Re: [ql-users] Hove Workshop

[P Witte]

Roy wood writes:

> >Problem is, at the end most people are busy getting home. I dont suppose
> >therell be an aftermath on Sunday? I cant make Saturday..
> There is always some kind of aftermath. Jochen always likes to get an 
> Indian meal in at some point when he is here so I am planning to visit a 
> restaurant in Brighton Marina fairly soon after the show. You are 
> welcome to join me at my house for a coffee after the show and a meal in 
> the early evening.

I should like that. Thank you!

Per
___
QL-Users Mailing List
http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm

Re: [ql-users] Q-Starter

[P Witte]

George Gwilt writes:

> > An array descriptor merely presents a logical view of the data. If Turbo
> > at present just sees that a parameter is an array and ignores any
indices,
> > then parsing those indices would have to be implemented - something that
> > could be a major job! If, however, the indices are accessable to Turbo,
then
> > its simply a matter of creating a descriptor based on those indices -
not
> > much more difficult than creating the descriptor for the whole array?
> >
> >
>
> The problem as I see it is that the slicing information, which could only
be
> used by Turbo for a machine code extension, would have to be sent by
Parser
> via the intermediate code to codegen which would then have to package it
so that
> in the "proc/fn_rom" section in the entry code (taken from the Turbo
library
> and put in every compiled task) the appropriate (new) code could use the
> information to set a correct S*BASIC type descriptor.
>
> The new code in the entry code is easy. It is the other bits that are not.

Perhaps SNG could suggest something?

Per

___
QL-Users Mailing List
http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm

Re: [ql-users] Q60 / 80

[Roy wood]

In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes
Aurélien GÉRÔME wrote:
Hi 68k folks,
One week ago, I posted a message to sales at q40.de, but got no anwser
then. I also tried webmaster at q40.de, but got no anwser too.
Derek Stewart of D&D Systems is just back from a trip, I guess he'll check
the "sales" account soon.
I spoke with Derek a short time ago and I gather he is going into 
hospital for an operation soon. This may be why there is no reply.
--
Roy Wood
Q Branch. 20 Locks Hill, Portslade, Sussex.BN41 2LB
Tel: +44 (0) 1273 386030fax: +44 (0) 1273 430501  skype : royqbranch
web : www.qbranch.demon.co.uk

___
QL-Users Mailing List
http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm

Re: [ql-users] QStarter, QFiles

[Malcolm Cadman]

In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Dilwyn Jones 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes

Yes, it like all code writing ... the major part of say 90% to 95% 
is
relatively easy, yet it is the last 1% to 5% that is hard.

--  Malcolm Cadman
Refer to my Murphy's Law docs for the one which says that the first 90% 
of a project takes 90% of the time. The rest takes the other 90%.
Yes, myth has an uncanny way of being factual ... :-)
--
Malcolm Cadman
___
QL-Users Mailing List
http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm

Re: [ql-users] QStarter, QFiles

[Phoebus R. Dokos (Φοίβος Ρ. Ντόκος)]

On Thu, 14 Apr 2005 14:22:06 -0400, Malcolm Cadman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>  
wrote:

In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Darren  
Branagh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes

It reminds me of a famous quote by George Best :-
"90% of my money I spent on booze, birds and gambling - the rest I  
wasted."
Yes, that was one of his most lucid statements ...
Yet possibly the greatest footballer that I have ever seen play.
But how much better would he be if he used a QL to review his tactics?
Ffibys
___
QL-Users Mailing List
http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm

Re: [ql-users] QStarter, QFiles

[Malcolm Cadman]

In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Darren 
Branagh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes

It reminds me of a famous quote by George Best :-
"90% of my money I spent on booze, birds and gambling - the rest I wasted."
Yes, that was one of his most lucid statements ...
Yet possibly the greatest footballer that I have ever seen play.
-Original Message-
From: Dilwyn Jones [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 13 April 2005 21:15
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [ql-users] QStarter, QFiles

