fiddle faddle is hidden at the lower assembly like levels. The high 
level code is like reading sentences. It always seems to me to be the most 
straight forward way to tell the computer what to do.

The order is left to right, top to bottom.

Testing can be done at any level, solving the complexity problem of proper 
testing.

I see too many programmers testing a program at the top level with something 
like 20 decision points to navigate through. When it seems to work, they call 
it tested. No wonder things are getting too complex to fix.

It isn't really the programming languages fault but most programming languages 
don't make it any easier.

Dwight



From: cctalk  on behalf of Eric Smith via cctalk 

Sent: Wednesday, April 12, 2017 2:33:38 PM
To: Sean Conner; General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts
Subject: Re: If C is so evil why is it so successful?

On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 9:55 AM, Sean Conner via cctalk <
cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:

>   Yeah, I'm having a hard time with that too.  I mean, pedantically, it
> should be:
>
> #include 
> int main(void) { return EXIT_SUCCESS; }
>
> where EXIT_SUCCESS is 0 on every plaform except for some obscure system no
> one has heard of but managed to influence the C committee back in the late
> 80s.
>

Returning zero from main to indicate success is perfectly valid according
to the most recent three C standards.  ISO/IEC 9899:1990(E) §7.10.4.3,
ISO/IEC 9899:1999(E) §7.20.4.3 ¶5 and ISO/IEC 9899:2011(E) §7.22.4.4 ¶5
both requires that either 0 or EXIT_SUCCESS as an argument to exit() be
considered success.  EXIT_SUCCESS may or may not be zero, but zero is
considered success regardless of that.

One annoyance with the way the standard defines the EXIT_x macros is that
if you use other exit status values, including those from sysexits.h (not
part of the C standard), it's possible that an intended failure status
value might happen to match EXIT_SUCCESS on some standard-compliant
implementation.

§5.1.2.2.3 ¶1 of both :1999 and :2011 state that if execution reaches the
closing brace of main without a return statement, that it is equivalent to
returning zero, so even the return statement in this alleged non-portable
example is unnecessary.

On the other hand, the earlier ISO/IEC 9899:1990(E) §5.1.2.2.3 says that
main returning with no value yields an undefined termination status.

-- Eric "not a language lawyer but I play one on the internet" Smith

Re: TRS-80 curiosity

[william degnan via cctalk]

On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 10:13 PM, Scott Kevill via cctalk <
cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:

> Descriptions are in French, but Google Translate works well enough.
>
> Model I Buffered EI Cable (40 to 40 pin):
> http://prof-80.fr/carte-tandy-1700077-c/buffered-ei-cable
> http://prof-80.fr/carte-tandy-1700077-c/buffered-ei-cable/
> prototype-buffer-expansion
> (Schematics and Gerbers available)
>
> Model I Printer Interface Cable (40 to 40 pin):
> http://prof-80.fr/interface-parallele
> http://prof-80.fr/interface-parallele/prototype-printer-interface
> (Schematics and Gerbers available)
>
> Model I Hard Disk Adapter (40 to 50 pin):
> http://prof-80.fr/interface-hd-modele-1-n-26-1132
>
> Scott.
>
>
I have some of these above described cables if anyone is interested,
contact me directly with what you're looking for.  I actually did not know
what the 40 to 50 pin cables were for either :-)  I thought they were all
for some sort of printing only.
Bill

Re: TRS-80 curiosity

[Scott Kevill via cctalk]

Descriptions are in French, but Google Translate works well enough.

Model I Buffered EI Cable (40 to 40 pin):
http://prof-80.fr/carte-tandy-1700077-c/buffered-ei-cable
http://prof-80.fr/carte-tandy-1700077-c/buffered-ei-cable/prototype-buffer-expansion
(Schematics and Gerbers available)

Model I Printer Interface Cable (40 to 40 pin):
http://prof-80.fr/interface-parallele
http://prof-80.fr/interface-parallele/prototype-printer-interface
(Schematics and Gerbers available)

Model I Hard Disk Adapter (40 to 50 pin):
http://prof-80.fr/interface-hd-modele-1-n-26-1132

Scott.

Re: If C is so evil why is it so successful?

[Eric Smith via cctalk]

On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 9:55 AM, Sean Conner via cctalk <
cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:

>   Yeah, I'm having a hard time with that too.  I mean, pedantically, it
> should be:
>
> #include 
> int main(void) { return EXIT_SUCCESS; }
>
> where EXIT_SUCCESS is 0 on every plaform except for some obscure system no
> one has heard of but managed to influence the C committee back in the late
> 80s.
>

Returning zero from main to indicate success is perfectly valid according
to the most recent three C standards.  ISO/IEC 9899:1990(E) §7.10.4.3,
ISO/IEC 9899:1999(E) §7.20.4.3 ¶5 and ISO/IEC 9899:2011(E) §7.22.4.4 ¶5
both requires that either 0 or EXIT_SUCCESS as an argument to exit() be
considered success.  EXIT_SUCCESS may or may not be zero, but zero is
considered success regardless of that.

One annoyance with the way the standard defines the EXIT_x macros is that
if you use other exit status values, including those from sysexits.h (not
part of the C standard), it's possible that an intended failure status
value might happen to match EXIT_SUCCESS on some standard-compliant
implementation.

§5.1.2.2.3 ¶1 of both :1999 and :2011 state that if execution reaches the
closing brace of main without a return statement, that it is equivalent to
returning zero, so even the return statement in this alleged non-portable
example is unnecessary.

On the other hand, the earlier ISO/IEC 9899:1990(E) §5.1.2.2.3 says that
main returning with no value yields an undefined termination status.

-- Eric "not a language lawyer but I play one on the internet" Smith

Re: WTB: DEC Rainbow Expansion Memory

[Stephen Pereira via cctalk]

I’m glad to hear that you still have some possibilities there.  I’ve go nothing 
on mine.  I guess I’ll have to start looking for another RX-50 disk drive 
controller board.  Since those are as scarce as the memory expansion boards, 
I’m not very hopeful.

Guess it’ll be time to sell the parts on eBay…  Hopefully, I can get some of my 
investment back.

smp
--
Stephen M. Pereira
Bedford, NH  03110
KB1SXE

> On Apr 12, 2017, at 3:49 PM, Warner Losh  wrote:
> 
> Thanks! I have another experiment to try, but need some parts for
> that, so it will have to wait until they arrive. the unit has been a
> bit flakey this time, so I don't know if I need a new controller
> board, new RX-50 or a new power supply. Or a ROM refresh
> 
> Warner
> 
> On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 1:47 PM, Stephen Pereira
>  wrote:
>> Wow.  Since misery loves company, I guess we make a great pair today!
>> 
>> Good luck with your equipment!
>> 
>> smp
>> --
>> Stephen M. Pereira
>> Bedford, NH  03110
>> KB1SXE
>> 
>> On Apr 12, 2017, at 3:41 PM, Warner Losh  wrote:
>> 
>> For you and me both. I was getting read errors on my RX-50, so I tried
>> to swap in a new drive, and now that's all I get as well. Guess I'll
>> have to figure out another way to get the Venix/86R disks copied.
>> 
>> Warner
>> 
>> On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 1:23 PM, Stephen Pereira
>>  wrote:
>> 
>> I guess it doesn’t make any difference now.  I reassembled the computer and
>> now I get a message 28 “RX50 Controller Board" failure during POST.
>> I’ve taken it apart and put it back together several times, but I cannot
>> clear the failure.  This really has been a bad day!
>> 
>> smp
>> --
>> Stephen M. Pereira
>> Bedford, NH  03110
>> KB1SXE
>> 
>> On Apr 12, 2017, at 3:07 PM, Warner Losh  wrote:
>> 
>> On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 1:00 PM, Stephen Pereira
>>  wrote:
>> 
>> Thanks for your response.
>> 
>> Just to be certain, I just tore it all down and reconfirmed, in case my
>> memory was playing any tricks.
>> 
>> I have a PC-100B with no expansion card.
>> 
>> Thanks again for the advice.
>> 
>> 
>> Bummer. The cards come up from time to time in different places, but
>> there's none on ebay right now. Last summer there were like 5,
>> including one that had an 8087 coprocessor option...
>> 
>> smp
>> --
>> Stephen M. Pereira
>> Bedford, NH  03110
>> KB1SXE
>> 
>> On Apr 12, 2017, at 2:20 PM, Warner Losh  wrote:
>> 
>> On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 11:06 AM, Stephen Pereira via cctech
>>  wrote:
>> 
>> I’m looking for expansion memory for my DEC Rainbow.
>> 
>> I currently have 128K RAM, and I’d like to have 256K RAM, so I can actually
>> use the Lotus 1-2-3 that I recently purchased (without thinking).
>> 
>> Any suggestions?
>> 
>> 
>> So is this a 100A with a 64k expansion card? Or is it the 100B with no card?
>> 
>> If you have the 100A and a 3-bank expansion card, you should be able
>> to remove the 64k chips that are on there and replace them with 256k
>> chips. You should be able to take it to 832k with 27 256kbit DRAM
>> chips. 41256-120's in DIP 16 if I recall correctly. Need to set the
>> DIP switches correctly. This is the easiest path forward, if you are
>> lucky enough to have this configuration, since chips are easy to get,
>> relatively speaking, and last time I priced them, they were ~0.70 each
>> so this will set you back ~$20 from JAMECO. You'll want an anti-static
>> setup to do this, since the BBSs were full of people that had done
>> this w/o adequate setup blowing up their card / chips. IMHO, if you
>> are going this route, it's not worth messing with 64k chips since the
>> price difference is tiny and the win for 3 banks of 256k on the
>> Rainbow is big.
>> 
>> If you have a 100B with no expansion card, I can't help... The
>> expansion card is the hard bit these days...
>> 
>> Warner
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 

