To follow-up, I did locate a CompuPro/Sorcim formatting program but it looks
like it was targeted at a particular assembler. It has instructions like
"STO" and "LDK", which I presume to be macros because they are neither valid
8080 nor Z80 instructions.

Can anyone shed some light on these? I'm sure I could re-write the areas of
code but it would be helpful to find out what these macros originally were.

Thanks.
Rich



On 1/20/08 11:17 AM, in article C3B8DE4F.1500C%rcini@optonline.net, "Richard
A. Cini" wrote:

> All:
>
> I just finished the rehabilitation of my IMSAI, replacing the old 8"
> floppy system with one based on the CompuPro Disk 1 controller (8272-based).
> The monitor I'm using as a quick-and-dirty disk formatting program in it,
> but I'm looking for the source for one with more bells and whistles
> (on-screen progress; verification) that runs under CP/M.
>
> Does anyone have such a beast?
>
> Thanks in advance
>
>
> Rich
>
> --
> Rich Cini
> Collector of Classic Computers
> Build Master and lead engineer, Altair32 Emulator
> http://www.altair32.com
> http://www.classiccmp.org/cini
>

On Thu, 24 Jan 2008 21:24:27 -0500, "Richard A. Cini"
wrote:

>To follow-up, I did locate a CompuPro/Sorcim formatting program but it looks
>like it was targeted at a particular assembler. It has instructions like
>"STO" and "LDK", which I presume to be macros because they are neither valid
>8080 nor Z80 instructions.

Looked at my sources and they were the same, then I looked at the
"NXTREV" subdir and guess what... I'd hit that problem a long bunch
or years ago.

The answer is obvious.. sorta. They aren't macros but renamed
8080 instructions that have a form like the zilog assembler.

Instructions in the group of 8080 data transfers

MOV, MVI
LXI, LDA, LDAX, LHLD
SHLD STA, STAX

Also arithmetis group ops like

ADD DE,[HL]
DAD DE seemed to work right for that one.

All got mangled this way for the assembler they used.

So this:
STO A,FMT.S ;Set number of sectors

MOV A,E
STO A,FMT.N ;Set N Field

LDK D,0
LDK HL,TFGPL
ADD HL,DE
LD A,[hl]
STO A,FMT.G ;Set gap size

translates to:

; STO A,FMT.S ;Set number of sectors
STA A,FMT.S ;Set number of sectors

MOV A,E

; STO A,FMT.N ;Set N Field
STA A,FMT.N ;Set N Field

; LDK D,0
MVI D,0

; LDK HL,TFGPL
LHLD TFGPL

; ADD HL,DE
DAD DE

; LD A,[hl]
MOV A,M
; STO A,FMT.G ;Set gap size
STA A,FMT.G ;Set gap size


I think the assembler used was more regular appearing
and use notation like the Z80 especially for loads and stores
which for Z80 were all in the LD XX, ZZ form.

No idea what assembler was used or if it was on a mainframe.

>Can anyone shed some light on these? I'm sure I could re-write the areas of
>code but it would be helpful to find out what these macros originally were.

Hope that helps. After figuring out some of it I decided to write my
own formatter.


Allison

Allison:

Thanks a lot. I'll have a go at translating the source file I have. I
can cross-assemble Z80 instructions so I will probably start by just fixing
the LDK and STO instructions and see were I go from there.

Rich


On 1/24/08 10:32 PM, in article bjjip3lppjqsobo9mesjc58o3vd9ruomdt@4ax.com,
"no.spam@no.uce.bellatlantic.net" wrote:

