qbit wrote:
I was never a RETI fan, either... preferred RETIX.

--
frosty (expects two guys in the group will get it.)

Yup

"frosty" <frostyj (AT) bogus (DOT) tld> wrote

Thanks, Chuck!

I meant two guys besides me...

Anyone? Bueller?

--
frosty


Chandru Murthi wrote:

"frosty" wrote:
Never used RETI. Why setup BMS when you don't have to?

Dan is on my killfile list again until he learns how to behave.
If anyone sees anything reasonable from him, please let me know.
Until then I'm not reading any more of his crap, even if he does
accidentally spark a discussion of assembler subroutines.

T

Tony Gravagno wrote:
I'm curious whether Dan does this when he goes off a medication or when
he chooses his own self-medication. What is the pattern, Dan?
Whatever it is, fix it again the way you have in the past, if you can
figure that out. I'm sure you would prefer to be yourself and we would
prefer you to be a contributing member of the community.

"Tony Gravagno" <g6q3x9lu53001 (AT) sneakemail (DOT) com.invalid> wrote

Not 'setup' BMS ? I think you needed to do that for RETI _and_ RETIX. With
the former your just relieved of terminating the item-id with an AM (ie:
leave BMS on last byte of id - RETI will add the AM). Of course it was all a
long time ago..... could well be way off base...

dave

frosty wrote:
I'm with you guys. I was aware of RETI, but never saw the point.

Luke

"dave" wrote:

Flying without a map here. I think you setup BMSBEG for both, but BMS
was setup only for RETI because it didn't know where the end of the ID
was. I don't remember what pointed to the ID or how we knew how the
ID was terminated. If the ID is already terminated then you could use
RETIX (cuz it used SICD internally?), otherwise RETI needed some clue
about how far to scan to get the ID. I think the general practice (if
there is any such thing in VASM) was that when you stored an ID you
terminated it with a delimiter to avoid these issues, and that's why
only RETIX was necessary.

(Completely clueless and shouldn't have chimed in, sorry.)
T

I could be wrong, but I think RETI used BMSBEG and BMSEND to point to the
beginning and ending or the item id within the (relatively) small BMS
workspace. IIRC it was only 50 bytes on R83 and wasn't enlarged until after
d3 6.0

Kind of like the difference between WritOB and WrtLin. Either print from
bmsbeg to ob or to a delimiter depending on which you wanted.

Mark

"Tony Gravagno" <g6q3x9lu53001 (AT) sneakemail (DOT) com.invalid> wrote

A long, long time ago, in the days before MIID/SID etc, you could only copy
1 byte with INC r1, MCI r2,r1 (no MII either) so when you decided you'd
copied the item-id to the BMS work area (come to think of it, how would you
know?), the BMS reg was left on the LAST byte of the id. Hence, in the
wisdom of the ancients, the call to RETI which saved you one instruction.

Chandru

"Tony Gravagno" <g6q3x9lu53001 (AT) sneakemail (DOT) com.invalid> wrote