(HP-67/97) Othello for 67/97 40th anniversary
|
11-17-2016, 11:49 PM
Post: #1
|
|||
|
|||
(HP-67/97) Othello for 67/97 40th anniversary
This 199 steps program plays Othello*
The commented code and documentation is in the PDF attachments, English and French. *LBL A 1 STO E 8 . 8 STO B CLX STO C STO D *LBL a CLX STO 9 STO A RCL B CF2 GSB 9 X=0? F3? GTO 0 *LBL b 2 . 2 STO A *LBL c SF0 *LBL d RCL B STO I *LBL e RCL A 1 . 1 - X=0? CF0 X=0? SF2 RCL I + GSB 9 F3? CLX X=0? GTO 0 X<0? GTO 1 . 1 ST+ 9 GTO e *LBL 1 F1? X>0? GTO 0 F0? X>0? GTO 0 CF0 GTO d *LBL 0 RCL 9 FRC ST- 9 1 0 x x ST- 9 RCL A . 1 - STO A X<0? GTO 2 FRC . 2 X>Y? GTO c LSTX INT + STO A GTO c *LBL 2 F1? GTO 3 RCL B + STO B RCL C RCL 9 X≤Y? GTO 2 STO C LSTX STO D *LBL 2 RCL B X>0? GTO a RCL D X=0? GTO 3 STO B R/S SF1 GTO b *LBL 3 RCL E 0 X≤y? R/S *LBL B CF1 X=0? GTO A STO B SF1 SF0 1 CHS STO E GTO a *LBL 9 STO I SF3 INT X=0? RTN 9 X=Y? RTN LSTX FRC 1 0 x X≠0? X=Y? RTN CF3 RCL (i) X<>Y 4 X<>Y Yx STO 0 ÷ FRC 4 ST÷ 0 x INT 1 - RCL E STx 0 x x<0? RTN F1? F0? RTN F2? GTO 9 X=0? RTN SF2 *LBL 9 RCL 0 ST- (i) F2? ST- (i) RDN RTN *LBL E 8 STO I 2 1 8 4 5 *LBL 4 STO (i) DSZ I GTO 4 1 9 2 R/S ST+ 4 ST- 5 CLX *Othello® TM&©Othello,Co. and MegaHouse. |
|||
11-15-2019, 05:30 AM
Post: #2
|
|||
|
|||
RE: (HP-67/97) Othello for 67/97 40th anniversary
A wild thought: changing the representation base to 10 would allow the board registered to be displayed (printed)...
My 97 is half a continent away or I'd give it a go. Pauli |
|||
11-15-2019, 09:19 AM
Post: #3
|
|||
|
|||
RE: (HP-67/97) Othello for 67/97 40th anniversary
(11-15-2019 05:30 AM)Paul Dale Wrote: A wild thought: changing the representation base to 10 would allow the board registered to be displayed (printed)... Hi Paul, You're right. Thank you for your interest. I first started to write this in 2006 as a challenge that no 70's Othello game programmer (I know some of them) bet a penny on, knowing the limited capabilities of the 67/97. At the time, I wrote it on a 41 with the precious help of continuous memory, and I had not enough time to shrink it below 229 67/97-steps. Using base 4 instead of base 10 helped me squeeze the code a few steps but was not enough to go below 229. I found enough motivation (rage?) and a little time during 2016 and shrank the code to 199 steps. Staying below the 200 steps mark looked good to me, and I left things as is. Best, Jean-Marc |
|||
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|
User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)