Re: WTB: DEC Rainbow Expansion Memory

[Warner Losh via cctalk]

Thanks! I have another experiment to try, but need some parts for
that, so it will have to wait until they arrive. the unit has been a
bit flakey this time, so I don't know if I need a new controller
board, new RX-50 or a new power supply. Or a ROM refresh

Warner

On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 1:47 PM, Stephen Pereira
 wrote:
> Wow.  Since misery loves company, I guess we make a great pair today!
>
> Good luck with your equipment!
>
> smp
> --
> Stephen M. Pereira
> Bedford, NH  03110
> KB1SXE
>
> On Apr 12, 2017, at 3:41 PM, Warner Losh  wrote:
>
> For you and me both. I was getting read errors on my RX-50, so I tried
> to swap in a new drive, and now that's all I get as well. Guess I'll
> have to figure out another way to get the Venix/86R disks copied.
>
> Warner
>
> On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 1:23 PM, Stephen Pereira
>  wrote:
>
> I guess it doesn’t make any difference now.  I reassembled the computer and
> now I get a message 28 “RX50 Controller Board" failure during POST.
> I’ve taken it apart and put it back together several times, but I cannot
> clear the failure.  This really has been a bad day!
>
> smp
> --
> Stephen M. Pereira
> Bedford, NH  03110
> KB1SXE
>
> On Apr 12, 2017, at 3:07 PM, Warner Losh  wrote:
>
> On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 1:00 PM, Stephen Pereira
>  wrote:
>
> Thanks for your response.
>
> Just to be certain, I just tore it all down and reconfirmed, in case my
> memory was playing any tricks.
>
> I have a PC-100B with no expansion card.
>
> Thanks again for the advice.
>
>
> Bummer. The cards come up from time to time in different places, but
> there's none on ebay right now. Last summer there were like 5,
> including one that had an 8087 coprocessor option...
>
> smp
> --
> Stephen M. Pereira
> Bedford, NH  03110
> KB1SXE
>
> On Apr 12, 2017, at 2:20 PM, Warner Losh  wrote:
>
> On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 11:06 AM, Stephen Pereira via cctech
>  wrote:
>
> I’m looking for expansion memory for my DEC Rainbow.
>
> I currently have 128K RAM, and I’d like to have 256K RAM, so I can actually
> use the Lotus 1-2-3 that I recently purchased (without thinking).
>
> Any suggestions?
>
>
> So is this a 100A with a 64k expansion card? Or is it the 100B with no card?
>
> If you have the 100A and a 3-bank expansion card, you should be able
> to remove the 64k chips that are on there and replace them with 256k
> chips. You should be able to take it to 832k with 27 256kbit DRAM
> chips. 41256-120's in DIP 16 if I recall correctly. Need to set the
> DIP switches correctly. This is the easiest path forward, if you are
> lucky enough to have this configuration, since chips are easy to get,
> relatively speaking, and last time I priced them, they were ~0.70 each
> so this will set you back ~$20 from JAMECO. You'll want an anti-static
> setup to do this, since the BBSs were full of people that had done
> this w/o adequate setup blowing up their card / chips. IMHO, if you
> are going this route, it's not worth messing with 64k chips since the
> price difference is tiny and the win for 3 banks of 256k on the
> Rainbow is big.
>
> If you have a 100B with no expansion card, I can't help... The
> expansion card is the hard bit these days...
>
> Warner
>
>
>
>

Re: WTB: DEC Rainbow Expansion Memory

[Stephen Pereira via cctalk]

I guess it doesn’t make any difference now.  I reassembled the computer and now 
I get a message 28 “RX50 Controller Board" failure during POST. 
I’ve taken it apart and put it back together several times, but I cannot clear 
the failure.  This really has been a bad day!

smp
--
Stephen M. Pereira
Bedford, NH  03110
KB1SXE

> On Apr 12, 2017, at 3:07 PM, Warner Losh  wrote:
> 
> On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 1:00 PM, Stephen Pereira
>  wrote:
>> Thanks for your response.
>> 
>> Just to be certain, I just tore it all down and reconfirmed, in case my
>> memory was playing any tricks.
>> 
>> I have a PC-100B with no expansion card.
>> 
>> Thanks again for the advice.
> 
> Bummer. The cards come up from time to time in different places, but
> there's none on ebay right now. Last summer there were like 5,
> including one that had an 8087 coprocessor option...
> 
>> smp
>> --
>> Stephen M. Pereira
>> Bedford, NH  03110
>> KB1SXE
>> 
>> On Apr 12, 2017, at 2:20 PM, Warner Losh  wrote:
>> 
>> On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 11:06 AM, Stephen Pereira via cctech
>>  wrote:
>> 
>> I’m looking for expansion memory for my DEC Rainbow.
>> 
>> I currently have 128K RAM, and I’d like to have 256K RAM, so I can actually
>> use the Lotus 1-2-3 that I recently purchased (without thinking).
>> 
>> Any suggestions?
>> 
>> 
>> So is this a 100A with a 64k expansion card? Or is it the 100B with no card?
>> 
>> If you have the 100A and a 3-bank expansion card, you should be able
>> to remove the 64k chips that are on there and replace them with 256k
>> chips. You should be able to take it to 832k with 27 256kbit DRAM
>> chips. 41256-120's in DIP 16 if I recall correctly. Need to set the
>> DIP switches correctly. This is the easiest path forward, if you are
>> lucky enough to have this configuration, since chips are easy to get,
>> relatively speaking, and last time I priced them, they were ~0.70 each
>> so this will set you back ~$20 from JAMECO. You'll want an anti-static
>> setup to do this, since the BBSs were full of people that had done
>> this w/o adequate setup blowing up their card / chips. IMHO, if you
>> are going this route, it's not worth messing with 64k chips since the
>> price difference is tiny and the win for 3 banks of 256k on the
>> Rainbow is big.
>> 
>> If you have a 100B with no expansion card, I can't help... The
>> expansion card is the hard bit these days...
>> 
>> Warner
>> 
>> 

Re: WTB: DEC Rainbow Expansion Memory

[Warner Losh via cctalk]

On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 1:00 PM, Stephen Pereira
 wrote:
> Thanks for your response.
>
> Just to be certain, I just tore it all down and reconfirmed, in case my
> memory was playing any tricks.
>
> I have a PC-100B with no expansion card.
>
> Thanks again for the advice.

