Re: [M100] Questions about tokenizing BASIC in UNIX

On 26/9/22 15:52, John R. Hogerhuis wrote: Enabled by default. Huh. Weird considering both ends are going to be sending their own xon xoff. Not necessarily. How the Linux OS will respond to a program that has a port open to xon/xoff will depend on the type of port e.g. if it's a pty, it'll

Re: [M100] Questions about tokenizing BASIC in UNIX

On 26/9/22 18:44, Joshua O'Keefe wrote: If the kernel has DYNAMIC_DEBUG=y [1] then: https://stackoverflow.com/a/63682160 Thanks for that, will also have a poke later (gotta find my other FT2232 board as well). DYNAMIC_DEBUG is pretty neat!  It didn't e

Re: [M100] Questions about tokenizing BASIC in UNIX

> On Sep 25, 2022, at 8:59 PM, Daryl Tester > wrote: > > I've got a todo item to see how > to enable the dev_dbg() messages I looked, hoping to spare you from rebooting with debug enabled the old fashioned way. If the kernel has DYNAMIC_DEBUG=y [1] then: https://stackoverflow.com/a/63682160

Re: [M100] Questions about tokenizing BASIC in UNIX

Enabled by default. Huh. Weird considering both ends are going to be sending their own xon xoff. I guess whatever functionality it is creating must coexist with software flow control happening generated by the two parties. Or I am just thinking of the feature wrong altogether. Maybe it's a lookah

Re: [M100] Questions about tokenizing BASIC in UNIX

On 24/9/22 02:39, John R. Hogerhuis wrote: On Fri, Sep 23, 2022 at 2:59 AM Brian White mailto:b.kenyo...@gmail.com>> wrote: I believe all the right chip does is help, and make more code more likely to make it through Chip/driver wise the two things I've observed: Here's some extra Linu

Re: [M100] Questions about tokenizing BASIC in UNIX

you are right, that never really got sorted out. Would be good to pick that up again, and try to sort out, using low cost components, how to make that work. On Fri, Sep 23, 2022 at 2:00 PM Mike Stein wrote: > When Steve and I were playing with M100 to M100 communication over the > internet way

Re: [M100] Questions about tokenizing BASIC in UNIX

When Steve and I were playing with M100 to M100 communication over the internet way back when, he spent a fair bit of time trying to overcome the small buffer in the Model Ts but I don't think he could ever get it to work 100%. IIRC reducing the buffer size in the ethernet 'modem' down to one did s

Re: [M100] Questions about tokenizing BASIC in UNIX

On Fri, Sep 23, 2022 at 2:59 AM Brian White wrote: > > I believe all the right chip does is help, and make more code more likely > to make it through > Chip/driver wise the two things I've observed: You can configure the FTDI driver buffering threshold on Windows all the way down to 1 byte, whi

Re: [M100] Questions about tokenizing BASIC in UNIX

Terminal sessions aren't usually a problem unless you're sending a file to the Model T; manual typing in either direction isn't likely to overrun a buffer and whatever the T is connected to will probably be able to handle the data stream. Even receiving a file is usually not a problem if you're co

Re: [M100] Questions about tokenizing BASIC in UNIX

One way under Linux I have gotten around the issues of software flow control is to use screen for my serial terminal sessions. It has software flow control support built in. A must if you want to use ssh or another app that doesn't play well with stty. Brian On Fri, Sep 23, 2022, 5:59 AM Brian W

Re: [M100] Questions about tokenizing BASIC in UNIX

I don't believe this is enough to ensure clean data. I must have a dozen real ftdi adapters from different manufacturers and I keep having to increase the per-byte sleep in dlplus' bootstrapper and tsend.ps1 and PDDuino as I discover new basic programs to feed in. Some programs will ingest fine at

Re: [M100] Questions about tokenizing BASIC in UNIX

On Thu, Sep 22, 2022 at 5:32 PM B 9 wrote: > > Of particular note for troubleshooting is that, if some of the data gets > transferred, but it is garbled or you get a ?DS ERROR, then the problem > is that your PC's serial port does not support "ON CHIP SOFTWARE FLOW > CONTROL". One solution is to

Re: [M100] Questions about tokenizing BASIC in UNIX

working on trying to get >> some more Backpacks made. I think you could use this same idea for any sort >> of serial loading of programs. >> >> >> >> Jeff Birt >> >> >> >> *From:* M100 *On Behalf Of *B 9 >> *Sent:* Wednes