> On Thu, 24 Jan 2008 21:24:27 -0500, "Richard A. Cini"
> wrote:
>
>> To follow-up, I did locate a CompuPro/Sorcim formatting program but it looks
>> like it was targeted at a particular assembler. It has instructions like
>> "STO" and "LDK", which I presume to be macros because they are neither valid
>> 8080 nor Z80 instructions.
>
> Looked at my sources and they were the same, then I looked at the
> "NXTREV" subdir and guess what... I'd hit that problem a long bunch
> or years ago.
>
> The answer is obvious.. sorta. They aren't macros but renamed
> 8080 instructions that have a form like the zilog assembler.
>
> Instructions in the group of 8080 data transfers
>
> MOV, MVI
> LXI, LDA, LDAX, LHLD
> SHLD STA, STAX
>
> Also arithmetis group ops like
>
> ADD DE,[HL]
> DAD DE seemed to work right for that one.
>
> All got mangled this way for the assembler they used.
>
> So this:
> STO A,FMT.S ;Set number of sectors
>
> MOV A,E
> STO A,FMT.N ;Set N Field
>
> LDK D,0
> LDK HL,TFGPL
> ADD HL,DE
> LD A,[hl]
> STO A,FMT.G ;Set gap size
>
> translates to:
>
> ; STO A,FMT.S ;Set number of sectors
> STA A,FMT.S ;Set number of sectors
>
> MOV A,E
>
> ; STO A,FMT.N ;Set N Field
> STA A,FMT.N ;Set N Field
>
> ; LDK D,0
> MVI D,0
>
> ; LDK HL,TFGPL
> LHLD TFGPL
>
> ; ADD HL,DE
> DAD DE
>
> ; LD A,[hl]
> MOV A,M
> ; STO A,FMT.G ;Set gap size
> STA A,FMT.G ;Set gap size
>
>
> I think the assembler used was more regular appearing
> and use notation like the Z80 especially for loads and stores
> which for Z80 were all in the LD XX, ZZ form.
>
> No idea what assembler was used or if it was on a mainframe.
>
>> Can anyone shed some light on these? I'm sure I could re-write the areas of
>> code but it would be helpful to find out what these macros originally were.
>
> Hope that helps. After figuring out some of it I decided to write my
> own formatter.
>
>
> Allison

Richard A. Cini wrote:
> Allison:
>
> Thanks a lot. I'll have a go at translating the source file I have. I
> can cross-assemble Z80 instructions so I will probably start by just fixing
> the LDK and STO instructions and see were I go from there.
>
> Rich
>
>
> On 1/24/08 10:32 PM, in article bjjip3lppjqsobo9mesjc58o3vd9ruomdt@4ax.com,
> "no.spam@no.uce.bellatlantic.net" wrote:
>
>
<<>>


Hello Richard,

I remembered seeing a CP/M BIOS for Compupro which originally used the
Sorcim ACT assembler but which had been converted to standard 8080
mnemonics. After some searching I found it at this location.

http://www.speakeasy.org/~rzh/bb.html

There are CompuPro Boot loaders and CP/M 2.2 CBIOS for DISK1. Perhaps
this will provide some clues about the Sorcim instruction translation.
There is also an AMPRO floppy disk formatter for CP/M.

Also http://www.math.utah.edu/pub/tex/bib...obbs-1980.html
mentions an article by Steve Newberry reviewing ACTxx cross assemblers.


Jeffrey W. Shook

Thanks. I've been to Roger's site before. Now googling on Sorcim ACT
assembler produces some interesting hits, including news archives from 1982
complaining about it.

Thanks again for the lead.


On 1/25/08 11:45 PM, in article iVymj.8$jg2.2@newsfe11.lga, "Jeffrey W.
Shook" <31415926@optonline.net> wrote:

>
> Richard A. Cini wrote:
>> Allison:
>>
>> Thanks a lot. I'll have a go at translating the source file I have. I
>> can cross-assemble Z80 instructions so I will probably start by just fixing
>> the LDK and STO instructions and see were I go from there.
>>
>> Rich
>>
>>
>> On 1/24/08 10:32 PM, in article bjjip3lppjqsobo9mesjc58o3vd9ruomdt@4ax.com,
>> "no.spam@no.uce.bellatlantic.net" wrote:
>>
>>
> <<>>
>
>
> Hello Richard,
>
> I remembered seeing a CP/M BIOS for Compupro which originally used the
> Sorcim ACT assembler but which had been converted to standard 8080
> mnemonics. After some searching I found it at this location.
>
> http://www.speakeasy.org/~rzh/bb.html
>
> There are CompuPro Boot loaders and CP/M 2.2 CBIOS for DISK1. Perhaps
> this will provide some clues about the Sorcim instruction translation.
> There is also an AMPRO floppy disk formatter for CP/M.
>
> Also http://www.math.utah.edu/pub/tex/bib...obbs-1980.html
> mentions an article by Steve Newberry reviewing ACTxx cross assemblers.
>
>
> Jeffrey W. Shook

"Richard A. Cini" wrote:
>
> Thanks. I've been to Roger's site before. Now googling on Sorcim
> ACT assembler produces some interesting hits, including news
> archives from 1982 complaining about it.

Please do not top-post. Your answer belongs after (or intermixed
with) the quoted material to which you reply, after snipping all
irrelevant material. See the following links:

--



(taming google)
(newusers)



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com