Hello Tristan!
> IIRC, fMSX-DOS uses the OPL3 and not wave based emulation.
>
> BTW. I don't think wave (pcm?) based emulation will do any good. A
> mathematical emulation of 2-operator FM synthesis would be more
> suitable. The OPLL has some pretty hard to emulate stuff (hardware
> voices) which
Albert Beevendorp soltó algo asà como:
> >You mean in BASIC? In assembly, it's BIOS call #0180 and #0183.
>
> I knew that already, I do mean in Basic.
DEFUSR=&H180: A=USR(0)
DEFUSR=&H183: A=USR(0)
:)
Un saludo,
Jose Angel Morente ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
([EMAIL PROTECTED])
*MS
On Fri, 08 Sep 2000, you wrote:
> > Who need numbers in an arbitrary base anyway? Hexadecimal, decimal and
> > binary are enough. Octal is supported by many languages, but it is rarely
> > used in practice (the only use I know is Unix file permissions).
>
> Arbitrary base is easily implemented an
At 17:03 8-9-00 +0200, you wrote:
> > Yes, fMSX-DOS has a pretty good OPLL emulation.
>I asked for a wave based OPLL emulation.
>fMSX-DOS emulates OPLL by using the OPL3 generator contained
>inside my Sound Blaster.
You didn't write that (I think). You just asked for good FM-emulation. In
that c
> Yes, a timeout is needed for such situations. But as long as the other
> side is connected (and running an os with JUMP drivers), everything should
> be ok and no locks are possible.
You should _never_ assume that... One flawd bit on the ack line and... The
receiver thinks he sent an ack and wa
> > Not at all. Linux knows the `network driver' as a special object. I
should
> > just write a network driver, so the parallel port is treated as a
network
> > device. Then you can just use the connection as if it is an ethernet
card
> > , which means there is no need for a point to point link. I
> Alex Wulms wrote:
> > However, on 8-bits and on 16-bits systems, octals are not so convenient
to
> > use, for obvious reasons.
>
> If you are reading sectors and you see each byte as octal you can read
> Z80 ml much more easilly.
> For example with 101 then you can see directly that it means "ld
On Fri, 8 Sep 2000, Maarten ter Huurne wrote:
> > > For Linux, the best solution would be to write a serial driver for
> > > JoyNet. Then pppd can be used to connect to UZIX and you can use the
> > > existing PPP network device.
> >
> > Not at all. Linux knows the `network driver' as a special ob
On Fri, 8 Sep 2000, Maarten ter Huurne wrote:
> Error detection other than CRC. Under the assumption that there are only
> 1-bit errors, the protocol itself can detect errors. I'm not sure this
> assumption is correct, but gathering statistical evidence (hours of testing)
> should tell us more
On Fri, 08 Sep 2000, you wrote:
> > JoyNet singal propagation doesn't need waits that long. On 3.5MHz I got
> > speeds of about 3.5 kilobyte per second, that is 3500*8=28000 bits per
> > second, which is 125 clocks for a total 1-bit cycle (data + ack). Given
> > the fact that there are quite a fe
On Fri, 08 Sep 2000, you wrote:
> > The protocol can be fixed: adding CRC and a timeout is sufficient. But I
> > think a more elegant solution is possible, where you wouldn't need a CRC.
>
> What do you mean with that? Some error-correction algoritm in the protocol
> (equivalent to a CRC)? Or UDP
I'd like to make a good PCM emulation of a OPLL. But i'm
still looking for some good and free source code.
>
> Hello Albert,
>
> > Yes, fMSX-DOS has a pretty good OPLL emulation.
>
> :
>
> I'm not sure about this.
>
> I asked for a wave based OPLL emulation.
> fMSX-DOS emulates OPLL by
Hello Albert,
> Yes, fMSX-DOS has a pretty good OPLL emulation.
:
I'm not sure about this.
I asked for a wave based OPLL emulation.
fMSX-DOS emulates OPLL by using the OPL3 generator contained
inside my Sound Blaster.
I'd like to get a MSX emulator that uses the Sound Blaster PCM
for emul
> Oops, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (I think? Shit, I should have let him reply
himself!)
> or [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hmm this way it is just fine ;)
Greetz,
Sander
Who has no time at all at the moment, but will send all people that ordered
one
or more chips a message soon, because it seems that today we hav
I only replied to what I didn't agree with or what I had something to say
about. Other things I cut out.
On Wed, 6 Sep 2000, Maarten ter Huurne wrote:
> The protocol can be fixed: adding CRC and a timeout is sufficient. But I
> think a more elegant solution is possible, where you wouldn't need
"B. Wijnen" wrote:
>
> > For example with 101 then you can see directly that it means "ld a,b"
> > The entire Z80 is verry octal based in its opcode structure.
>
> True, except that 101 is `ld b,c':
> 0 b
> 1 c
> 2 d
> 3 e
> 4 h
> 5 l
> 6 (hl)
> 7 a
>
Sorry, I rotated the list in my mind.
Also
On Tue, 5 Sep 2000, Maarten ter Huurne wrote:
> > Small numbers of cycles are not possible. But usually, the number of
> > cycles needed is about 50 or 100.
>
> JoyNet singal propagation doesn't need waits that long. On 3.5MHz I got
> speeds of about 3.5 kilobyte per second, that is 3500*8=2800
On Tue, 5 Sep 2000, Maarten ter Huurne wrote:
> On Tue, 05 Sep 2000, you wrote:
>
> > The way numbers are written may be
> > different. Here's how my assembler does it:
> > starting with a number 0-9, a hexadecimal number is expected.
> > starting with %, a decimal number is expected.
> > starti
On Fri, 8 Sep 2000, David Heremans wrote:
> If you are reading sectors and you see each byte as octal you can read
> Z80 ml much more easilly.
> For example with 101 then you can see directly that it means "ld a,b"
> The entire Z80 is verry octal based in its opcode structure.
True, except that
> Hah, that was Sander Zuidema. Mail him at [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Oops, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (I think? Shit, I should have let him reply himself!)
or [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Best regards,
Manuel
---
Pre-PS: After 30/9/2000, I cannot use this address anymore. Therefore,
from 25/9/2000, please se
Hi Mauricio,
That person is Sander Zuidema [[EMAIL PROTECTED]].
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
> Mauricio Braga
> Sent: Friday, September 08, 2000 12:27 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: V9958 and FM again
>
>
> Hello.
>
> Hello.
>
> Some time ago, someone (I don't remember his name) was asking for people
> wanting
> to buy v9958 and FM. Well, I want one fm and a v9958 too, and there's a
> lot
> of brazilian people that wants it too. Ademir will for sure want at
> least 20 of them to
> use in his new MSX motherboa
Hello.
Some time ago, someone (I don't remember his name) was asking for people
wanting
to buy v9958 and FM. Well, I want one fm and a v9958 too, and there's a
lot
of brazilian people that wants it too. Ademir will for sure want at
least 20 of them to
use in his new MSX motherboards (ACE002). The
"Airam Rguez." wrote:
> > > which three new types? I only have seen one ;)
> >
> > You know what I mean.
>
> well...
>
> > A lot of people are creating new computers based on the MSX standard
> > Some use Z180, others Z380, etc. etc. etc.
> > In order to keep MSX a standard like it always
Alex Wulms wrote:
> However, on 8-bits and on 16-bits systems, octals are not so convenient to
> use, for obvious reasons.
>
If you are reading sectors and you see each byte as octal you can read
Z80 ml much more easilly.
For example with 101 then you can see directly that it means "ld a,b"
Th
25 matches
Mail list logo
