Re: Apple I Integer BASIC dump/listing?

[mjmahon@aol.com (Michael J. Mahon)]

Vince Briel replied (and I (>>) wrote:

>> At least it would have been handy if the disassembler had put in the
>> computed target addresses of the relative branches (if not generated
>> labels).  ;-)
>
>Please consider that Woz wrote Integer Basic by hand with no assembler. The
>fact that there is some reference to instructions specific to their actions
>is pretty good.

I certainly do consider that.  Which is why a disassembly of Integer
BASIC is the closest thing to source that we'll ever have.

As a user of several disassemblers and a reader of (too) many
disassemblies, I really appreciate being able to see where a branch
branches, as opposed to having to compute it.  I would expect that
anyone writing a disassembler would want the same, since the hex
listing contains the relative displacement, and one of the primary
purposes of a disassembly is to enable a reader to understand the
code (the other primary purpose is to enable re-assembly after
any changes are made).

>It was done by hand. Achim did it by writing a program to read the tape file
>and interpet the 1's and 0's into bytes and then into hex thus having the
>first known text copy of Apple I Integer Basic. There was a lot of work, yet
>everybody seems to nit pick at the little things. Has anybody considered
>that English isn't even this guys native language?

I assume that you mean that he did it on a modern computer with a
sound card.  I agree, that's a nice piece of work.  I had no context for
where the listing came from, who did it, or when.  I merely added to
someone else's observation that the "comments" appeared to be
machine-generated.  (In fact, the "comments" add no information
to the disassembly for anyone who has learned the instruction set.)

Since I had no idea who did it, I gave no consideration to his native
language (though I guessed that it wasn't assembler ;-).

>Instead of knocking guys who do things like this and blow them out of the
>vintage community why don't you show some respect.

Sorry you thought I was "knocking" someone current.  I assumed that
the disassembly was run years ago on an Apple I after loading Integer
BASIC, and guessed that it was a (one of a thousand) home-grown
disassembler of the period.  My aplogies for a bad assumption
(but it's still not a "good" disassembly).

I was comparing it to what would be obtained by playing the cassette
into an Apple I (or II, with appropriate cassette read changes) and
then disassembling it with the Woz/Baum disassembler.  This
would be a fairly straightforward exercise for anyone familiar with
the Apple I or Apple II who had one at his/her disposal.

If anyone is "blown out of the vintage community" by what are fairly
typical (and occasionally nit-picky ;-) comments in a newsgroup, then
they are 1) taking it much too personally, and 2) not very committed
to being "in" the community in the first place.

I try to be polite and respectful. That doesn't mean that I don't criticize.
I do try to make my criticisms constructive, and I try to compliment
nice work when appropriate (as I complimented yours, particularly
after learning that sales are not an aim but a courtesy).

-michael

Check out amazing quality sound for 8-bit Apples on my
Home page:  http://members.aol.com/MJMahon/