Threaded Mode | Linear Mode

WrongWay · (This post was last modified: 02-20-2022 05:05 AM by WrongWay.)

This was a program my father wrote, it appears to be a flight planning application. I could use some help deciphering it. It does run. Run size and set to 100 to fully load the program

2022/02/19
corrected the original program and attached it to this post

bbergman · 12-15-2020, 05:23 PM

Sounds like a project for Geoff Quickfall Smile

WrongWay · (This post was last modified: 12-15-2020 06:44 PM by WrongWay.)

I wasn't sure if it belonged in the software library as it lacks documentation. Any help in deciphering what is going on is greatly appreciated

CY-CL · 12-15-2020, 06:48 PM

Set Size to 100

Ángel Martin · (This post was last modified: 05-13-2021 07:16 AM by Ángel Martin.)

(12-15-2020 06:06 AM)WrongWay Wrote: This was a program my father wrote, it appears to be a flight planning application. I could use some help deciphering it. It does run. Run size and set to 100 to fully load the program

In line 16 there's a GT0 CF but LBL "CF" is nowhere to be found. Is this a typo??
GTO C doesn't look likely either given where the instruction is: no previous test and no LBL after it.
Would be good if you can double check the listing...

Code:

X=0?

GTO 00

SF 03

GTO CF

FS? 00

GTO 01

LBL 00

C.Ret · 05-19-2021, 03:33 PM

There is also a REGMOVE command, this code may need the XFunctions module ?

Stevetuc · (This post was last modified: 05-20-2021 10:00 AM by Stevetuc.)

(05-13-2021 07:13 AM)Ángel Martin Wrote:
(12-15-2020 06:06 AM)WrongWay Wrote: This was a program my father wrote, it appears to be a flight planning application. I could use some help deciphering it. It does run. Run size and set to 100 to fully load the program

In line 16 there's a GT0 CF but LBL "CF" is nowhere to be found. Is this a typo??
GTO C doesn't look likely either given where the instruction is: no previous test and no LBL after it.
Would be good if you can double check the listing...

Code:

X=0? GTO 00 SF 03 GTO CF FS? 00 GTO 01 LBL 00

It looks like the CF flag is being used for indirection
Ie if CF= 03 GTO CF > GTO LBL 03

Ángel Martin · 05-21-2021, 05:21 AM

(05-20-2021 09:59 AM)Stevetuc Wrote: It looks like the CF flag is being used for indirection
Ie if CF= 03 GTO CF > GTO LBL 03

I don't think so; if this was the case when are the instructions that follow executed?

twdeckard · 05-22-2021, 01:11 AM

(05-21-2021 05:21 AM)Ángel Martin Wrote:
(05-20-2021 09:59 AM)Stevetuc Wrote: It looks like the CF flag is being used for indirection
Ie if CF= 03 GTO CF > GTO LBL 03

I don't think so; if this was the case when are the instructions that follow executed?

Is it a clever synthetic though? couldn’t you use the first (top) 10 keys as surrogates for 00-10 in STO and RCL and GTO?

I think a piece of the program is missing though, there aren’t routines sensitive to flag 03?

Todd

Massimo Gnerucci · 05-22-2021, 05:07 AM

(05-22-2021 01:11 AM)twdeckard Wrote: couldn’t you use the first (top) 10 keys as surrogates for 00-10 in STO and RCL and GTO?

Yes, but 01-10.

WrongWay · 02-19-2022, 10:40 PM

There might have been a typo at my hand. I will rescan the tapes and see if I can transcribe them better. I've seen mention of some USB hardware that might be of use but no idea what i need to do to make that a reality

WrongWay · 02-20-2022, 12:15 AM

(05-13-2021 07:13 AM)Ángel Martin Wrote:
(12-15-2020 06:06 AM)WrongWay Wrote: This was a program my father wrote, it appears to be a flight planning application. I could use some help deciphering it. It does run. Run size and set to 100 to fully load the program

In line 16 there's a GT0 CF but LBL "CF" is nowhere to be found. Is this a typo??
GTO C doesn't look likely either given where the instruction is: no previous test and no LBL after it.
Would be good if you can double check the listing...

Code:

X=0? GTO 00 SF 03 GTO CF FS? 00 GTO 01 LBL 00

Yes, this should be GTO "C"

WrongWay · (This post was last modified: 02-20-2022 05:18 AM by WrongWay.)

I tried compiling this program and I can't seem to get it to run on V41, it gets to STO 50 and returns NONEXISTANT. How is it possible?

Answer: It requires Synthetic Programming

twdeckard · 02-20-2022, 10:25 AM

Wrong way, did you pull the program down? could you repost it?

Best
Todd

twdeckard · 02-20-2022, 11:16 AM

Wrong way, did you pull the program down? could you repost it?

Best
Todd

C.Ret · 02-20-2022, 11:44 AM

(02-20-2022 05:06 AM)WrongWay Wrote: I tried compiling this program and I can't seem to get it to run on V41, it gets to STO 50 and returns NONEXISTANT. How is it possible?

Are you sure you were using the correct SIZE parameter ?

WrongWay · 02-20-2022, 06:30 PM

Great question! I am not sure I am using the correct size parameter. This code was found in a box of magnetic strips and there is no documentation about it anywhere.

WrongWay · 02-20-2022, 06:40 PM

JETLOG program attached. for some reason I can't attache raw files, but the zip file contains the raw

WrongWay · 02-22-2022, 04:16 PM

The size appears to be 176.

Ángel Martin · (This post was last modified: 02-25-2022 10:17 AM by Ángel Martin.)

(02-20-2022 12:15 AM)WrongWay Wrote:
(05-13-2021 07:13 AM)Ángel Martin Wrote: In line 16 there's a GT0 CF but LBL "CF" is nowhere to be found. Is this a typo??
GTO C doesn't look likely either given where the instruction is: no previous test and no LBL after it.
Would be good if you can double check the listing...

Code:

X=0? GTO 00 SF 03 GTO CF FS? 00 GTO 01 LBL 00

Yes, this should be GTO "C"

I wouldn't think so, that would mean that the following two program steps are never executed:

SF 03
GTO "C"
FS? 00
GTO 01
LBL 00
...

It's probably more likely to be this, changing SF 03 with FS? 03:

FS? 03
GTO C
FS? 00
GTO 01
LBL 00
...

right?