Bummer. The cards come up from time to time in different places, but
there's none on ebay right now. Last summer there were like 5,
including one that had an 8087 coprocessor option...

> smp
> --
> Stephen M. Pereira
> Bedford, NH  03110
> KB1SXE
>
> On Apr 12, 2017, at 2:20 PM, Warner Losh  wrote:
>
> On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 11:06 AM, Stephen Pereira via cctech
>  wrote:
>
> I’m looking for expansion memory for my DEC Rainbow.
>
> I currently have 128K RAM, and I’d like to have 256K RAM, so I can actually
> use the Lotus 1-2-3 that I recently purchased (without thinking).
>
> Any suggestions?
>
>
> So is this a 100A with a 64k expansion card? Or is it the 100B with no card?
>
> If you have the 100A and a 3-bank expansion card, you should be able
> to remove the 64k chips that are on there and replace them with 256k
> chips. You should be able to take it to 832k with 27 256kbit DRAM
> chips. 41256-120's in DIP 16 if I recall correctly. Need to set the
> DIP switches correctly. This is the easiest path forward, if you are
> lucky enough to have this configuration, since chips are easy to get,
> relatively speaking, and last time I priced them, they were ~0.70 each
> so this will set you back ~$20 from JAMECO. You'll want an anti-static
> setup to do this, since the BBSs were full of people that had done
> this w/o adequate setup blowing up their card / chips. IMHO, if you
> are going this route, it's not worth messing with 64k chips since the
> price difference is tiny and the win for 3 banks of 256k on the
> Rainbow is big.
>
> If you have a 100B with no expansion card, I can't help... The
> expansion card is the hard bit these days...
>
> Warner
>
>

Re: WTB: DEC Rainbow Expansion Memory

[Stephen Pereira via cctalk]

Wow.  Since misery loves company, I guess we make a great pair today!

Good luck with your equipment!

smp
--
Stephen M. Pereira
Bedford, NH  03110
KB1SXE

> On Apr 12, 2017, at 3:41 PM, Warner Losh  wrote:
> 
> For you and me both. I was getting read errors on my RX-50, so I tried
> to swap in a new drive, and now that's all I get as well. Guess I'll
> have to figure out another way to get the Venix/86R disks copied.
> 
> Warner
> 
> On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 1:23 PM, Stephen Pereira
>  wrote:
>> I guess it doesn’t make any difference now.  I reassembled the computer and
>> now I get a message 28 “RX50 Controller Board" failure during POST.
>> I’ve taken it apart and put it back together several times, but I cannot
>> clear the failure.  This really has been a bad day!
>> 
>> smp
>> --
>> Stephen M. Pereira
>> Bedford, NH  03110
>> KB1SXE
>> 
>> On Apr 12, 2017, at 3:07 PM, Warner Losh  wrote:
>> 
>> On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 1:00 PM, Stephen Pereira
>>  wrote:
>> 
>> Thanks for your response.
>> 
>> Just to be certain, I just tore it all down and reconfirmed, in case my
>> memory was playing any tricks.
>> 
>> I have a PC-100B with no expansion card.
>> 
>> Thanks again for the advice.
>> 
>> 
>> Bummer. The cards come up from time to time in different places, but
>> there's none on ebay right now. Last summer there were like 5,
>> including one that had an 8087 coprocessor option...
>> 
>> smp
>> --
>> Stephen M. Pereira
>> Bedford, NH  03110
>> KB1SXE
>> 
>> On Apr 12, 2017, at 2:20 PM, Warner Losh  wrote:
>> 
>> On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 11:06 AM, Stephen Pereira via cctech
>>  wrote:
>> 
>> I’m looking for expansion memory for my DEC Rainbow.
>> 
>> I currently have 128K RAM, and I’d like to have 256K RAM, so I can actually
>> use the Lotus 1-2-3 that I recently purchased (without thinking).
>> 
>> Any suggestions?
>> 
>> 
>> So is this a 100A with a 64k expansion card? Or is it the 100B with no card?
>> 
>> If you have the 100A and a 3-bank expansion card, you should be able
>> to remove the 64k chips that are on there and replace them with 256k
>> chips. You should be able to take it to 832k with 27 256kbit DRAM
>> chips. 41256-120's in DIP 16 if I recall correctly. Need to set the
>> DIP switches correctly. This is the easiest path forward, if you are
>> lucky enough to have this configuration, since chips are easy to get,
>> relatively speaking, and last time I priced them, they were ~0.70 each
>> so this will set you back ~$20 from JAMECO. You'll want an anti-static
>> setup to do this, since the BBSs were full of people that had done
>> this w/o adequate setup blowing up their card / chips. IMHO, if you
>> are going this route, it's not worth messing with 64k chips since the
>> price difference is tiny and the win for 3 banks of 256k on the
>> Rainbow is big.
>> 
>> If you have a 100B with no expansion card, I can't help... The
>> expansion card is the hard bit these days...
>> 
>> Warner
>> 
>> 
>> 

Re: WTB: DEC Rainbow Expansion Memory

[Warner Losh via cctalk]

For you and me both. I was getting read errors on my RX-50, so I tried
to swap in a new drive, and now that's all I get as well. Guess I'll
have to figure out another way to get the Venix/86R disks copied.

Warner

On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 1:23 PM, Stephen Pereira
 wrote:
> I guess it doesn’t make any difference now.  I reassembled the computer and
> now I get a message 28 “RX50 Controller Board" failure during POST.
> I’ve taken it apart and put it back together several times, but I cannot
> clear the failure.  This really has been a bad day!
>
> smp
> --
> Stephen M. Pereira
> Bedford, NH  03110
> KB1SXE
>
> On Apr 12, 2017, at 3:07 PM, Warner Losh  wrote:
>
> On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 1:00 PM, Stephen Pereira
>  wrote:
>
> Thanks for your response.
>
> Just to be certain, I just tore it all down and reconfirmed, in case my
> memory was playing any tricks.
>
> I have a PC-100B with no expansion card.
>
> Thanks again for the advice.
>
>
> Bummer. The cards come up from time to time in different places, but
> there's none on ebay right now. Last summer there were like 5,
> including one that had an 8087 coprocessor option...
>
> smp
> --
> Stephen M. Pereira
> Bedford, NH  03110
> KB1SXE
>
> On Apr 12, 2017, at 2:20 PM, Warner Losh  wrote:
>
> On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 11:06 AM, Stephen Pereira via cctech
>  wrote:
>
> I’m looking for expansion memory for my DEC Rainbow.
>
> I currently have 128K RAM, and I’d like to have 256K RAM, so I can actually
> use the Lotus 1-2-3 that I recently purchased (without thinking).
>
> Any suggestions?
>
>
> So is this a 100A with a 64k expansion card? Or is it the 100B with no card?
>
> If you have the 100A and a 3-bank expansion card, you should be able
> to remove the 64k chips that are on there and replace them with 256k
> chips. You should be able to take it to 832k with 27 256kbit DRAM
> chips. 41256-120's in DIP 16 if I recall correctly. Need to set the
> DIP switches correctly. This is the easiest path forward, if you are
> lucky enough to have this configuration, since chips are easy to get,
> relatively speaking, and last time I priced them, they were ~0.70 each
> so this will set you back ~$20 from JAMECO. You'll want an anti-static
> setup to do this, since the BBSs were full of people that had done
> this w/o adequate setup blowing up their card / chips. IMHO, if you
> are going this route, it's not worth messing with 64k chips since the
> price difference is tiny and the win for 3 banks of 256k on the
> Rainbow is big.
>
> If you have a 100B with no expansion card, I can't help... The
> expansion card is the hard bit these days...
>
> Warner
>
>
>

Re: TRS-80 curiosity

[Tony Duell via cctalk]

On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 8:15 PM, Fred Cisin via cctalk
 wrote:
 of which I don't know.  It is a 40 pin to 50 pin ribbon cable with a
 black box connecting them that is labeled TANDY.  I know of nothing
 the Tandy made that used a 50 pin connector other than a hard disk.
>
> On Wed, 12 Apr 2017, Parent Allison via cctalk wrote:
>>
>> Maybe...
>> The only device  I know of like that was trs80 to a printer (Centronics or
>> compatible ).
>
>
> Radio Shack used 34 pin for "Centronics" compatible printer cables.
> (#26-1401 was a cable with 34 pin card edge to 36 pin Blue Ribbon)

There was a 'cable' (containing a few TTL ICs) to link a Centronics
printer to a Model 1 CPU/keyboard unit without needing an expansion
interface.