Yes, it like all code writing ... the major part of say 90% to 95%
is
relatively easy, yet it is the last 1% to 5% that is hard.
--
Malcolm Cadman
Refer to my Murphy's Law docs for the one which says that the first
90% of a project takes 90% of the time. The rest takes the other 90%.
--
Dilwyn Jones
--
Malcolm Cadman
___
QL-Users Mailing List
http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm

Re: [ql-users] Users using wrong address

[Phoebus R. Dokos (Φοίβος Ρ. Ντόκος)]

On Thu, 14 Apr 2005 13:39:39 -0400, Tony Firshman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>  
wrote:

Many people are using
ql-users-q-v-d.com@lists.q-v-d.com
to send mail to the group.
The address should be [EMAIL PROTECTED]
All mail to anything else goes into my WPB.
It is messing up the nice mailing list area that Turnpike creates.
Bruce - I was told by one person that the wrong address is in the
instructions.
Tony

It has to do with the way that the list is setup. A couple setup  
instructions to majordomo and that would be fixed

Ffibys
___
QL-Users Mailing List
http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm

[ql-users] Users using wrong address

[Tony Firshman]

Many people are using
ql-users-q-v-d.com@lists.q-v-d.com

to send mail to the group.

The address should be [EMAIL PROTECTED]

All mail to anything else goes into my WPB.
It is messing up the nice mailing list area that Turnpike creates.

Bruce - I was told by one person that the wrong address is in the
instructions.

Tony
-- 
 QBBS (QL fido BBS 2:252/67) +44(0)1442-828255
  tony@.co.uk  http://firshman.co.uk
 Voice: +44(0)1442-828254  Fax: +44(0)1442-828255  Skype: tonyfirshman
 TF Services, 29 Longfield Road, TRING, Herts, HP23 4DG

___
QL-Users Mailing List
http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm

Re: [ql-users] Q60 / 80

[Aurélien GÉRÔME]

On Thu, Apr 14, 2005 at 03:39:06PM +0200, Marcel Kilgus wrote:
> Aurélien GÉRÔME wrote:
> > By the way, there is *NO WAY* yet to get a fast emulation of an MMU
> > which is required by Linux.
> 
> Actually, I wouldn't be so sure. Using decent JIT technology a 68k
> core (without MMU) with at least 200Mhz (relative to 68060) could be
> possible on current PCs (my guess is more like 300 to 400Mhz). I
> cannot believe that an MMU emulation would slow that down to 1/10th.
> Frankly, I just don't see any market for it, otherwise I would have
> tried.

Maybe I have incorrectly express myself. :)

I should have said "there is no software yet" rather than "there is
no way".

JIT is a nice idea, but for an MMU emulation, even with JIT, it is
just too much ressources consuming, really to much. By the way, I took
the example of ARAnyM which emulates more than a single processor,
but a graphic card, system buses, and some other peripherals. Hence,
my remark was misplaced. ;)

Cheers.
-- 
((__,-"""-,__))  Aurélien GÉRÔME   .---.
 `--)~   ~(--`   Free Software Developer  / \
.-'(   )`-.  Unix Sys & Net Admin [EMAIL PROTECTED]@./
`~~`@)   (@`~~`   /`\_/`\
| |.''`. //  _  \\
| |   : :'  :   | \ )|_
(8___8)   `. `'`   /`\_`>  <_/ \
 `---`  `- \__/'---'\__/
___
QL-Users Mailing List
http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm

Re: [ql-users] Q60 / 80

[Phoebus R. Dokos (Φοίβος Ρ. Ντόκος)]

On Thu, 14 Apr 2005 10:01:02 -0400, Marcel Kilgus  
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

Phoebus R. Dokos wrote:
Yes but that would be beyond the scope of QPC (to run Linux) anyway;
Of course. Who would want to do that if native Linux is better
supported and magnitudes faster?
There are reasons like learning the architecture or testing executables in  
an emulated environment. After all for most applications where a 68K  
architecture is involved, development takes place in another system.

