[Coco] Mod10 Suggestions

[William Mikrut]

I like the learning... as with everything... everything I am learning can
be applied to any system.

I cannot see any reason I when I am writing routines in the IBM, I could
just go straight to assembly for small routines and skip the overhead of
the HLLs.    At most it would make some of the larger processes run much,
much faster!

Plus it forces me to 'rethink' what I am doing... is it really necessary?
Is there a better way?
I like learning this!!


On Sat, Feb 18, 2017 at 10:17 AM, Salvador Garcia via Coco <
coco at maltedmedia.com> wrote:

> Congrats on your byte count reduction. It made me cry for the days when
> reducing a program from 79 to 65 was cause for celebration. Nowadays, I
> build my executable and I don't even see how big it is.
> Having this type of control over you program motivated the programmer to
> learn about the hardware's architecture and optimization techniques. Having
> gigs of storage at one's fingertips has made the programmer lazy and
> ignorant of the underlying processes. Thank you for bringing that feeling
> of accomplishment back! Salvador
>
>
>       From: William Mikrut <wmikrut72 at gmail.com>
>  To: CoCoList for Color Computer Enthusiasts <coco at maltedmedia.com>
>  Sent: Friday, February 17, 2017 3:58 PM
>  Subject: Re: [Coco] Mod10 Suggestions
>
> Thank you for all of the great suggestion!
>
> I have implemented them and the byte count shrunk from 79 -> 65 ( Almost
> 20% reduction) and it actually runs faster without the excessive loop
> overhead.
>
> The only thing I didn't try was storing a variable in the DP ($0003)
> because I always want my code to be completely independent of there it's
> loaded.
>
> Here is the revised version 2!
>
> (A CoCo based CCD reader would be Awesome!
> I wonder if Ingenico would be on board!!)
>
>
>
> On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 4:34 AM, Mark McDougall <msmcdoug at iinet.net.au>
> wrote:
>
> > On 17/02/2017 5:57 PM, Dave Philipsen wrote:
> >
> > Here's a problem.  It's not the credit card digit itself that is being
> >> tested for odd/even.  It's the position of the digit.  So you need to do
> >> a  'bitb #1' instead of a 'bita #1'.
> >>
> >
> > Good catch - thanks!
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > --
> > Mark McDougall
> > <http://retroports.blogspot.com.au>
> >
> > --
> > Coco mailing list
> > Coco at maltedmedia.com
> > https://pairlist5.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/coco
> >
>
>
> --
> Coco mailing list
> Coco at maltedmedia.com
> https://pairlist5.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/coco
>
>
>
>
> --
> Coco mailing list
> Coco at maltedmedia.com
> https://pairlist5.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/coco
>