It was in 2 parts. The short one included the logic and had a 40 pin edge
connector on a short length of ribbon cable connected to the box
containing the logic. The PCB in said box had a _40 way_ card edge coming
out through the side with a slot after 34 contacts. There was a longer cable
with a 40 way edge connector (with a polarising key after 34 contacts,
between the contacts) on one end and a 36 pin microribbon connector
(to go to the printer) on the other. You connected the long cable to the card
edge on the box of logic, plugged the short cable from that into the expansion
bus connector on the keyboard and plugged the other end of the long cable
into the printer (which had to supply the +5V needed for the logic in the
cable).

If you then bought an EI, you could connect the long cable (only) to the
34 pin card edge on the EI.

The only problem was that if you did this, you couldn''t fit the 'hood' over
the connector (as it was designed for a 34 pin connector). And the cable
didn't fit the M3 or M4.

I had one. In the end (after getting an EI and later a M3), I replaced
the connector
with a 34 pin one. It then didn't fit the original short cable/logic
(which I had no
use for), but did work with the EI and M3.

-tony

Re: TRS-80 curiosity

[Kelly Leavitt via cctalk]

> > So, I just picked up an MISE from Bartlett Labs (cause I really liked
> > the M3SE I had) and decided to revive one of my TRS-80 MOdel I's.
> > In my box of "stuff" I found an interesting ribbon cable the function
> > of which I don't know.  It is a 40 pin to 50 pin ribbon cable with a
> > black box connecting them that is labeled TANDY.  I know of nothing
> > the Tandy made that used a 50 pin connector other than a hard disk.
> > Could that be what this is for?  Anybody ever seen one?  I no longer
> > have any Tandy External HD's but then, with things like MISE and FreHD
> > why would one still want one other than for nostalgia.
> >
> > bill
> 
> Although I never had one, I beleive Tandy made an adapter that plugged
> into the Model 1 expansion bus (40 pin) and gave you a (cut down?)
> Model 3 expansion bus (50 pin). As you suggest it was commonly used
> to connect Model 3 hard disks to the Model 1, but I think it worked with
> some other devices too.
> 
> -tony

Tony is probably correct here.

See:  
http://electrickery.hosting.philpem.me.uk/comp/trs80/doc/Model_I_HD_Adapter.pdf

Re: Does anyone here know Siemens STL?

[geneb via cctalk]

On Wed, 12 Apr 2017, Adrian Stoness wrote:


Modicon, ge faunic, Allen Bradly, Allen Heath, hewert Rand, Siemens, abb,
idec, square d, some I know I'm forgeting

You don't "program" an STL file.  It's a 3D object layout for a 3D printed 
part.  :)


(also, don't top post!)

g.

--
Proud owner of F-15C 80-0007
http://www.f15sim.com - The only one of its kind.
http://www.diy-cockpits.org/coll - Go Collimated or Go Home.
Some people collect things for a hobby.  Geeks collect hobbies.

ScarletDME - The red hot Data Management Environment
A Multi-Value database for the masses, not the classes.
http://scarlet.deltasoft.com - Get it _today_!

Re: TRS-80 curiosity

[Fred Cisin via cctalk]

of which I don't know.  It is a 40 pin to 50 pin ribbon cable with a
black box connecting them that is labeled TANDY.  I know of nothing
the Tandy made that used a 50 pin connector other than a hard disk.

On Wed, 12 Apr 2017, Parent Allison via cctalk wrote:

Maybe...
The only device  I know of like that was trs80 to a printer (Centronics or 
compatible ).


Radio Shack used 34 pin for "Centronics" compatible printer cables.
(#26-1401 was a cable with 34 pin card edge to 36 pin Blue Ribbon)

Re: WTB: DEC Rainbow Expansion Memory

[Stephen Pereira via cctalk]

Thanks for your response.

Just to be certain, I just tore it all down and reconfirmed, in case my memory 
was playing any tricks.

I have a PC-100B with no expansion card.

Thanks again for the advice.

smp
--
Stephen M. Pereira
Bedford, NH  03110
KB1SXE

> On Apr 12, 2017, at 2:20 PM, Warner Losh  wrote:
> 
> On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 11:06 AM, Stephen Pereira via cctech
>  wrote:
>> I’m looking for expansion memory for my DEC Rainbow.
>> 
>> I currently have 128K RAM, and I’d like to have 256K RAM, so I can actually 
>> use the Lotus 1-2-3 that I recently purchased (without thinking).
>> 
>> Any suggestions?
> 
> So is this a 100A with a 64k expansion card? Or is it the 100B with no card?
> 
> If you have the 100A and a 3-bank expansion card, you should be able
> to remove the 64k chips that are on there and replace them with 256k
> chips. You should be able to take it to 832k with 27 256kbit DRAM
> chips. 41256-120's in DIP 16 if I recall correctly. Need to set the
> DIP switches correctly. This is the easiest path forward, if you are
> lucky enough to have this configuration, since chips are easy to get,
> relatively speaking, and last time I priced them, they were ~0.70 each
> so this will set you back ~$20 from JAMECO. You'll want an anti-static
> setup to do this, since the BBSs were full of people that had done
> this w/o adequate setup blowing up their card / chips. IMHO, if you
> are going this route, it's not worth messing with 64k chips since the
> price difference is tiny and the win for 3 banks of 256k on the
> Rainbow is big.
> 
> If you have a 100B with no expansion card, I can't help... The
> expansion card is the hard bit these days...
> 
> Warner

Re: Another language : SDL

[Camiel Vanderhoeven via cctalk]

I use SDL daily... But my SDL is DEC¹s Structure Definition Language, a
language to define structures and export them to be used in Macro-32,
Bliss, and C.

Kind regards,

Camiel Vanderhoeven
OpenVMS Kernel Engineer

+-+-+-+
|V|M|S| Software
+-+-+-+

VMS Software, Inc.
Research & Development Department


On 4/12/17, 7:36 PM, "cctalk on behalf of Chuck Guzis via cctalk"
 wrote:

>On 04/12/2017 09:46 AM, Stefan Skoglund via cctalk wrote:
>> Anyone with access to a distribution of SDT (Telelogik's SDL
>> programming system) for old era SunOS 4 ? I have a SS10 which is a
>> beggar for SDT (or KEE or Frame.)
>
>
>Well, there you go--another reason for the tower of Babel.  STL, at
>first glance for me, brings up "Standard Template Library".  I have no
>doubt that there are at least a half-dozen other language-related
>meanings for this acronym.
>
>SDL = System Definition Language, from the 1960s, almost completely
>forgotten now.  Then there's SDL = Specification and Description Language:
>
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Specification_and_Description_Language
>
>If I had to shake a stick at all computer languages, I'd run out of
>sticks.
>
>--Chuck

Re: WTB: DEC Rainbow Expansion Memory

[Warner Losh via cctalk]

On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 11:06 AM, Stephen Pereira via cctech
 wrote:
> I’m looking for expansion memory for my DEC Rainbow.
>
> I currently have 128K RAM, and I’d like to have 256K RAM, so I can actually 
> use the Lotus 1-2-3 that I recently purchased (without thinking).
>
> Any suggestions?

So is this a 100A with a 64k expansion card? Or is it the 100B with no card?

If you have the 100A and a 3-bank expansion card, you should be able
to remove the 64k chips that are on there and replace them with 256k
chips. You should be able to take it to 832k with 27 256kbit DRAM
chips. 41256-120's in DIP 16 if I recall correctly. Need to set the
DIP switches correctly. This is the easiest path forward, if you are
lucky enough to have this configuration, since chips are easy to get,
relatively speaking, and last time I priced them, they were ~0.70 each
so this will set you back ~$20 from JAMECO. You'll want an anti-static
setup to do this, since the BBSs were full of people that had done
this w/o adequate setup blowing up their card / chips. IMHO, if you
are going this route, it's not worth messing with 64k chips since the
price difference is tiny and the win for 3 banks of 256k on the
Rainbow is big.

