Re: Data Becker CBM-8000 hi-res graphics

From: David Holz <>
Date: Wed, 6 Sep 2017 00:59:49 -0700
Message-ID: <>
On 09/05/2017 11:44 PM, Baltissen, GJPAA (Ruud) wrote:
> To be honest, no. No offence meant and I really appreciate your
> effort. What I'm doing now is comparing the source code for the C64
> with the one generated by my disassembler. So far the structure of the
> first 4 KB of the BASIC is almost the same. This enable me to give a
> name to the various RAM addresses used by the 8032. Having found the
> names, I did a second disassembly where I told my disassembler to use
> the found names. What I'm doing now is 1) copying the comments in
> general and those after the instructions and 2) giving the various
> jumps and subroutines a name. For example: P_ FFCC becomes
> CloseIoChannls. Once all important labels have name, I'll run a
> program to export these labels. These will be fed to my disassembler
> again and then I will use it on the DB ROM so the list I gave you in a
> previous email will show understandable labels instead of these P_xxxx
> ones.

So have you not started on the disassembly of the DB code proper yet?  I
can share the progress I made yesterday, which basically covers all the
graphics routines so far, from which I derived the jump table I posted.
I actually referred to
the most for understanding the PET ROM calls, so I only focused on
fleshing out the DB code itself.

There's a text file copy/pasted from the disassembler display, as well
as the .wfdis file to continue working on it (or just to view a
hyperlinked version) with

I was able to bang out that disassembly quite quickly yesterday, but I
certainly welcome more users to WFDis to keep fleshing it out, as it's
definitely got a lot of "quality of life" issues remaining.  Not sure
I'm going to continue working on this particular ROM at the moment,
though, since the gist of the graphics routines are pretty established now.

       Message was sent through the cbm-hackers mailing list
Received on 2017-09-06 09:00:07

Archive generated by hypermail 2.2.0.