Re: Are there any 65816 card schematics?

["Michael J. Mahon" <mjmahon@aol.com>]

mdj wrote:

> Personally, I've found that if it's assembly language programming
> you're interested in, 65C02 is more 'fun'. The 65816 adds nothing in
> way of computational opcodes (and the lack of 16 bit ops is easily
> compensated for on the 02), but merely lots of additional addressing
> schemes.

This is also my assessment.

> The two 'big' improvements in the '816 for me are the 16 bit stack
> pointer and the stack-relative addressing modes, which make
> implementing higher-level languages like C, Pascal, etc. far more
> efficient.

I agree--lengthening the stack pointer completely changes the
way the processor looks to a compiler, allowing much more traditional
code to be generated.  And 16-bit ops that make operations on addresses
into single instructions also greatly reduces the "code explosion" that
otherwise results from straight compilation on the 6502.

> Sticking with existing approaches allows your project to be enjoyed by
> a wide range of enthusiasts.

Hear, hear!

-michael

NadaNet networking for Apple II computers!
Home page:  http://members.aol.com/MJMahon/

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