Ti asm in 28 days problem

[Sven.Thomas0]

Yes, what the 28 day tutorial says is very much wrong. The lower 8-bits are random, so you will need to overwrite 257 bytes (not 256). A simple way to achieve this is:

[asdf]

Or something like this:

[jammasterz]

Thank you!
Thats very sad that the whole byte is random, but i guess ill have to live with that .

I've made a few adjustments, it still doen't work(the program executes, but nothing is displayer when enter is pressed), but ill try to figure it out(probably key input problem ):

[Sven.Thomas0]

Ah, try ld hl,$9AB6 (if I counted right) or just do ld hl,msg

[jammasterz]

Nope, the adress is right. I'm trying to figure out whats wrong, but i just cant find it.

BTW, i cant use msg because the program is orginally writen at $9D95, and when i move it the adress would be wrong. Thts why i calculated a new adress with:
msg - $9D95 + 4 +9A9A. I dont know why but i gave me a wrong adress anyway, so i used a direct one, $9AB4, which is correct

[asdf]

You could also try "$9A9A + (msg - interrupt)".
Also, bit 7,z checks this bit:
X1111111, not 1111111X.

Try this out (this works for the + key)

[jammasterz]

Yeah i just noticed it. Acually its bit 0.

[asdf]

Yeah, but if you use enter you will jump into the interrupt immediately after running the program (because you won't be able to release the key fast enough), so i changed it to bit 1, the [+] key. The code above works for me

[jammasterz]

Thank you so much for help!

It displays hey like 2-3 times when the key is pressed but it works

[asdf]

The reason for that is because the code is so fast (and the interrupt is run over a hundred times a second). You could have another variable in safeRAM which you store 1 to if + is pressed (and if that variable = 1, don't display hey) and set to 0 if it is not pressed. That way it'll only display once. Try holding down + and see what happens

[jammasterz]

Yeah, but then i'd have a problem with when to reset it, so that it can wait for the key to pressed again. Maybe there is a way to reset the port so that when you do IN (1), A you get FF? (There must be, because TI did it). Ill try to look through the code, but i can allready see that there is a lot of jumps, so its gonna take some while.

[asdf]

What I mean is something like this:

[jammasterz]

Yeah, and the problem with this is that the message display will only be executed once, becuase you dont reset the flag. What i would do is to make a counter that count the executions of the interupt. For example:

1. I know that interrupts trigger every 1/140 of a sec. Therefore i can make a 1 byte counter at $9872.
2. If the counter equals to 0 and the + button is pressed- display
3. If the counter is less than 140, increment, don't display.
4. If the counter is 140 set it to 0.

I think this should work, but the best way to do this is to find a way to know if the key is held down or not. I saw once a port(i checked it, it is port 4, bit 3) where you could find a flag like this, but only for [ON] key.

[asdf]

Please read through the code again carefully, in particular:

[jammasterz]

I apologize, i in fact didn't look through it carefully. For fun i wrote a similiar one before reading your code, and it works as well Thanks

[asdf]

Don't worry about it, and it's even better that you wrote your own code, congrats!

[jammasterz]

Okay i've got a few more problems. Firstable i want to say that im not using TI-83, but TI-84.

When i loaded the interrupt program onto my calc, it didnt display anything.
And when i translated the code into OP- codes and typed it in hex form with AsmPrgm token the calc crashed.

So my first question is: Are there any diffrences between 83 and 84? By diffrences i mean diffrences in memory alocation, diffrent mechanisms and so on.

2. Why does the calculator crash when im typing the OP-codes directly? Im sure i didnt do any mistake with the numbers.

[asdf]

Between the TI-83 there are some differences in the layout of the calc's memory (different saferam locations, programs are run from a different location in memory, etc.), but programs for the 83+ should in theory work fine on the 84+. What is the code you've compiled/are trying to load?

[jammasterz]

The corrected version of this, which worked fine on the emulator.

[asdf]

Hmm, i don't actually have a calc anymore to test it on, but i don't see what could cause any problems. Try adding a di at the start of your interrupt routine and an ei before jumping to $003A (though i assume _PutS disables interrupts...). You could also try loading your interrupt somewhere else, maybe saferam1, i dunno. Maybe ThunderBolt or someone else knows what's going on?