[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: 6502 illegal opcodes questions



Sam Gillett wrote:
"Paul Schlyter" wrote ...


In article <1149383070.763983.291190@h76g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
mdj <mdj.mdj@gmail.com> wrote:


Hey, we're almost back on topic, considering this was supposed to be
about 'undocumented opcodes' :-) Of course, my feelings on using
undocumented library calls is much the same as my feelings on
undocumented opcodes. They are very similar problems.

In the Apple II world we had other similar situations: calling Monitor
ROM routines at some fixed address.  Or calling routines in the Applesoft
Basic ROM's.


Programmers in the Commodore world also made extensive use of calling ROM
routines.  But, not all of them were undocumented.  Commodore listed the
entry address for many of the more useful Kernal routines, along with a name
for the routine and a brief description of its function, in the C64
Programmer's Reference Guide.

When the C128 came along, Commodore also documented Kernal calls for that
machine in the C128 PRG.

The Apple II manual documented a couple of dozen monitor routines also,
but since the ROM listing was provided, many called other entry points.

-michael

Parallel computing for 8-bit Apple II's!
Home page:  http://members.aol.com/MJMahon/

"The wastebasket is our most important design
tool--and it is seriously underused."