[sebhc] HASL-8 Bug/Corruption?

Walter Moore waltm22 at comcast.net
Fri May 14 11:14:58 CDT 2004

When I looked at Dave's offending code sequence, It sure seemed to me that
there was a possibility that an extraneous zero byte might have entered the
Code at 0x320E when the original tape was last read or maybe when it was
written.  It was just one of those "programmer" things where you want to
take a look at it and double check it.

So it was time to get out the old H8-5 card and try and load my copy of
HASL-8.  After four or five attempts, I actually got something on the tape
to load, but the loaded image ended somewhere in the 065.xxx rage.  I think
it was TED-8.  So I tried the next image on the tape (The TED-8 and HASL-8
came on the same tape, with each image written twice).  It actually loaded!
Wow.  It was long enough too!

So I poked around to look at the code sequence.  The instructions didn't
match what Dave reported from the emulator.  I did find the "SAVE?" text,
followed by some calls and tried to follow them.  No such luck.

My thoughts were that I had a different version of HASL-8 than what is in
the archive.  So I decided to hook a terminal up to the card and actually
run the program so I could get a version number.  That required removing the
card to change jumpers.  Just to let you know how long it had been since I
last used the card, it was jumpered for a 300 baud 20mA current loop from
back when I had an H-9 and LA36 Decwriter II, say 1979.

After changing the jumpers and hoping I hooked the terminal up correctly, I
reinstalled the card and tried to load the tape.  No such luck.  I haven't
been able to load anything since.  I plan to run the tests in the manual
this weekend and recalibrate the card.

Where is all this leading to...?

In looking at the archives, there isn't any version information in the file
names or anywhere else that I saw.  I think we need to have this information
available.  For example, I have Extended Benton Harbor Basic versions
10.01.00 and 10.02.00 on tape (don't know if they are good).  Does anyone
have suggestions on filename format?  Or do we go with a tree whenever there
is more than one version.  Now I'll throw in the problem where two people
upload the same version, but there is a difference of a couple of bytes.  If
both copies work, then how is that to be resolved?


Delivered by the SEBHC Mailing List

More information about the Sebhc mailing list