If you have a 100B with no expansion card, I can't help... The
expansion card is the hard bit these days...

Warner

WTB: DEC Rainbow Expansion Memory

[Stephen Pereira via cctalk]

I’m looking for expansion memory for my DEC Rainbow.

I currently have 128K RAM, and I’d like to have 256K RAM, so I can actually use 
the Lotus 1-2-3 that I recently purchased (without thinking).

Any suggestions?

Thanks,
smp
—
Stephen M. Pereira
Bedford, NH  03110
KB1SXE

Re: TRS-80 curiosity

[Parent Allison via cctalk]

On Apr 12, 2017, at 11:45 AM, Alexandre Souza via cctalk 
 wrote:

> 

That cable had the same connector on both ends and labels!  The later version 
added a pair 
of cables with 5pin connectors.  Later they redesigned the EI to work right as 
the early 
versions were timing critical for the Dram (bad implemntation).


Allison

Re: TRS-80 curiosity

[Parent Allison via cctalk]

On Apr 12, 2017, at 11:31 AM, Tony Duell via cctalk  
wrote:

> On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 3:51 PM, Bill Gunshannon via cctalk
>  wrote:
>> 
>> So, I just picked up an MISE from Bartlett Labs (cause I really liked
>> the M3SE I had) and decided to revive one of my TRS-80 MOdel I's.
>> In my box of "stuff" I found an interesting ribbon cable the function
>> of which I don't know.  It is a 40 pin to 50 pin ribbon cable with a
>> black box connecting them that is labeled TANDY.  I know of nothing
>> the Tandy made that used a 50 pin connector other than a hard disk.
>> Could that be what this is for?  Anybody ever seen one?  I no longer
>> have any Tandy External HD's but then, with things like MISE and FreHD
>> why would one still want one other than for nostalgia.
>> 
>> bill
> 
> Although I never had one, I beleive Tandy made an adapter that plugged
> into the Model 1 expansion bus (40 pin) and gave you a (cut down?)
> Model 3 expansion bus (50 pin). As you suggest it was commonly used
> to connect Model 3 hard disks to the Model 1, but I think it worked with
> some other devices too.
> 
> -tony

Maybe...

The only device  I know of like that was trs80 to a printer (Centronics or 
compatible ).

Allison

Re: LOD bands for MIT CADR

[Al Kossow via cctalk]

http://www.unlambda.com/index.php?n=Main.Cadr

On 4/12/17 7:50 AM, Alfred M. Szmidt via cctalk wrote:
> Anyone seen or got any?
> 

Re: If C is so evil why is it so successful?

[ben via cctalk]

On 4/12/2017 10:15 AM, Rod Smallwood via cctalk wrote:


All computer computer languages are only as good or bad as the person
using them.


I suspect today that few people map any computer langauges to real 
hardware other than virtual machines.



Rod


Ben.

Re: If C is so evil why is it so successful?

[Warner Losh via cctalk]

On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 12:43 PM, Sean Conner via cctalk
 wrote:
> It was thus said that the Great Alfred M. Szmidt once stated:
>>It was thus said that the Great Noel Chiappa via cctalk once stated:
>>> > From: Alfred M. Szmidt
>>>
>>> > No even the following program:
>>> >   int main (void) { return 0; }
>>> > is guaranteed to work
>>>
>>> I'm missing something: why not?
>>
>>  Yeah, I'm having a hard time with that too.  I mean, pedantically, it
>>should be:
>>
>>
>>  #include 
>>  int main(void) { return EXIT_SUCCESS; }
>>
>> Pedantically, it does not matter -- a return from main is equivalent
>> to an exit(), and exit(0) is sensibly defined, and EXIT_SUCCESS can
>> also be different from 0 (even though I don't think such a platform
>> exists).
>>
>> Similiarly for EXIT_FAILURE ...
>
>   There's this
> (http://stackoverflow.com/questions/8867871/should-i-return-exit-success-or-0-from-main/8868139#8868139):
>
> Somebody asked about OpenVMS. I haven't used it in a long time, but
> as I recall odd status values generally denote success while even
> values denote failure. The C implementation maps 0 to 1, so that
> return 0; indicates successful termination. Other values are passed
> unchanged, so return 1; also indicates successful termination.
> EXIT_FAILURE would have a non-zero even value.
>
>   And certainly VMS is on topic for this list.

The answer is 'it depends' on VMS. I can't recall if it was the C
runtime that was part of VMS, or that was installed by the compiler,
but this was version dependent. The earliest versions of the compiler
that we had, running on 4.4 didn't do the mapping. By the time we'd
upgraded to 4.7 and to a newer compiler, the mapping did happen.
Before exit was a thin wrapper on sys$exit(), but after it wasn't.
This was across both the DEC CC compiler, and the version of gcc
available back in the late 1980's. Interestingly, the old version of
the manual/help file didn't have EXIT_SUCCESS in it, but the new
version did, if memory isn't failing me today. There were a lot of
programs that printed the same message when exit(0) happened, which is
why DEC had to fix it. There was just too many of them. It's my
recollection that it mapped values < 256 in some way that was special,
and values > 256 it passed to sys$exit since all the facilities you'd
create would have high bits set.

But that was coming up on like 30 years ago, so maybe the exact
details fail me. I do know that it change from one version to the
next.

Warner

Re: If C is so evil why is it so successful?

[ben via cctalk]

On 4/12/2017 9:08 AM, Norman Jaffe via cctalk wrote:

Assembler is a sports car kit.



More like the VW BUG. It gets you there, but needs more
...
I suspect C was successful just because the 11 could handle
characters cleanly.
Ben.

Re: If C is so evil why is it so successful?

[Sean Conner via cctalk]

It was thus said that the Great Alfred M. Szmidt once stated:
>It was thus said that the Great Noel Chiappa via cctalk once stated:
>> > From: Alfred M. Szmidt
>> 
>> > No even the following program:
>> >   int main (void) { return 0; }
>> > is guaranteed to work
>> 
>> I'm missing something: why not?
> 
>  Yeah, I'm having a hard time with that too.  I mean, pedantically, it
>should be:
> 
> 
>  #include 
>  int main(void) { return EXIT_SUCCESS; }
> 
> Pedantically, it does not matter -- a return from main is equivalent
> to an exit(), and exit(0) is sensibly defined, and EXIT_SUCCESS can
> also be different from 0 (even though I don't think such a platform
> exists).
> 
> Similiarly for EXIT_FAILURE ...

  There's this
(http://stackoverflow.com/questions/8867871/should-i-return-exit-success-or-0-from-main/8868139#8868139):

Somebody asked about OpenVMS. I haven't used it in a long time, but
as I recall odd status values generally denote success while even
values denote failure. The C implementation maps 0 to 1, so that
return 0; indicates successful termination. Other values are passed
unchanged, so return 1; also indicates successful termination.
EXIT_FAILURE would have a non-zero even value.

  And certainly VMS is on topic for this list.

  -spc (So ... pedantically speaking, who's correct?)

Re: Does anyone here know Siemens STL?

[Adrian Stoness via cctalk]

Modicon, ge faunic, Allen Bradly, Allen Heath, hewert Rand, Siemens, abb,
idec, square d, some I know I'm forgeting

On Apr 12, 2017 12:54 PM, "geneb via cctalk"  wrote:

> On Wed, 12 Apr 2017, Chuck Guzis via cctalk wrote:
>
> You might find more fertile ground plowing the plctalk.net forum when
>> your questions relate to the STL/SCL/FBD/LAD/CSF area.
>>
>> FWIW, "STL"  in Siemens-talk is an acronym for "Statement List".  Why it
>> isn't "SL" is anyone's guess.
>>
>> I kept trying to figure out how anyone was going to program a Stereo
> Lithography file. :)
>
> g.
>
> --
> Proud owner of F-15C 80-0007
> http://www.f15sim.com - The only one of its kind.
> http://www.diy-cockpits.org/coll - Go Collimated or Go Home.
> Some people collect things for a hobby.  Geeks collect hobbies.
>
> ScarletDME - The red hot Data Management Environment
> A Multi-Value database for the masses, not the classes.
> http://scarlet.deltasoft.com - Get it _today_!
>

Re: If C is so evil why is it so successful?

