Search results

I was about to ask what DCD meant, but @cheesestraws mention of @tashtari led me to the info I needed. For anyone else joining the party, it looks like the general idea is explained here and I believe is the limitations table you are referring to :)

Fascinating! I'll be following your work!

@Thom Cherryhomes I did not know the Macintosh floppy disk interface was capable of having sub-devices. That is certainly a thing with the SCSI interface, but I've never seen it done on the floppy interface. Quite intriguing! May I ask why not use SCSI? Are you targeting pre-SCSI Macs?

@Thom Cherryhomes I might be interested in what you come up with. I've been meaning to try out Retro68 someday. The biggest problem with the legacy tools is that they are no longer being actively maintained (obviously) and they have bugs. So it's a game of whack-a-mole getting around the...

Hi, I am jumping in from the thread on Facebook. I wanted to confirm what @halkyardo said. Device drivers need a special entry point and are not just plain code resources. If you use a compiler such as Symantec C++, it will provide that glue code for you so you simply write the "main()" routine...

Grrr, the "Disassemble" feature in Symantec C++ 8.6 gives me a "System error 10" under Mac OS 8.1 UPDATE: Incompatibility with "SOMobjectsTM for Mac OS", whatever that is!

It's possible that it was a bug in the particular version of CodeWarrior I was using (CodeWarrior 8 Gold, which is considerably older than CodeWarrior 6 Pro). I don't recall exactly what the issue was, but it was an problem with the entry glue code they provided that would always cause an link...

So I installed Symantec 8.6 and began compiling a list of differences. Unfortunately, there are pros and cons on both sides and whether there is a clear winner depends on which things are most important to you. Here is what I have found so far: CodeWarrior Gold 8 (1996-01-04) What I like: IDE...

I often hear that modern compilers can generate far better machine code than any human could, but I wonder whether that would hold true on the 680x0. I recall reading that part of the reason CPUs migrated from CISC to RISC was because it was easier to build an optimizing compilers for them. The...

Also, the following blurb in the MacWorld article is intriguing: I've definitely buy a beer to the first person who can take the GCC compiler from Retro68 and integrate it into the Symantec IDE! :D

After reading this MacWorld article, I think Symantec C++ 8.6 is seriously worth a look. I have been extensively benchmarking certain bits of code, in both C++ and assembly, so it would be fascinating to compare the CW and Symantec compilers to see which one is truly better.

I've downloaded versions of CodeWarrior from Gold 8 (1996) through Pro 4 (1998) and as far as I can tell from reading the documentation, there were absolutely no changes to the 680x0 stuff in that time period. Which is a real shame, because I suspect adding those extra addressing modes to the...

I have recently been doing some rather extensive assembly development on the Mac related to my MiniVNC project. One frustration is that while CodeWarrior Gold 8 supports the 68020 processor, it does not support the 68020 addressing modes. Does anyone know whether there is a version of...

Version 1.1 now supports this!

Hello, I wanted to update this thread with a note that I made a pretty major update to MiniVNC. The thing I wanted to focus on in this release was compatibility with clients other than RealVNC. Due to processor limitations, B&W 68000 Macs can only use the older TRLE encoding and still require...

I seriously want to see Bad Apple running on a Macintosh! EDIT: Oh, I see you have it already for the SE/30. But I mean I want to see it on my Mac Plus, lol

@fstark: I've been thinking a lot about what you did with MacFlim and I thought this info might benefit you. Are you familiar with "8808 domination" from the PC side of the world? This is a video encoder and player for the IBM PC XT that is able to show color video at 24 fps: Keep in mind...

That’s what everybody on hackaday thought, but the project I posted above shows that it is possible. I think that’s a game changer, because it really simplifies things.

@cheesestraws: Yeah, I really wanted to use all the little dev boards in my collection, especially the ESP32 ones with WiFi, but they all max out at about two dozen pins. That really does seem to be the biggest challenge. The next biggest challenge is 5V compatibility and following that...

Also, since I primarily have Mac Plus computers in my collection, I am curious whether something similar could be done for those machines, maybe by interfacing with the CPU socket itself.