Threaded Mode | Linear Mode

**Gene** · 11-19-2016, 09:46 PM

Ok, it looks like it is working.

I was out of range. I think we are good to send off once I play a few more games. Hopefully Robert can play a bit to check.

Dieter · 11-19-2016, 10:48 PM

(11-19-2016 09:46 PM)Gene Wrote: Ok, it looks like it is working.

I was out of range. I think we are good to send off once I play a few more games. Hopefully Robert can play a bit to check.

I just added a sample game to my last post.
Maybe you want to try it and see if you can reproduce the results.

And please don't forget the FIX 2. Just to be sure. ;-)

Dieter

**Gene** · 11-19-2016, 11:01 PM

FIX 2 noted and included. ty

**Gene** · (This post was last modified: 11-20-2016 01:05 AM by Gene.)

Urgent:

Does the AOS program have a problem? I did a XEQ AOS to initialize. Then I did 1 + 2 = and it shows 0.

?

Code:

 01 LBL "AOS" 

 02 SF 27 

 03 LBL a 

 04 CF 01 

 05 CF 02 

 06 22 

 07 CF 22 

 08 0 

 09 LBL 09 

 10 STO IND Y 

 11 DSE Y 

 12 GTO 09 

 13 STO 00 

 14 12 

 15 STO 23 

 16 -1 

 17 STO 24 

 18 CLST 

 19 RTN 

 20 LBL "+" 

 21 LBL A 

 22 61 

 23 GTO 00 

 24 LBL "-" 

 25 LBL B 

 26 51 

 27 GTO 00 

 28 LBL "*" 

 29 LBL C 

 30 42 

 31 GTO 00 

 32 LBL "/" 

 33 LBL D 

 34 32 

 35 GTO 00 

 36 LBL "YX" 

 37 LBL b 

 38 14 

 39 GTO 00 

 40 LBL "NEG" 

 41 LBL c 

 42 23 

 43 GTO 00 

 44 LBL "<" 

 45 LBL d 

 46 5 

 47 LBL 00 

 48 10 

 49 / 

 50 STO 22 

 51 INT 

 52 X!=0? 

 53 GTO 00 

 54 FS? 01 

 55 XEQ 03 

 56 LBL 00 

 57 RDN 

 58 FS?C 22 

 59 XEQ 02 

 60 RCL 22 

 61 INT 

 62 X=0? 

 63 GTO 00 

 64 LBL 07 

 65 RCL 24 

 66 X<0? 

 67 GTO 00 

 68 RCL IND 24 

 69 FRC 

 70 RCL 22 

 71 FRC 

 72 X>Y? 

 73 GTO 00 

 74 RCL IND 24 

 75 INT 

 76 X=0? 

 77 GTO 00 

 78 XEQ 01 

 79 GTO 07 

 80 LBL 00 

 81 ISG 24 

 82 ENTER 

 83 RCL 24 

 84 13 

 85 X<=Y? 

 86 ASIN 

 87 RCL 22 

 88 STO IND 24 

 89 RCL IND 23 

 90 CF 01 

 91 GTO 99 

 92 LBL ">" 

 93 LBL e 

 94 1 

 95 STO 22 

 96 X<>Y 

 97 FS?C 22 

 98 XEQ 02 

 99 RCL 24 

100 X<0? 

101 SQRT 

102 RCL IND 24 

103 INT 

104 X=0? 

105 GTO 08 

106 XEQ 01 

107 GTO e 

108 LBL 08 

109 DSE 24 

110 ENTER 

111 RCL IND 23 

112 SF 01 

113 GTO 99 

114 LBL E 

115 LBL "=" 

116 1 

117 STO 22 

118 X<>Y 

119 FS?C 22 

120 XEQ 02 

121 RCL 24 

122 X<0? 

123 GTO 00 

124 RCL IND 24 

125 XEQ 01 

126 GTO E 

127 LBL 00 

128 RCL IND 23 

129 XEQ a 

130 RDN 

131 RDN 

132 SF 22 

133 GTO 99 

134 LBL 02 

135 ISG 23 

136 ENTER 

137 21 

138 RCL 23 

139 - 

140 X<0? 

141 SQRT 

142 RDN 

143 STO IND 23 

144 RCL 22 

145 INT 

146 X!=0? 

147 RTN 

148 LBL 03 

149 ISG 24 

150 ENTER 

151 4.2 

152 STO IND 24 

153 RDN 

154 RTN 

155 LBL 01 

156 RCL IND 23 

157 DSE 23 

158 RCL IND 23 

159 X<>Y 

160 XEQ IND Z 

161 FS?C 02 

162 ISG 23 

163 ENTER 

164 RCL 23 

165 13 

166 - 

167 X<0? 

168 SQRT 

169 X<>Y 

170 STO IND 23 

171 DSE 24 

172 RTN 

173 RTN 

174 LBL 01 

175 Y^X 

176 RTN 

177 LBL 02 

178 CHS 

179 LBL 00 

180 SF 02 

181 RTN 

182 LBL 03 

183 / 

184 RTN 

185 LBL 04 

186 * 

187 RTN 

188 LBL 05 

189 CHS 

190 LBL 06 

191 + 

192 LBL 99 

193 RTN 

194 SF 22 

195 END

Link to AOS raw file: AOS raw file

The code should have the fix for this NOP: NOP

Original write-up from PPC Journal: AOS PPC Journal article

