I wrote:
> Wrote my own disassembler in Python. No assembler yet.
>
Now there's an assembler as well.
> https://github.com/brouhaha/i89
>
There is 8089 support in MAME, if you want to try to simulate something
with an integrated debugger
On 10/20/16 11:53 PM, Eric Smith wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 8:51 PM, dwight wrote:
>
>>> From: space...@gmail.com
>>>
>>> Before I write my own, does anyone happen to
On Fri, Sep 25, 2015 at 10:56 AM, Al Kossow wrote:
> What I/O board are you trying to figure out, Eric?
Intel iSBC 215. I have a G, but all variants have a similar processor
subsystem using the 8089.
I'd appreciate copies of the firmware for all Intel iSBC 215 variants.
I
Oops, not the MT-32, that uses the Intel MCS-96 family. Nearly too many chips
here to keep track of!
Rather it's for the ACT Apricot PC/Xi seems to use an 8089 for I/O.
David
> On Sep 25, 2015, at 2:53 PM, David Ryskalczyk wrote:
>
> MAME has an emulator and a disassembler
On Fri, Sep 25, 2015 at 9:38 AM, dwight wrote:
> Someplace in my piles of stuff, I may have an EPROM '89. At least I
> think it was an 89.
> If I find it, your welcome to it Eric.
Thanks, Dwight, but I don't think there was any EPROM version of the
8089, as they don't have
Someplace in my piles of stuff, I may have an EPROM '89. At least I
think it was an 89.
If I find it, your welcome to it Eric.
Dwight
On 9/24/15 8:45 PM, Eric Smith wrote:
On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 8:51 PM, dwight wrote:
You just may have to write your own.
Most don't even know what a 8089 is.
That's looking likely.
What I/O board are you trying to figure out, Eric?
A bunch of different manufacturers
MAME has an emulator and a disassembler since the Roland MT-32 uses this chip.
David
> On Sep 25, 2015, at 2:40 PM, Holm Tiffe wrote:
>
> Mouse wrote:
>
And I'd still have to write a disassembler.
>>
>> If someone can point me at the assembly and machine language
On 09/25/2015 09:56 AM, Al Kossow wrote:
What I/O board are you trying to figure out, Eric? A bunch of
different manufacturers early Multibus Winchester controller boards
used them.
The 8089 was a good idea but badly timed and terribly underpowered. 2
channels of DMA, while a plain old
Mouse wrote:
> >> And I'd still have to write a disassembler.
>
> If someone can point me at the assembly and machine language specs for
> the thing, I can add it to my disassembler
>
> /~\ The ASCII Mouse
> \ / Ribbon Campaign
> X Against HTML
On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 11:41 PM, Chuck Guzis wrote:
> Hmmm, I thought ASM89 used brackets for indicating addressing modes.
It does, so it doesn't have the parenthesis problem per se. I only
brought up the parenthesis as a general example of problems with
conventions for
>> And I'd still have to write a disassembler.
If someone can point me at the assembly and machine language specs for
the thing, I can add it to my disassembler
/~\ The ASCII Mouse
\ / Ribbon Campaign
X Against HTMLmo...@rodents-montreal.org
/ \
On 09/24/2015 08:53 PM, Eric Smith wrote:
Yes, though the syntax for the addressing modes would have to be
non-standard, unless the macro assembler had really good string
mangling capabilities for macro arguments. Same general problem as
trying to define macros to assemble for the 6502, which
On 09/24/2015 07:51 PM, dwight wrote:
From: space...@gmail.com
Before I write my own, does anyone happen to have an assembler
and/or a disassembler for the Intel 8089 I/O processor?
You just may have to write your own. Most don't even know what a 8089
I'll bet you could do it with some
On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 8:51 PM, dwight wrote:
> You just may have to write your own.
> Most don't even know what a 8089 is.
That's looking likely.
Although I mostly want to assemble on a modern OS, it would be nice to
get a copy of ASM89 for the ISIS-II on the Intel MDS,
- Original Message -
From: "Eric Smith" <space...@gmail.com>
To: "General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic
Posts" <cctalk@classiccmp.org>
Sent: Thursday, September 24, 2015 11:45 PM
Subject: Re: assembler, disassembler for Intel
8089?
On Thu, Sep 24
On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 10:15 PM, Mike Stein wrote:
> Should be fairly trivial to modify or even create a new table for TASM:
I have no reason to doubt that TASM is a fine product, but if I'm
going to invest the effort to add support for a new processor to an
existing
17 matches
Mail list logo