• Please review our updated Terms and Rules here

BASIC-in-ROM in an IBM 5170. Why?

It's better to go into BASIC than to get the computer halted. There may even be a way to return to the operating system...

<clip>

This should theoretically work, as long as no other interrupts goes off durning step 1, 2 and 5. It also relays on that C-BASIC doesn't wipe out the interrupt vector table, and that interrupts are enabled durning runtime. Running BASIC programs that pokes above the first 64Kb should also be avoided.

But what's the point? And even more importantly, what commercial application does this?

I have never seen an application that went to ROM BASIC rather than halt the system (or even give the user an option to reboot).
 
But what's the point? And even more importantly, what commercial application does this?

There is really no point, I will agree on that, but the reason I was thinking about the program is because: 1. Because; if I for some unusual reason want to load C-Basic, I wouldn't need to reboot, 2. Because (doing it the 'dirty' way,) coding a program like that takes just a few seconds 3. I like "Compleetnes" (being able to run all three versions of basic from DOS).

About commercial value, it'll be only for personal interests. The hardware part may be expanded to a debugging card letting the user see what's on the bus and make the user take controll over all the IRQ lines on the Bus.

I have never seen an application that went to ROM BASIC rather than halt the system (or even give the user an option to reboot).

There are no application that does that, but it would actually be easy to make one. I may be able to do it in a few hours. On the hardware-part of it, the only real problem would be to convert the noisy signal of flipping a switch (the moment you flip it) into a clean digital signal. I guess a big capacitor may be enough.
 
This topic has touched on a few aspects of a programming project I want to do, and even gave me an idea for a lead-up that will be less time-consuming. Not that I have to worry about my time allocation, do I? Just finding a message from June 13th when I signed on last night lets me know I've been away from anything more than lurking lately.

The project? I'll have to tell that when I am a bit further along. Who knows how long that will take.
 
BTW, I wanted to experiment a bit with http://www.cnd.org/HYPLAN/yawei/basics.zip , on an XT clone...
So I ran RUNBASIC.COM under PCE emulator, it created ROMBASIC.COM which I ran on the clone, and it loaded successfully.
But POPBASIC.COM still claims "Your computer does not have ROM BASIC.", and BASIC/BASICA from PC DOS don't work either.
I don't know what's wrong, RUNBASIC.COM or PCE?

Could somebody please run RUNBASIC.COM on some 1981..1991 IBM and send me the ROMBASIC.COM file it creates?
 
I wonder if the same person who wrote POPBASIC.COM wrote the POPBASIC.DOC file. POPBASIC.COM checks for ROM basic at segment F600. Since a (normal) PC doesn't have RAM there, it's not possible to load a copy of ROM there.

cf. POPBASIC.COM code at location 592H and following.

Try loading your BASIC ROM image and using INT 18 to enter it.
 
I just ran the program in an XT, and then tried to use ROMBASIC.COM it created on an AT and on a 386 clone, and neither one worked.

I'll look at it with a debugger later and see what's going on.

In any case, if you want the ROMBASIC.COM, how should I send it to you?

Bill
 
This way it works, indeed.
Too bad it doesn't work as advertised, ie. with BASICA nad POPBASIC...

BASICA and POPBASIC both look to segment F600 for the ROM version. One might be able to hack BASICA.COM to use a different segment; I haven't looked. Generally, it's just easier to use GWBASIC.
 
Back
Top