Post Reply 
An (i) for an i—29C’s usage
08-23-2019, 06:15 PM
Post: #1
An (i) for an i—29C’s usage
Hi all

As the 67 uses I for the storage directly into the I register and (i) was the indirection usage, why was the 19/29C’s i operator used for indirection operations (GTO i GSB i), etc.) and not (i) like the 67/97?

Thanks
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
08-24-2019, 12:00 AM
Post: #2
RE: An (i) for an i—29C’s usage
On the 19C/29C, the I register is register 0. I assume that the HP designers felt that the distinction between 0 and i was clear enough without using parentheses as a hint that indirect addressing is happening.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
08-24-2019, 12:36 AM
Post: #3
RE: An (i) for an i—29C’s usage
(08-24-2019 12:00 AM)Thomas Okken Wrote:  On the 19C/29C, the I register is register 0. I assume that the HP designers felt that the distinction between 0 and i was clear enough without using parentheses as a hint that indirect addressing is happening.

I hadn’t thought of that. That train of thinking helps me put things in perspective.

Thanks
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
08-24-2019, 01:46 AM
Post: #4
RE: An (i) for an i—29C’s usage
Hello,
As an old user of the 29c (since 83), I never have had problems to use those two sides of the Indirect Register; the reciprocal is not true: when I many years later acquired a 67, the use of I or (i) were - and nowadays is - problematic.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
08-24-2019, 05:10 AM
Post: #5
RE: An (i) for an i—29C’s usage
Archilog, ‘Problematic’? Please explain.

Thanks
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)