[Sean Conner via cctalk]

It was thus said that the Great Alfred M. Szmidt via cctalk once stated:
> 
>> From: Alfred M. Szmidt
> 
>> No even the following program:
>>   int main (void) { return 0; }
>> is guaranteed to work
> 
>I'm missing something: why not?
> 
> It boils down to pedantism.  The encoding of the above is ASCII, and
> the encoding type of a C program is implementation defined.  

  Name *ONE* computer langauge where this *ISN'T* the case.  Until then,
I'll consider this a completely bogus claim.  Meanwhile, is *this* better?

??=include 
int main(void)
??<
  return EXIT_SUCCESS;
??>

So that it might be possible to convert this obviously ASCII rendition of a
C progran into EBCDIC?

> The other
> thing is that the abstract machine defined in C can be utterly bogus,
> i.e. not capable of executing anything due to various implementation
> specified environment limitations.

  Citation required.  Plus a real-world example.  Because otherwise I think
you're skirting very close to Troll Territory here ... 

> Ofcourse, this is all academic ... and I don't know any such idiotic
> implementation.

  Or an annoying level of pedanticism here ...

  -spc (Seriously, citation required ... )

Re: If C is so evil why is it so successful?

[Chuck Guzis via cctalk]

I think a better question is "Why do you choose to write C (or any other
language)?"

I can speak for myself--I can't say for sure, but I've written at least
hundreds of thousands of line of assembly (not "assembler", please!)
language, much of it on mainframes, back when mainframes were fairly
slow and code needed to be compact and fast.

You do develop discipline in coding, realizing the payoff when someone
drops a 6" thick assembly listing on your desk with the attached yellow
sheet that says "There's a problem somewhere in this; please fix for
Friday's build."

I'd had a brush with another systems programming language, CDC SYMPL,
which resembled PL/I, but it was nascent and not entirely accepted by
management at the time.

FORTRAN was used for quite a few system utilities and, of course, bits
of the FORTRAN compiler itself.

When I moved to the then-new Intel 8080, there were only about two
choices (other than straight machine code, which I've also used on older
machines); assembly and PL/M (from Intel).  PL/M was great for "quick
and dirty" programs, but your polished code and final product usually
turned out to be assembly.  The 8080 was slow and memory was expensive.

In the late 70s, I became acquainted with K C and  thought it was a
good idea.  But C on the 8-bitters, particularly the 8080 didn't fare
well in either speed or memory.  Trying to deal with on-stack local
variables on architecture with no stack-relative addressing was a
nightmare.  The z80 was better for this.

When the 8086 and Microsoft came along, the picture changed
dramatically.  You pretty much had to have Lattice C if you were an OEM
developing your own custom adaptation of MS-DOS--and if you were going
to use Xenix, C was part of the package.

I still wrote some assembly, for obvious reasons; i.e, you can't get to
some machine specific features without it, but more of my code became an
admixture, with much of the assembly being inline code, rather than
separate assemblies.  One drawback of C was (and still is) the weak
preprocessor, which pales in comparison to that of, say, PL/I.

Small MCU programming took me back to assembly, which was a strange
experience, as most MCU (e.g. AVR, PIC 8-bit) assemblers are pretty
brain-dead when compared with full-featured relatives.

I'm currently doing a lot of ARM programming and wouldn't even consider
assembly, unless it was for a single instruction or two.  If carefully
coded, C is quite portable (note the big "if").

I've written C++ also, when it seemed to be logical.  For me, the point
of OOP is object reuse and much of my work involved one-time
applications.  So I still fall back to C.

One good or bad thing about C is that it removes uncommon features, so
that you don't get access to the parity branches or the special
instructions (e.g. AAM) which does enhance the portability of code.

Could I do my work  in Ada?  Sure--I like the language.  But the
likelihood of finding a good, free Ada compiler for a specific platform
can be fairly small.

--Chuck

Re: Does anyone here know Siemens STL?

[geneb via cctalk]

On Wed, 12 Apr 2017, Chuck Guzis via cctalk wrote:


You might find more fertile ground plowing the plctalk.net forum when
your questions relate to the STL/SCL/FBD/LAD/CSF area.

FWIW, "STL"  in Siemens-talk is an acronym for "Statement List".  Why it
isn't "SL" is anyone's guess.

I kept trying to figure out how anyone was going to program a Stereo 
Lithography file. :)


g.

--
Proud owner of F-15C 80-0007
http://www.f15sim.com - The only one of its kind.
http://www.diy-cockpits.org/coll - Go Collimated or Go Home.
Some people collect things for a hobby.  Geeks collect hobbies.

ScarletDME - The red hot Data Management Environment
A Multi-Value database for the masses, not the classes.
http://scarlet.deltasoft.com - Get it _today_!

Re: Does anyone here know Siemens STL?

[Chuck Guzis via cctalk]

On 04/11/2017 07:03 PM, Charles Dickman via cctalk wrote:
> The Balkanized nature of programming is interesting.
> 
> I make a comment about C and get a flurry of responses, but ask a 
> question about a programming language that is also very common for 
> machine control and get no response at all. Not even a recognition
> of its existence.
> 
> Siemens STL ist a programming language for machine controllers. It
> is oriented towards Boolean operations and extended for integer and
> real data types. Symbolic addressing is almost completely absent.

You might find more fertile ground plowing the plctalk.net forum when
your questions relate to the STL/SCL/FBD/LAD/CSF area.

FWIW, "STL"  in Siemens-talk is an acronym for "Statement List".  Why it
isn't "SL" is anyone's guess.

--Chuck

Re: Another language : SDL

[Chuck Guzis via cctalk]

On 04/12/2017 09:46 AM, Stefan Skoglund via cctalk wrote:
> Anyone with access to a distribution of SDT (Telelogik's SDL
> programming system) for old era SunOS 4 ? I have a SS10 which is a
> beggar for SDT (or KEE or Frame.)


Well, there you go--another reason for the tower of Babel.  STL, at
first glance for me, brings up "Standard Template Library".  I have no
doubt that there are at least a half-dozen other language-related
meanings for this acronym.

SDL = System Definition Language, from the 1960s, almost completely
forgotten now.  Then there's SDL = Specification and Description Language:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Specification_and_Description_Language

If I had to shake a stick at all computer languages, I'd run out of sticks.

--Chuck

Re: Does anyone here know Siemens STL?

[Shoppa, Tim via cctalk]

Charles Dickman wrote:
> The puzzling (and frustrating) thing about these industrial control
> languages is how primitive they are. There is lots of talk about IIoT
> and Industry 4.0, but at the bottom much of it is essentially handed
> written machine code.

Well, I still get to program in ladder logic and deal with real relay control 
systems every single day at my day job. Ladder logic, most computer guys 
wouldn't even recognize that as a computer language. Still decades old.

At the other end "modern" is the LUA scripting language of the ESP8266. That's 
almost exactly like the first time I programmed a TRS-80 or Apple II except it 
has built-in WiFi and it's a lot easier to get at the GPIO pins and it only 
costs $5.

Tim N3QE

Re: If C is so evil why is it so successful?

[Alfred M. Szmidt via cctalk]

   It was thus said that the Great Noel Chiappa via cctalk once stated:
   > > From: Alfred M. Szmidt
   > 
   > > No even the following program:
   > >   int main (void) { return 0; }
   > > is guaranteed to work
   > 
   > I'm missing something: why not?

 Yeah, I'm having a hard time with that too.  I mean, pedantically, it
   should be:


   #include 
   int main(void) { return EXIT_SUCCESS; }

Pedantically, it does not matter -- a return from main is equivalent
to an exit(), and exit(0) is sensibly defined, and EXIT_SUCCESS can
also be different from 0 (even though I don't think such a platform
exists).

