|
Buttons? Who needs buttons when we got ICONS ?
Software rusts. Simon Stephenson, ca 1994. So does this signature. me, 2012
|
|
|
|
|
u must be very brave to do such things...
Caveat Emptor.
"Progress doesn't come from early risers – progress is made by lazy men looking for easier ways to do things." Lazarus Long
|
|
|
|
|
I checked this and you're right.
Right click the Toolbox window and select "Reset Toolbox".
It should show up now 
The reset messed up some icons on the Toolbox, but a second reset fixed that too.
|
|
|
|
|
Nope, still not there...
Exception up = new Exception("Something is really wrong.");
throw up;
|
|
|
|
|
Weird, that worked for me.
I'm out of ideas then 
|
|
|
|
|
Didn't you know, buttons have been replaced by velcro!
|
|
|
|
|
Last I heard on one of an MS' Win?-team teaser pre-announcements ... in response to a message I posted ... was Nov, 2020 for something as usable as WinForm Controls.
«One day it will have to be officially admitted that what we have christened reality is an even greater illusion than the world of dreams.» Salvador Dali
|
|
|
|
|
Zoom murder: A son stabbed and killed his father during a meeting, police say - CNN[^]
The response from the competition was swift and fierce:
- Microsoft: This would never have happened if they used Skype. Mainly because it rarely works.
- Apple: Police would have been able to catch the suspect 15 minutes earlier if they'd used Facetime instead, because Apple products track your every move.
- Google: They should have used Google Meets. It's been in beta for only 10 years.
- Signal: Stupid kid. If he'd used Signal, this wouldn't have even made the news.
/ravi
|
|
|
|
|
oops sorry about the news. But the responses are funny.
|
|
|
|
|
Why did CNN reach out to Zoom? Are they suggesting that the Zoom application could have done something to stop the son?
|
|
|
|
|
Ravi Bhavnani wrote: Apple products track your every move
You're gonna shatter some people's world with a statement like this...
|
|
|
|
|
So, Amityville horror isn't just a movie.
|
|
|
|
|
I was thinking of writing a 6502 processor emulator in C#, but the trouble is that every ROM I could get to test it with it is protected meaning I can't just download it from somewhere, at least not legally. I need an old Apple ][ or Commodore 64 ROM. Even an old NES game or two would work. Without that, all I've got are homebrew ROMs and I don't know that I can rely on them for my testing.
Why is this stuff still protected? Nobody cares about Commodore 64s or Apple ][s anymore. I can kind of see the NES restrictions because they still have some value, but really, the market for the ROMs of the former computers is slim to none.
Real programmers use butterflies
|
|
|
|
|
honey the codewitch wrote: Why is this stuff still protected?
Because quite a bit of IP law is an ass?
|
|
|
|
|
Real programmers use butterflies
|
|
|
|
|
This reminds of something that happened in the late 1980s. Where I went to college there was a very old mainframe. Several years after graduation some friends decided to write an emulator for it in C, of course. Eventually they got it to work and were able to load and run old programs for it. The amusing part is they ran some performance tests and they found their emulator on an IBM PC-AT with an 80826 ran faster than the actual mainframe did. That PC ran at 5MHz I think. I think the mainframe was a Control Data but I am not sure.
With the speed of today's hardware, your emulator is likely to be faster than those old 6502-based systems.
"They have a consciousness, they have a life, they have a soul! Damn you! Let the rabbits wear glasses! Save our brothers! Can I get an amen?"
|
|
|
|
|
Isn't that like the Intel 432: It was said that the emulator running on an 8086 was faster than the actual 432 chip.
|
|
|
|
|
I had not read that before and certainly don't doubt it. I think in the end the 432 was more an intellectual exercise than anything else.
"They have a consciousness, they have a life, they have a soul! Damn you! Let the rabbits wear glasses! Save our brothers! Can I get an amen?"
|
|
|
|
|
Absolutely, assuming it's not a "modern" 6502 but running at some insane clock speed. 
This chip powered the old Apple ][ machines, the original Nintendo, the Commodore 64 and some others. They're very modest in terms of typical performance.
Real programmers use butterflies
|
|
|
|
|
Then switch to the Z80.
AFAIK ZX Spectrum ROMs are not protected any more.
|
|
|
|
|
I have no familiarity with the Z80 processor. I have a lot of familiarity with the 6502. It would be a whole lot of extra work for me to implement the Z80 because of the learning curve.
Real programmers use butterflies
|
|
|
|
|
Z80 assembly is... beautiful.
|
|
|
|
|
A word to the wise: I don't know how you want to go about your project but emulating any of those old processors is a fairly trivial matter. The surrounding hardware is a completely different ball game. In many cases it doesn't even make sense to emulate the video or audio circuitry because you are targeting different devices.
What you can probably do is to take the ROM entry points and treat them as black boxes and reimplement them to fit your system. For C64, I've seen a list of Commodore 64 standard KERNAL functions[^] that can serve as a starting point. There seems to be also a listing of the C64 Kernal that can serve as an inspiration for your implementations.
From a legal point of view, you would be implementing an API. I know that Oracle takes the view that this is an IP infringement but there are many lawyers who disagree with them. At any rate, you are probably a fish too small to fry for any of these big companies (no disrespect intended ).
Mircea
|
|
|
|
|
Don't tell the copyright trolls but I've built an NES emulator in C# before. I understand what you mean by the surrounding hardware. The only tricks with implementing the 6502 is to do cycle counting, handle undocumented opcodes, and duplicate bugs in the original chip, since code expects it.
Real programmers use butterflies
|
|
|
|
|
honey the codewitch wrote: Nobody cares about Commodore 64s
I care about the C64... I care... 
I was legitimately excited to get (my first) C64, with a good size game collection, and working 1541 disk drive this last Christmas. Now I have a computer several years older than myself (though I don't know who's feeling the age more. We could both use some lubed joints.)
On a serious note, I am surprised those ROMs are still protected. I guess, with the community that revolves around both, I expected little barriers to doing whatever with the hardware/software.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
