Sorry if this should be in the ez80 forum, but I think it goes here.

I was wondering if there was an equivalent to onblock for the CE? I wanted to use it to make a password program in basic, and it is annoying that people can just hit on to get around it.

Ask and you shall receive. Here's the relevant program:

OnBlockCE

Hope this helps!


Code:

I've always wondered: What happens if you activate OnBlock, run your program and forget to disable it again before the calculator auto powers down?
I mean a situation where you can't use On but the calculator is off.

With mine, the calculator automatically resets the interrupt controller when doing this. So; you will still be able to turn on your calculator, of course, and OnBlock will have been disabled.

That Mateo, what a productive and helpful guy. Thank you for addressing this concern, although I remain as suspicious as ever about the efficacy of BASIC password protection programs.

Thanks Mateo! Your awesome!

Haha, isn't that the truth. For those of you who missed the above link, I assembled one for the CSE calculator in addition to the CE version:

OnBlock CE: Download
OnBlock CSE: Download

I am making a password program for my calculator using OnBlock and TextLib, but I found a problem with the program. First, I use 0:Asm(prgmONBLOCK. Then, when I input the correct code, I use 1: Asm(prgmONBLOCK. However, if I have pressed the ON button before entering the correct code, it does not affect the program until that part. Then it does the ON break. Is there a way for you to make it so that the calculator does not know at all about the ON button being pressed? It doesn't really matter a lot, but it would make it more useful. I hope you know what I am talking about.

Fixed and updated. Might be a little bit before it is approved, however. Hope this helps!

Thanks! What did you change (I don't understand assembly, but I understand English explaining why stuff was happening)? Also, how hard would it be to make a program that would be like the Start-up app for the monochrome calculators if it can't be an app?

Edit: I was about to go try to download it and then I realized what you meant by it getting approved. At first I was confused and thought that you thought that people wouldn't like it. I guess I will see the new and improved version later.

Well, there are a few who oppose this, as it requires modification of the OS through writes to falsh and recalculating checksums and such. Technically, it is possible to do without this, but it wouldn't be very secure as a simple press of the reset button would delete the startup program. Anywho, as for what I changed, I simply made it so the the ON interrupt bit doesn't latch while running. If it latches, that means that it will eventually be triggered again once the interrupt is renabled.

How could a program modify the OS of the calculator? Is it because it can basically do anything in assembly (with the calculator's limitations)? Also, did Doors CSE modify the OS of my CSE, and does that make my calculator unstable, or is it okay because Doors is an app?

DoorsCSE does nothing of the sort. ZStart does, however. Literally anything can be done in assembly, as long as one knows what they are doing. The OS is just a program, like anything else. DoorsCSE uses provided functionality to take advantage of loading on start, specially the OFFSCRPT variable.

I would just like to point out that with TI being cool and updating OSes, OnBlock for the CE no longer works if you use any sort of getkey routine. Sorry about that

For those that care; here are the OS comparisons:

Original:

Code:


Updated OS:


Code:

Is there a way to stop people from just hitting 2nd + Quit? I understand that On Block for the Ti 84 Plus CE works well to stop people from just simply clicking that on key at the bottom of the calculator. I feel that, quite frankly, On Block is useless if one can just hit 2nd quit, which is I think is how most people quit programs.

Forgive me if this question has been asked many times or if there is a simple answer, I am not an expert of programming.

Have you attempted to run it for yourself and discover the answer?

Hi Guys,

When I run 0:asm(prgmONBLOCK in a program, and click the on button in the program, I will still receive an ERROR : BREAK error message. I have checked, and I will still receive that same message if I do the same exact command, but instead of doing 0:asm(prgmONBLOCK, I replace that 0 with a 1. The same error is displayed. Why might this be?