The JIT idea itself I've toyed with often, but I guess most people are
already happy with the speed as it is. QemuFast is a remarkable
achievement in this respect.
Absolutely, however the tradeoff with specifically QemuFast is reduced  
compatibility (unless steps are taken to trap the problems)

Ffibys
___
QL-Users Mailing List
http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm

[ql-users] Q60 / 80

[pgraf]

Aurélien GÉRÔME wrote:

> I am so delighted to hear that. Right, m68k hardware is not yet
> dead! ;D

I'd say it's dead and alive at the same time :-) Commercially it's dead,
because building the mainboards just means risk, work and turnover without
reward. But as your own example shows, some still want highend 68k and are
even willing to spend more money than for hot new PC stuff.

[Snip]

> 1/ Learn the architecture.

This was a point I previously didn't see for native hardware.

> There are some new extensions boards for Falcon with a 68060 at 105 MHz

I wonder what running at about 100 MHz means for the makers of these
boards. Is it just to get a simple 68000 OS like TOS or QDOS working in
the first place, or still correct behaviour in a demanding situation like
building a cross-compiler or a Linux kernel while the system is pageing.
This makes a big difference in my experience.

> 2/ Learn Linux kernel inner-working for the m68k port flavours, and
> Linux kernel generic behaviour. Well, the 68LC060 is well supported
> by the kernel, and I have been told FPU emulation runs smoothly. ;)

Maybe contact Richard Zidlicky about this. He was somewhat reluctant about
the FPU emulation under Linux, although I don't remember exactly why. The
ql-developers list would be the place to discuss this.

> By the way, there is *NO WAY* yet to get a fast emulation of an MMU
> which is required by Linux.

This was news to me. Thanks for the info and for the explanation of your
68k motivation.

Peter

___
QL-Users Mailing List
http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm

Re: [ql-users] Q60 / 80

[Marcel Kilgus]

Phoebus R. Dokos wrote:
> Yes but that would be beyond the scope of QPC (to run Linux) anyway;

Of course. Who would want to do that if native Linux is better
supported and magnitudes faster?

The JIT idea itself I've toyed with often, but I guess most people are
already happy with the speed as it is. QemuFast is a remarkable
achievement in this respect.

Marcel

___
QL-Users Mailing List
http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm

Re: [ql-users] Q60 / 80

[Phoebus R. Dokos (Φοίβος Ρ. Ντόκος)]

On Thu, 14 Apr 2005 09:39:06 -0400, Marcel Kilgus  
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

Aurιlien GΙRΤME wrote:
By the way, there is *NO WAY* yet to get a fast emulation of an MMU
which is required by Linux.
Actually, I wouldn't be so sure. Using decent JIT technology a 68k
core (without MMU) with at least 200Mhz (relative to 68060) could be
possible on current PCs (my guess is more like 300 to 400Mhz). I
cannot believe that an MMU emulation would slow that down to 1/10th.
Frankly, I just don't see any market for it, otherwise I would have
tried.
Yes but that would be beyond the scope of QPC (to run Linux) anyway; plus  
SMSQ/e doesn't require it.

Ffibys
___
QL-Users Mailing List
http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm

Re: [ql-users] Q60 / 80

[Marcel Kilgus]

Aurélien GÉRÔME wrote:
> By the way, there is *NO WAY* yet to get a fast emulation of an MMU
> which is required by Linux.

Actually, I wouldn't be so sure. Using decent JIT technology a 68k
core (without MMU) with at least 200Mhz (relative to 68060) could be
possible on current PCs (my guess is more like 300 to 400Mhz). I
cannot believe that an MMU emulation would slow that down to 1/10th.
Frankly, I just don't see any market for it, otherwise I would have
tried.

Marcel

___
QL-Users Mailing List
http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm

Re: [ql-users] Q-Starter

[Marcel Kilgus]

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> As far as I know BP_LET changes a parameter by copying the value on
> the maths stack to the address at byte 4 of the parameter entry on
> the Name Table. I had assumed that this 4-byte pointer would be set.
> Instead MWDEF seems to be copying both the pointer into the name
> table as well as the 8-byte entry from the name table.

Yes, it copies that to ensure that the name table entry is still the
same (i.e. it's just used for comparison and as a safety net).
Question being, is this check necessary, is there any case where just
storing the variable address can corrupt memory because of it being
moved or anything? I guess for Turbo the answer is a sound "no", but
I'm not so sure about the interpreters.

