Key Codes in Program Listings (70's/80's calculators)

[Eddie W. Shore]

I don't remember if I asked this before but for calculators from the 70s/80s (25C, 65, 67, 12C, 11C, 15C, etc), but what style of listing would you prefer?

Style 1 where the key codes are included:
Example: (15C)
001 ; 42, 21, 11 ; LBL A
002 ; 1 ; 1
003 ; 40 ; +
004 ; 43, 32 ; RTN


Style 2 where it's just step numbers and keys:
001 LBL A
002 1
003 +
004 RTN


I've been listing my programs in style 1 and considering dropping the key codes.

[carey]

(04-15-2024 12:38 AM)Eddie W. Shore Wrote:  I don't remember if I asked this before but for calculators from the 70s/80s (25C, 65, 67, 12C, 11C, 15C, etc), but what style of listing would you prefer?

Style 1 where the key codes are included:
Example: (15C)
001 ; 42, 21, 11 ; LBL A
002 ; 1 ; 1
003 ; 40 ; +
004 ; 43, 32 ; RTN


Style 2 where it's just step numbers and keys:
001 LBL A
002 1
003 +
004 RTN


I've been listing my programs in style 1 and considering dropping the key codes.

I find Style 1 preferable for the 15C (the only one of the listed calculators I use) because including key codes offer the advantage of providing a check (similar to a checksum and useful for long listings) that the correct keys were pressed.

Since Style 2 has the advantage of making program logic clearer, if Style 1 could be modified so keys are indented and aligned to the right (as below), both Style 1 and Style 2 advantages could be achieved (though with more work for the author! :)

Code:

Modified Style 1:
Example:   (15C)
001 ;  42, 21, 11 ; LBL A
002 ;  1 ;          1
003 ;  40 ;         +
004 ;  43, 32 ;     RTN

Another possibility is Style 2 for short programs and Style 1 for long programs.

[Garth Wilson]

When I used the TI-58c and 59 in the early- to mid-1980's which showed only numbers in the display, and I programmed lots, all the key codes were ingrained in my mind and very automatic; so when I wrote programs, I just wrote columns of numbers.  When I went to the HP-41 which showed the instructions' names in the LCD, I only wrote instructions, no key codes.

[toml_12953]

(04-15-2024 12:38 AM)Eddie W. Shore Wrote:  I don't remember if I asked this before but for calculators from the 70s/80s (25C, 65, 67, 12C, 11C, 15C, etc), but what style of listing would you prefer?

Style 1 where the key codes are included:
Example: (15C)
001 ; 42, 21, 11 ; LBL A
002 ; 1 ; 1
003 ; 40 ; +
004 ; 43, 32 ; RTN


Style 2 where it's just step numbers and keys:
001 LBL A
002 1
003 +
004 RTN


I've been listing my programs in style 1 and considering dropping the key codes.

If the labels were in a neat column, then I'd prefer the first style.

Code:

001 ;  42, 21, 11  ; LBL A
002 ;  1           ; 1
003 ; 40           ; +
004 ; 43, 32       ; RTN

[StephenG1CMZ]

Indenting those instructions looks like a lot of work, but the end result looks clearer.
I wonder whether having two listings would be any good:

Keycodes:
001 42,41
002 42,41
Instructions:
001 LBL
002 LBL

Probably not, but I just thought I'd ask the experts for their view.

[rprosperi]

Both are useful, for different reasons. The codes are useful if you are verifying what you have already entered, while the key instructions are better for entry or just studying the logic and technique used.

I think there's no question that Tom's suggestion is the best, but it takes more work, so that may not be what Eddie was looking for... Be careful what you ask for...

[Thomas Klemm]

I mainly use the format used by online emulators:

HP-15C

Code:

#  Program produced by JRPN 15C.
#  Generated 2024-4-15 13:33 Central European Summer Time.
#  Program occupies 7 bytes.

   000 {          } 
   001 { 42 21 11 } f LBL A
   002 {        1 } 1
   003 {       40 } +
   004 {    43 32 } g RTN

# End.

HP-16C

Code:

#  Program produced by JRPN 16C.
#  Generated 2024-4-15 13:53 Central European Summer Time.
#  Program occupies 7 bytes.

   000 {          } 
   001 { 43 22  A } g LBL A
   002 {        1 } 1
   003 {       40 } +
   004 {    43 21 } g RTN

# End.

HP-25C

Code:

01: 01       : 1
02: 51       : +

HP-29C

Code:

01: 15 13 00 : g LBL 0
02: 01       : 1
03: 51       : +
04: 15 12    : g RTN

HP-65

Code:

001: 23    : LBL
002: 11    : A
003: 01    : 1
004: 61    : +
005: 24    : RTN

HP-67

Code:

001: 31 25 11
002: 01
003: 61
004: 35 22

But I clip it to the relevant lines.
And in case of the HP-67 I would add the missing keys in a separate column.

[Eddie W. Shore]

It would be great if there was a tab tag ([tag]), that would help a lot.

[Thomas Klemm]

(04-15-2024 12:38 AM)Eddie W. Shore Wrote:  Example: (15C)
001 ; 42, 21, 11 ; LBL A
002 ; 1 ; 1
003 ; 40 ; +
004 ; 43, 32 ; RTN

This can be reformatted with:

Code:

perl -F\; -ane 'printf "%s;%12s;%s", @F' <<EOF
001 ; 42, 21, 11 ; LBL A
002 ; 1 ; 1
003 ; 40 ; +
004 ; 43, 32 ; RTN
EOF

001 ; 42, 21, 11 ; LBL A
002 ;          1 ; 1
003 ;         40 ; +
004 ;     43, 32 ; RTN

But the result must be entered into a code-block.

[Johnh]

When I write out my 15C programs, I just use the key descriptions without the codes. I find that easier to read and when checking, I get familiar with how they correspond to the codes.

But I don't have a worthwhile opinion about posting the codes here since I don't tend to enter programs by others, although I'm interested to read and learn about them

[vassilisprevelakis]

(04-15-2024 01:44 AM)Garth Wilson Wrote:  When I used the TI-58c and 59 in the early- to mid-1980's which showed only numbers in the display, and I programmed lots, all the key codes were ingrained in my mind and very automatic [...]

Same here, I started with a TI-59 and knew the op codes by heart, but still it was a pain to check a long program for correct entry. So when I upgraded to an HP-41C (which BTW I still have) I was extremely happy not to have to worry about key codes.

Recently I was given a TI-56 which even though it can connect to the PC100A print cradle (like the TI-58 and 59) it just prints the line number and op codes. No mnemonics.

So I wrote a small spreadsheet that will convert keycodes to mnemonics and thus produce a listing similar to what you would get with a TI-59 and PC100 printer.

The approach can, of course, be carried over to most calculators of the era with similar encodings.

Vassilis
http://www.series80.org