Re: [M100] Questions about tokenizing BASIC in UNIX

ssues still abound for all. We are working on trying to get > some more Backpacks made. I think you could use this same idea for any sort > of serial loading of programs. > > > > Jeff Birt > > > > *From:* M100 *On Behalf Of *B 9 > *Sent:* Wednesday, July 27, 2022 2

Re: [M100] Questions about tokenizing BASIC in UNIX

Subject: Re: [M100] Questions about tokenizing BASIC in UNIX What a nifty use of the Backpack's command line interface! I saw your YouTube on the Backpack last year and thought they looked intriguing. Did the supply chain issues ever get resolved? —b9

Re: [M100] Questions about tokenizing BASIC in UNIX

On Tue, Jul 26, 2022 at 5:15 AM wrote: > A typical issue when trying to load a DO and convert it to a BA is not > having enough RAM for both copies in memory at the same time. One of the > Backpack owners whipped up this little program to solve that problem. It > loads in one line at a time from

Re: [M100] Questions about tokenizing BASIC in UNIX

I was looking for a little pokes and machine code but it ain't there. All BASIC. Probably super slow too. But clever nonetheless. -- John.

Re: [M100] Questions about tokenizing BASIC in UNIX

Laddiealpha and probably other file services only support BA and maybe B? to indicate tokenized files. Not 3 letters and no distinction between platforms. It's up to the user to either load a DO file or make sure the BA file is appropriate for their platform. The only caveat is Laddiealpha does a

Re: [M100] Questions about tokenizing BASIC in UNIX

: LOAD D 160 END 200 A=INPUT$(1,2):PRINT A;:IF A<>C THEN 200 ELSE RETURN From: M100 On Behalf Of B 9 Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2022 1:46 AM To: m...@bitchin100.com Cc: Model 100 Discussion Subject: Re: [M100] Questions about tokenizing BASIC in UNIX Thanks for all the tips, everyone! DNLOAD.BA Description: Binary data

Re: [M100] Questions about tokenizing BASIC in UNIX

Thanks for all the tips, everyone! I had no idea VirtualT was scriptable via telnet. That is so convenient that I almost didn't bother writing my own tokenizer. But I realized that, now that I have a table of the tokens , I co

Re: [M100] Questions about tokenizing BASIC in UNIX

If B9's UNIX BASIC is somewhat compatible and he promises not to laugh or criticize I can try to find the Tbasic source code. m - Original Message - From: Brad Grier To: m...@bitchin100.com Sent: Monday, July 25, 2022 3:32 PM Subject: Re: [M100] Questions about token

Re: [M100] Questions about tokenizing BASIC in UNIX

Club100 Member directory for Mike Stein has Entoke.exe - http://www.club100.org/memfiles/index.php?&direction=0&order=nom&directory=Mike%20Stein And a wayback machine crawl reveals detoke.exe - https://web.archive.org/web/2017155020/http://www.xibalba.com/website100/software.html On Mon, Jul

Re: [M100] Questions about tokenizing BASIC in UNIX

There are tokenise and detokenise programs for DOS, in the Compuserve archive, I think. On Sun, 24 Jul 2022 at 23:42, John R. Hogerhuis wrote: > Not as far as I know. I think Robert Pigford's program is it. PowerBASIC > is a compiler though so I guess its binaries would run under a Linux DOS > e

Re: [M100] Questions about tokenizing BASIC in UNIX

M100/M102 and T200 all use the same token format, but 8201A/8300 is different from the other 3 variants. You could try using M100 VirtualT with 32K to tokenize and save the .BA file, then load it into T200. Ken On 7/24/22 11:42 PM, John R. Hogerhuis wrote: Not as far as I know. I think Robert

Re: [M100] Questions about tokenizing BASIC in UNIX

Not as far as I know. I think Robert Pigford's program is it. PowerBASIC is a compiler though so I guess its binaries would run under a Linux DOS emulator. I've certainly run DOS assemblers like TASM as part of a GNU/Linux Makefile. You would need a tokenizer for each BASIC variant you want to sup

[M100] Questions about tokenizing BASIC in UNIX

Hi! I keep running out of space when downloading an ASCII BASIC program and then using *LOAD*, *SAVE* to tokenize it on the Tandy 200. I'd like to be able to tokenize on my UNIX host system before downloading it to my T200. What I've found so far: - Robert Pigford wrote a Model 100 Tokenizer t