It stores the address of the name table instead if the address of the
variable itself because it lets BP_LET do the work (and that code is
shared with a lot of other possible variants, so I'd need to extract
that code path somehow and make it separate).

> I assume that at the time the code you quote is obeyed A3 still
> points to the name table entry for the channel parameter, but that
> A5 has been set to the address of the window definition (perhaps
> plus a constant).

Almost, A5 points to an internal variable space, allocated as a thing
(the "easymenu01230123" things one can see in the thing list).

Ciao, Marcel

___
QL-Users Mailing List
http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm

Re: [ql-users] Q-Starter

[Geogwilt]

In a message dated 13/04/05 16:35:54 GMT Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
writes:

> >
> >Oops, I confess I'm pretty new to all this, but for me it looks like
> >actually this IS how it works:
> >
> >   move.w  2(a6,a3.l),d0 ;set error return variable
> >   blt.s   @1
> >   ext.l   d0
> >   lsl.l   #3,d0
> >   add.l   $18(a6),d0
> >   move.l  d0,error_var(a5)
> >   move.l  0(a6,d0.l),error_id1(a5)
> >   move.l  4(a6,d0.l),error_id2(a5)
> >@1
> >
> >But I can change everything. I guess the right way to do it is to
> >check that the type of the parameter is $0203?
> >
> 

I have now tried this method, but storing the address of the channel variable 
from its position in the parameter information at the end of the Name Table. 
This address is the same as that in the original entry in the Name Table for 
the variable.

Since the first word in the Name Table entry for a variable headed by # and 
preceded by a comma will be

   $0293

it will be safer to mask this with $FF0F before testing for $0203.

The storing of the pointer to the variable's value can then be something 
like:

   move.l  4(a3,a6.l),error_var(a5)

I have used this method successfully on  Q60 and on a JM rom plus trump card.

George
___
QL-Users Mailing List
http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm

Re: [ql-users] Q60 / 80

[Dilwyn Jones]

Peter Graf wrote:
> When folks invest so much money there still must be more in a native QL
> system that just the capabilty to execute a QL OS. What is this today?
> 
> Is it the simplicity of the system? Power consumption issues / fanless CPU
> operation? Direct access to the hardware without emulated software layers?
> The fast boot into the 68k OS after power-on? The option to do totally
> without Windows or Linux? Intel outside? Nostalgia? Tinkering and
> learning? A little bit of all of them? Something else?
> 
> Peter
I think a combination of all these things.

I am content with QPC2 and a PC, but would probably buy a Q60 if I had the 
money and the space in the house.

For me, it is the ability to use a different type of computer to that which I 
use every day in work.

In QDOS or SMSQ I can write my own programs and generally "tinker" which I 
would not do on other computer systems.

There is also the general level of friendship of the QL community. We all try 
to help each other. People who stay with the QL generally do so for reasons 
other than profit, so we end up being a very friendly crowd.

Dilwyn Jones

___
QL-Users Mailing List
http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm

Re: [ql-users] Q60 / 80

[Aurélien GÉRÔME]

> an Atari Falcon, an Apple Quadra 650, or an Amiga 4000T,

Just an erratum : "Apple Quadra 950". ;)
___
QL-Users Mailing List
http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm

Re: [ql-users] Q60 / 80

[Aurélien GÉRÔME]

On Thu, Apr 14, 2005 at 12:02:23PM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Derek Stewart of D&D Systems is just back from a trip, I guess he'll check
> the "sales" account soon.

Derek just told me in private my mail did not come through in the
first place, so I simply mailed him again to its own email address.

> It touches me to see that folks still want native highend 68k systems
> although we are nowhere able to compete with the price of a PC based
> emulator. We are not even advertising in the magazines anymore but orders
> keep coming.

I am so delighted to hear that. Right, m68k hardware is not yet
dead! ;D

> When folks invest so much money there still must be more in a native QL
> system that just the capabilty to execute a QL OS. What is this today?