Similiarly for EXIT_FAILURE ...

Re: If C is so evil why is it so successful?

[Alfred M. Szmidt via cctalk]

   > From: Alfred M. Szmidt

   > No even the following program:
   >   int main (void) { return 0; }
   > is guaranteed to work

   I'm missing something: why not?

It boils down to pedantism.  The encoding of the above is ASCII, and
the encoding type of a C program is implementation defined.  The other
thing is that the abstract machine defined in C can be utterly bogus,
i.e. not capable of executing anything due to various implementation
specified environment limitations.


Ofcourse, this is all academic ... and I don't know any such idiotic
implementation.

Re: TRS-80 curiosity

[Bill Gunshannon via cctalk]

On 4/12/2017 11:45 AM, Alexandre Souza wrote:
> Isn't this the buffered expansion cable?
>

No, the buffered Expansion Interface cable is 40 pin to 40 pin
and very short.  This is 3 feet long which would be a disaster
for the EI. :-)

bill

Another language : SDL

[Stefan Skoglund via cctalk]

Anyone with access to a distribution of SDT (Telelogik's SDL programming
system) for old era SunOS 4 ?
I have a SS10 which is a beggar for SDT (or KEE or Frame.)

Re: If C is so evil why is it so successful?

[Stefan Skoglund via cctalk]

ons 2017-04-12 klockan 10:57 -0400 skrev Noel Chiappa via cctalk: 
> > From: Alfred M. Szmidt
> 
> > No even the following program:
> >   int main (void) { return 0; }
> > is guaranteed to work
> 
> I'm missing something: why not?
> 
>   Noel
> 

If the compiler doesn't have ANSI C prototypes.

What is the meaning of '0' (and the return call itself) on different
platforms ?

C is special because so much of a program's behaviour is 'undefined' and
so everything which goes is ok and so inherently non-portable.

Re: If C is so evil why is it so successful?

[Ian S. King via cctalk]

Weighing in on the C vs. assembler subthread: modern processors are like
exotic sportscars, in that pretty much anyone can drive the thing to the
corner grocery but it takes a lot of skill to get the best performance out
of it.  Load/store superscalar architectures benefit enormously from
various tricks that optimizing compilers do.  Sure, you can code those
tricksk in assembler, but for any program other than the most trivial it
becomes a daunting task.

Compiled C also supports writing sustainable code.  Use as many
intermediate variables as you like to clarify what your code is trying to
do - the compiler will optimize them out of existence.  This can make
troubleshooting more difficult, but that's why you turn off the
optimization for debug builds.

C vs. anything else?  I think John Wilson was spot on, it's like a
motorcycle and if you don't know what you're doing you can hurt yourself.
Personally, I usually use Python for application code and C if I'm doing
something down 'on the metal' that has to be performant (e.g., device
drivers).  -- Ian

On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 9:15 AM, Rod Smallwood via cctalk <
cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:

>
>
> On 12/04/2017 16:08, Norman Jaffe via cctalk wrote:
>
>> Assembler is a sports car kit.
>>
>> From: "cctalk" 
>> To: "cctalk" 
>> Cc: j...@mercury.lcs.mit.edu
>> Sent: Wednesday, April 12, 2017 7:57:07 AM
>> Subject: Re: If C is so evil why is it so successful?
>>
>> From: Alfred M. Szmidt
>>> No even the following program:
>>> int main (void) { return 0; }
>>> is guaranteed to work
>>>
>> I'm missing something: why not?
>>
>> Noel
>>
>> PS: There probably is something to the sports car analogy, but I'm not
>> going
>> to take a position on that one! :-) Interesting side-question though: is
>> assembler more or less like a sports car than C? :-)
>>
> All computer computer languages are only as good or bad as the person
> using them.
>
> Rod
>
> --
> There is no wrong or right
> Nor black and white.
> Just darkness and light
>
>


-- 
Ian S. King, MSIS, MSCS, Ph.D. Candidate
The Information School 
Dissertation: "Why the Conversation Mattered: Constructing a Sociotechnical
Narrative Through a Design Lens

Archivist, Voices From the Rwanda Tribunal 
Value Sensitive Design Research Lab 

University of Washington

There is an old Vulcan saying: "Only Nixon could go to China."

Re: If C is so evil why is it so successful?

[Rod Smallwood via cctalk]

On 12/04/2017 16:08, Norman Jaffe via cctalk wrote:

Assembler is a sports car kit.

From: "cctalk" 
To: "cctalk" 
Cc: j...@mercury.lcs.mit.edu
Sent: Wednesday, April 12, 2017 7:57:07 AM
Subject: Re: If C is so evil why is it so successful?


From: Alfred M. Szmidt
No even the following program:
int main (void) { return 0; }
is guaranteed to work

I'm missing something: why not?

Noel

PS: There probably is something to the sports car analogy, but I'm not going
to take a position on that one! :-) Interesting side-question though: is
assembler more or less like a sports car than C? :-)
All computer computer languages are only as good or bad as the person 
using them.


Rod

--
There is no wrong or right
Nor black and white.
Just darkness and light

Re: If C is so evil why is it so successful?

[Sean Conner via cctalk]

It was thus said that the Great Noel Chiappa via cctalk once stated:
> > From: Alfred M. Szmidt
> 
> > No even the following program:
> >   int main (void) { return 0; }
> > is guaranteed to work
> 
> I'm missing something: why not?

  Yeah, I'm having a hard time with that too.  I mean, pedantically, it
should be:

#include 
int main(void) { return EXIT_SUCCESS; }

where EXIT_SUCCESS is 0 on every plaform except for some obscure system no
one has heard of but managed to influence the C committee back in the late
80s.

> PS: There probably is something to the sports car analogy, but I'm not going
> to take a position on that one! :-) Interesting side-question though: is
> assembler more or less like a sports car than C? :-)

  One thing for sure---assembly langauge (for a given architecture) is
probably better defined (less undefined/underspecified behavior) than C.

  -spc

Re: TRS-80 curiosity

[Alexandre Souza via cctalk]

Isn't this the buffered expansion cable?


2017-04-12 12:31 GMT-03:00 Tony Duell via cctalk :

> On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 3:51 PM, Bill Gunshannon via cctalk
>  wrote:
> >
> > So, I just picked up an MISE from Bartlett Labs (cause I really liked
> > the M3SE I had) and decided to revive one of my TRS-80 MOdel I's.
> > In my box of "stuff" I found an interesting ribbon cable the function
> > of which I don't know.  It is a 40 pin to 50 pin ribbon cable with a
> > black box connecting them that is labeled TANDY.  I know of nothing
> > the Tandy made that used a 50 pin connector other than a hard disk.
> > Could that be what this is for?  Anybody ever seen one?  I no longer
> > have any Tandy External HD's but then, with things like MISE and FreHD
> > why would one still want one other than for nostalgia.
> >
> > bill
>
> Although I never had one, I beleive Tandy made an adapter that plugged
> into the Model 1 expansion bus (40 pin) and gave you a (cut down?)
> Model 3 expansion bus (50 pin). As you suggest it was commonly used
> to connect Model 3 hard disks to the Model 1, but I think it worked with
> some other devices too.
>
> -tony
>

Re: Does anyone here know Siemens STL?

[Adrian Stoness via cctalk]

Herd of it

Siemens has destroyed so many good products by buying them out blah

On Apr 11, 2017 9:03 PM, "Charles Dickman via cctalk" 
wrote:

> The Balkanized nature of programming is interesting.
>
> I make a comment about C and get a flurry of responses, but ask a
> question about a programming language that is also very common for
> machine control and get no response at all. Not even a recognition of
> its existence.
>
> Siemens STL ist a programming language for machine controllers. It is
> oriented towards Boolean operations and extended for integer and real
> data types. Symbolic addressing is almost completely absent.
>
> On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 9:19 PM, Charles Dickman 
> wrote:
> > Does anyone here even know what Siemens STL is?
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 9:00 PM, Charles Dickman 
> wrote:
> >>
>

Re: Chip in first Apple AirPort WiFi

[Ethan via cctalk]

If I recall correctly, as you've noted it was a WaveLAN / Orinoco silver
card ('HERMES' chipset), connected via PCMCIA to a SBC based around an AMD
ELAN SC400 - 33AC 486-like CPU. It had something like a couple megs of RAM
and maybe 512K of FLASH. I don't know what OS it ran, if anything 'off the
shelf'
Why do you ask?