Gene: I think it has a problem. :-(

**Gene** · 11-20-2016, 02:31 AM

Until we figure out if there is a problem in the AOS, this is the version that will go in. It gives answers instead of zeroes. :-)

AOS into .rom

Dieter · (This post was last modified: 11-20-2016 05:48 PM by Dieter.)

(11-20-2016 02:31 AM)Gene Wrote: Until we figure out if there is a problem in the AOS, this is the version that will go in. It gives answers instead of zeroes. :-)

AOS into .rom

Yes, there is a problem that I fixed in the last version I got here – but obviously the wrong one went into the zip file I posted.

The problem is in the Equals-routine (E) which finally calls the clear-all routine (XEQ a) at a point where the final result is in X. Due to the CLST in the clear-routine this value is lost. So your program works correctly, it just clears its result right before returning it. #-)

The attachment includes two versions: AOS_3 uses CLRG and thus clears all the 41's data registers. Here the final result is saved in Z and finally recalled by two RDNs (same as the original progam). AOS_3a uses a CLRGX loop that clears only R00...R22 and saves the result in LastX so that it can be finally recalled from there after the clearing is done. Both versions should work, both have a specific advantage: AOS_3 is faster, but clears all data registers, while AOS_3a clears only the required ones but takes 2-3 seconds longer for each "AOS" and "=" call due to the clear loop. If a complete CLRG is fine for you, use AOS_3.

Edit: I wonder if this CLRG is required at all. After the stack pointers are reset everything should work without setting all registers to zero. Gene, could you try this by loading AOS_3 and removing the initial CLRG? I have filled R00...R22 with random numbers and the program seems to work fine without clearing the registers.

Dieter

Dieter · (This post was last modified: 11-21-2016 07:42 AM by Dieter.)

(11-20-2016 12:47 AM)Gene Wrote: Does the AOS program have a problem? I did a XEQ AOS to initialize. Then I did 1 + 2 = and it shows 0.
(...)

Code:

(...) 127 LBL 00 128 RCL IND 23 129 XEQ a 130 RDN 131 RDN 132 SF 22 133 GTO 99

Here is/was the problem: The final result is recalled by RCL IND 23 and then the whole operation stack is cleared (XEQ a). Here the result is lost due to the CLST (and four other values filling the stack) in that routine. Two fixed versions are attached to my previous post.

(11-20-2016 12:47 AM)Gene Wrote: The code should have the fix for this NOP: NOP

Excuse me, but what is this "NOP" supposed to mean? You have used this term in a few posts and it seems to mean something like a bug report. Here I expected some way of doing a NOP = "no operation" on a '41. #-)

Of course this fix is and was included in AOS and AOS_3/3a.

Dieter

Dieter · (This post was last modified: 11-20-2016 07:13 PM by Dieter.)

(11-20-2016 02:31 AM)Gene Wrote: Until we figure out if there is a problem in the AOS, this is the version that will go in.

I see there is already one download of the fixed version 3/3a, and I guess I know who did it. ;-)

Anyway, here is the AOS version 4 which I am currently testing. It has no CLRG or another clearing routine, and it recalls the final result after an "=" operation directly from R13. Also note the SF22 instead of CF22 on startup which allows starting with an operator key (and x=0). Maybe you can try this one as well.