Of course, it is. ;)

> Is it the simplicity of the system? Power consumption issues / fanless CPU
> operation? Direct access to the hardware without emulated software layers?
> The fast boot into the 68k OS after power-on? The option to do totally
> without Windows or Linux? Intel outside? Nostalgia? Tinkering and
> learning? A little bit of all of them? Something else?

Well, I do not know for the other people. However, in my case, it
could be criticise by QL native system people like you who prefer
using the original system.

Of course, all your hypothesis are also my concern. ;)

I am a Debian GNU/Linux m68k contributor, I need decent hardware to:

1/ Learn the architecture. Of course, I can do that with
an Atari Falcon, an Apple Quadra 650, or an Amiga 4000T,
but that last one is at most a 68060 at 56 MHz. There are
some new extensions boards for Falcon with a 68060 at 105 MHz
, but Linux does
not support them yet. I need to get in touch with people working on
the related kernel part, before getting my money into it. :)

2/ Learn Linux kernel inner-working for the m68k port flavours, and
Linux kernel generic behaviour. Well, the 68LC060 is well supported
by the kernel, and I have been told FPU emulation runs smoothly. ;)

3/ Help the building of Debian packages on m68k
by setting up an auto-builder. The goal is to get
the fastest hardware to have the building done. See
 to
know why.

By the way, there is *NO WAY* yet to get a fast
emulation of an MMU which is required by Linux. See
 and
.

BasiliskII for Mac68k has no MMU support.

ARAnyM for Atari has a huge MMU implementation which consumes a lot,
even when Videl graphics emulation is offline. I was at 15 MHz at most
on a dual Athlon MP 2400+ and 20 MHz at most on a dual G5 at 2 GHz.

UAE for Amiga has an old unstable MMU implementation which does not
work anymore.

Cheers.
-- 
((__,-"""-,__))  Aurélien GÉRÔME   .---.
 `--)~   ~(--`   Free Software Developer  / \
.-'(   )`-.  Unix Sys & Net Admin [EMAIL PROTECTED]@./
`~~`@)   (@`~~`   /`\_/`\
| |.''`. //  _  \\
| |   : :'  :   | \ )|_
(8___8)   `. `'`   /`\_`>  <_/ \
 `---`  `- \__/'---'\__/
___
QL-Users Mailing List
http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm

[ql-users] Q60 / 80

[pgraf]

Aurélien GÉRÔME wrote:

> Hi 68k folks,
>
> One week ago, I posted a message to sales at q40.de, but got no anwser
> then. I also tried webmaster at q40.de, but got no anwser too.

Derek Stewart of D&D Systems is just back from a trip, I guess he'll check
the "sales" account soon.

> Where can I buy a Q60 / 80?

The Q60 is sold from D&D Systems in England.

It touches me to see that folks still want native highend 68k systems
although we are nowhere able to compete with the price of a PC based
emulator. We are not even advertising in the magazines anymore but orders
keep coming.

When folks invest so much money there still must be more in a native QL
system that just the capabilty to execute a QL OS. What is this today?

Is it the simplicity of the system? Power consumption issues / fanless CPU
operation? Direct access to the hardware without emulated software layers?
The fast boot into the 68k OS after power-on? The option to do totally
without Windows or Linux? Intel outside? Nostalgia? Tinkering and
learning? A little bit of all of them? Something else?

Peter

___
QL-Users Mailing List
http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm

RE: [ql-users] QStarter, QFiles

[Darren Branagh]

It reminds me of a famous quote by George Best :-

"90% of my money I spent on booze, birds and gambling - the rest I wasted."

Cheers,

Darren.

-Original Message-
From: Dilwyn Jones [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: 13 April 2005 21:15
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [ql-users] QStarter, QFiles


> Yes, it like all code writing ... the major part of say 90% to 95% 
> is
> relatively easy, yet it is the last 1% to 5% that is hard.
>
> -- 
> Malcolm Cadman
Refer to my Murphy's Law docs for the one which says that the first 
90% of a project takes 90% of the time. The rest takes the other 90%.

-- 
Dilwyn Jones



-- 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.9.6 - Release Date: 11/04/2005

___
QL-Users Mailing List
http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
___
QL-Users Mailing List
http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm