[Coco] How does the SCS line / GIME Setting Work?

[sales at gimechip.com]

There's really too few of us left to argue amongst ourselves anyway, right? 
We just have friendly debates :-)
and you guys have been at this a lot longer than my measly 3 years so I 
value each and every one of your opinions and advice.
-John
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Gene Heskett" <gene.heskett at gmail.com>
To: <coco at maltedmedia.com>
Sent: Saturday, June 19, 2010 11:50 PM
Subject: Re: [Coco] How does the SCS line / GIME Setting Work?


> On Sunday 20 June 2010, jdaggett at gate.net wrote:
>>On 19 Jun 2010 at 23:26, Gene Heskett wrote:
>>> James, Kevin has been wrong before, and in fact that was the reason I
>>> put on my bulletproof stuff and started on RBF.MN all those years ago,
>>> even before the 6309 was discovered.  The level2 version was not doing
>>> exactly as the docs said it should, so I fixed that code in 7 or 8
>>> different locations before I got to Ed34 and thought I was done.  But
>>> that one had a land mine in its FD.SEG(48) handling that I put in :(, so
>>> now we've had 2 or 3 more versions since.
>>
>>Gene
>>
>>I will say this. It was not my intent to say anyone is right or wrong even
>> though it may well have come out like that.
>
> Trying to find ways to make the truth palatable has always been one of my
> downfalls.  Sorry.
>
>> Like I said I defered to his
>> measurements until otherwise I can prove myself either right or wrong.
>> For now it makes little or no difference to me.
>
> James, I'd never start an argument with you.  Not on a SCS or GIME point.
> You have been much closer to that hardware than I will ever be.  As I have
> the scope which not everyone here has, I could, with a bit of disassembly 
> to
> get to it, confirm the behavior, but I'm not inclined to check until
> something that should work doesn't.
>
> Let me word it this way.  In level 1 versions of os9, the earlier ones had
> code that in one case repeated itself, but generally did it right.  It was
> after he gave us the 'Christmas presents' that a couple of lug nuts came
> loose.  At one point I had it all broken out into individual functions, 
> and
> when I put it back together, the dups got left out, and some of the stuff 
> he
> took out in the Christmas presents got put back in, mostly getstt/setstt
> details but it made it complete and only grew about 20 bytes.
>
> Then when the 6309 arrived, I ran through it again and made the megaread
> time 2 seconds better, from 13 secs to 11 secs, but I also put the backar
> bit in, and that, because it was sensitive to big files and no one setting
> SAS up to a reasonable value, several got hurt, including me BTW.
>
>>The GIME chip does not do everything the same as the SAM chip. There are a
>> lot of similarities and there are differemces. I will leave at that.
>
> I think they/you made it only the same in just enough places to be 
> backwards
> compatible with existing SW.  That was done very well.  For my part, 
> faster
> rgb outputs would have been a major blessing, but I suppose there was a
> power budget to meet.
>
> -- 
> Cheers, Gene
> "There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
> soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
> -Ed Howdershelt (Author)
> You will always get the greatest recognition for the job you least like.
>
> --
> Coco mailing list
> Coco at maltedmedia.com
> http://five.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/coco


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 9.0.829 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2950 - Release Date: 06/19/10 
12:50:00