Dieter

**Gene** · 11-20-2016, 07:41 PM

(11-20-2016 05:20 PM)Dieter Wrote: Excuse me, but what is this "NOP" supposed to mean? You have used this term in a few posts and it seems to mean something like a bug report. Here I expected some way of doing a NOP = "no operation" on a '41. #-)

Dieter

Gene: NOP was a column heading for corrections in the PPC Journal for many years. It might be article corrections, programming errors, etc.

Here's a link to a two page illustration of the Journal cover page and the page showing the NOP column: PPC V5N4 NOP

**Gene** · 11-20-2016, 07:55 PM

AOS_3 is the one going into the rom.

I played with AOS4, but I think it has a bit more tweaking to do. Great idea, but I need to get the files to Angel and AOS3 seems to work fine.

AOS4 had a problem with this:

( 1 + 2 ) * ( 2 + 3 ) =

It showed a 0 in the middle of the calculation and gave a 0.

AOS3 is a great program! :-)

**Gene** · 11-20-2016, 08:02 PM

Link to PDF of all program listings in the rom: PDF

Link to .zip of all .raw files in the rom: .zip of .raw

The .zip file includes a space "SumDigits.raw" file which is rom filler if there is enough space. I don't expect there to be enough room, so it will be carried over to rom2. :-) If it is included, it should be XROM 23,27 to avoid changing the hard coded XROM instructions we put in to call the Seed and RN routines.

Dieter · 11-20-2016, 08:07 PM

(11-20-2016 07:55 PM)Gene Wrote: AOS4 had a problem with this:

( 1 + 2 ) * ( 2 + 3 ) =

It showed a 0 in the middle of the calculation and gave a 0.

Hmm... will check this.

(11-20-2016 07:55 PM)Gene Wrote: AOS3 is a great program! :-)

OK then. But please also try it without the CLRG at the beginning. It should work just as well without losing all data registers.

Dieter

Dieter · 11-20-2016, 08:14 PM

(11-20-2016 07:41 PM)Gene Wrote: Gene: NOP was a column heading for corrections in the PPC Journal for many years. It might be article corrections, programming errors, etc.

Fine – but what does it stand for? I didn't find an explanation on page 3 of V5N4 you posted. Is it an acronym? An abbreviation? Or does it simply refer to the NOP instruction?

Dieter

**Gene** · 11-20-2016, 08:38 PM

CLRG is removed from the AOS program.

I think NOP does refer to the No OPeration instruction because errors in an article didn't do anything or errors in a program were incorrect. I am not sure of the original derivation, but it has been around in HP calculator circles for ages.

**rprosperi** · 11-21-2016, 01:22 AM

Gene & Dieter,

Are you feeling like HP Quality/Test Engineers testing about-to-be-released calculator software back in the day? Impressive amount of testing and updates happening at a fast pace!

**Gene** · (This post was last modified: 11-21-2016 03:52 AM by Gene.)

No, because they did a much better job at this than we are doing. :-)

And Robert and Dieter are the coders here.

Dieter · (This post was last modified: 11-21-2016 10:10 PM by Dieter.)

(11-19-2016 07:14 PM)Dieter Wrote: (ST program)
I cannot say anything for sure, but the attached version (less than 30 minutes old) seems to run OK. It even does some things right that the original 67 program (and its documentation) did not.

I just saw that one of the data registers can be saved since R07 only holds the constant 25, which is the sensor range. This value is used only once, and another time half of this to define the phaser reach (so that's 12,5 here).

So I replaced R11 with R07 and inserted the two constants directly into the code: the sensor range still is 25 (line 53), the max. allowed Klingon distance for a phaser attack was rounded up to 15 (line 162, saves two bytes compared to 12,5 ;-)).

If you want to update the ST program – although it is not strictly required –, here is version 3a.

Edit: There is also an improved version of the SD program. Requires 96 bytes and needs two registers less than the original version. Also the output looks cleaner now since I added the one or other CF 29. ;-)

Dieter

RobertM · 11-22-2016, 02:36 AM

Gene,
Tried to send you a PM and it said you had reached your private message quota. Sad

**Gene** · 11-22-2016, 02:56 AM

fix now. :-)

**Gene** · 11-22-2016, 02:58 AM

(11-21-2016 08:53 PM)Dieter Wrote: Edit: There is also an improved version of the SD program. Requires 96 bytes and needs two registers less than the original version. Also the output looks cleaner now since I added the one or other CF 29. ;-)
Dieter

Gene: Post it! That's the filler program for the .rom and if it takes less room it might make it.