One of the early Apple Airports ran NetBSD, I believe supported by Wasabi 
Systems originally of NYC, then Norfolk VA. Not sure if it was the first.


I still have a pre-wifi 13" long ISA WaveLan card that is in the 915mhz 
ISM band sitting on a shelf.


--
Ethan O'Toole

Re: TRS-80 curiosity

[Tony Duell via cctalk]

On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 3:51 PM, Bill Gunshannon via cctalk
 wrote:
>
> So, I just picked up an MISE from Bartlett Labs (cause I really liked
> the M3SE I had) and decided to revive one of my TRS-80 MOdel I's.
> In my box of "stuff" I found an interesting ribbon cable the function
> of which I don't know.  It is a 40 pin to 50 pin ribbon cable with a
> black box connecting them that is labeled TANDY.  I know of nothing
> the Tandy made that used a 50 pin connector other than a hard disk.
> Could that be what this is for?  Anybody ever seen one?  I no longer
> have any Tandy External HD's but then, with things like MISE and FreHD
> why would one still want one other than for nostalgia.
>
> bill

Although I never had one, I beleive Tandy made an adapter that plugged
into the Model 1 expansion bus (40 pin) and gave you a (cut down?)
Model 3 expansion bus (50 pin). As you suggest it was commonly used
to connect Model 3 hard disks to the Model 1, but I think it worked with
some other devices too.

-tony

Re: If C is so evil why is it so successful?

[John Wilson via cctalk]

On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 09:08:53AM -0600, Norman Jaffe via cctalk wrote:
>Assembler is a sports car kit. 

I'd say it's more like a motorcycle -- it does the most with the least
and it's SO FUN to ride.  But if you don't know how, it seems impossible,
and safety is entirely your problem.

John Wilson
D Bit

Re: If C is so evil why is it so successful?

[Norman Jaffe via cctalk]

Assembler is a sports car kit. 

From: "cctalk"  
To: "cctalk"  
Cc: j...@mercury.lcs.mit.edu 
Sent: Wednesday, April 12, 2017 7:57:07 AM 
Subject: Re: If C is so evil why is it so successful? 

> From: Alfred M. Szmidt 

> No even the following program: 
> int main (void) { return 0; } 
> is guaranteed to work 

I'm missing something: why not? 

Noel 

PS: There probably is something to the sports car analogy, but I'm not going 
to take a position on that one! :-) Interesting side-question though: is 
assembler more or less like a sports car than C? :-) 

Re: If C is so evil why is it so successful?

[Noel Chiappa via cctalk]

> From: Alfred M. Szmidt

> No even the following program:
>   int main (void) { return 0; }
> is guaranteed to work

I'm missing something: why not?

Noel

PS: There probably is something to the sports car analogy, but I'm not going
to take a position on that one! :-) Interesting side-question though: is
assembler more or less like a sports car than C? :-)

TRS-80 curiosity

[Bill Gunshannon via cctalk]

So, I just picked up an MISE from Bartlett Labs (cause I really liked
the M3SE I had) and decided to revive one of my TRS-80 MOdel I's.
In my box of "stuff" I found an interesting ribbon cable the function
of which I don't know.  It is a 40 pin to 50 pin ribbon cable with a
black box connecting them that is labeled TANDY.  I know of nothing
the Tandy made that used a 50 pin connector other than a hard disk.
Could that be what this is for?  Anybody ever seen one?  I no longer
have any Tandy External HD's but then, with things like MISE and FreHD
why would one still want one other than for nostalgia.

bill

LOD bands for MIT CADR

[Alfred M. Szmidt via cctalk]

Anyone seen or got any?

Re: GoFundMe for Cap'n Crunch

[Shawn Gordon via cctalk]

This is the 2nd or 3rd fundraising campaign for him in the last year. 
Anonabox did one last year too.


On 4/11/2017 10:59 PM, Evan Koblentz via cctalk wrote:

https://www.gofundme.com/crunch-medical-fund

Help if you can.

We all owe a debt to John Draper aka the Cap'n.



Evan Koblentz, director
Vintage Computer Federation
a 501(c)3 educational non-profit

e...@vcfed.org
(646) 546-

www.vcfed.org
facebook.com/vcfederation
twitter.com/vcfederation

Re: If C is so evil why is it so successful?

[Leif Johansson via cctalk]

On 2017-04-12 12:11, Tor Arntsen via cctalk wrote:
>> C is like sports cars: A lot of people want them, some can afford them
>> but very few can actually drive them.
> 
> I completely disagree. That is just a made-up comparision. E.g.: C
> compilers are for the most part free (as in 'gratis') these days. And
> there a probably more competent C programmers around than
> competent-whatever-else. Many incompetent ones, sure, but that's just
> because of sheer numbers. And it's much easier to be incompetent in
> C++ or what have you.
> In other words: C is not like sports cars at all. At least not for the
> reasons listed.
> 

I regularly hire coders and from where I sit, finding experienced C
coders is like finding a pot of gold.

Also I didn't mean "a sports car" as in "expensive" but "rare, powerful
and very cool". I still wouldn't trust most people to drive one.

Cheers Leif

Re: Does anyone here know Siemens STL?

[Charles Dickman via cctalk]

On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 10:32 PM, Chuck Guzis via cctalk
 wrote:

> I don't think that you're being quite fair.  There are boatloads of
> specialized application programming languages--I rarely pay attention to
> any of them, figuring that after your first dozen or so, it's easy
> enough to add another one.

True, I went a bit overboard.

The puzzling (and frustrating) thing about these industrial control
languages is how primitive they are. There is lots of talk about IIoT
and Industry 4.0, but at the bottom much of it is essentially handed
written machine code.

RE: If C is so evil why is it so successful?

[Dave Wade G4UGM via cctalk]

“C” is successful because it is evil. 

 

It is so easy to write a piece of dirty code that will do the job in hand, on 
the current platform, that is devoid of error checking but which gets the jobs 
done.

 

It becomes evil when the code is re-purposed from a one off into production 
code.

 

Writing good robust code in “C” is hard. Verifying its robust is even harder. 
So it doesn’t get done…

 

.. I used to think of “C” as a tool that would allow you to shoot yourself in 
the foot in all the same ways as you had available in assembler, plus a few 
more, but much more quickly…

 

Dave 

 

 

From: cctalk [mailto:cctalk-boun...@classiccmp.org] On Behalf Of Charles 
Dickman via cctalk
Sent: 12 April 2017 01:38
To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts 
Subject: If C is so evil why is it so successful?

 

 

Re: If C is so evil why is it so successful?

[Alfred M. Szmidt via cctalk]

   > if it's not portable then it might as well be assembly and get the
   > benefits that come with that.

   Sorry, I don't agree. It _is_ possible to write portable code, but even
   ignoring that, the benfits of writing in a higher-level language (good
   control structures, complex expressions, etc, etc) are well worth it.

Well... No even the following program:

  int main (void) { return 0; }

is guaranteed to work, so much for portablility, huh?

Re: If C is so evil why is it so successful?

[Leif Johansson via cctalk]

> > if it's not portable then it might as well be assembly and get the
> > benefits that come with that.
> 
> Sorry, I don't agree. It _is_ possible to write portable code, but even
> ignoring that, the benfits of writing in a higher-level language (good
> control structures, complex expressions, etc, etc) are well worth it.

C is like sports cars: A lot of people want them, some can afford them
but very few can actually drive them.

GoFundMe for Cap'n Crunch

[Evan Koblentz via cctalk]

https://www.gofundme.com/crunch-medical-fund

Help if you can.

We all owe a debt to John Draper aka the Cap'n.



Evan Koblentz, director
Vintage Computer Federation
a 501(c)3 educational non-profit

e...@vcfed.org
(646) 546-

www.vcfed.org
facebook.com/vcfederation
twitter.com/vcfederation