TI-89 Titanium - Page 9

Snow Tiger :
GC > Je me demandais juste s'il relogeait en ghost space les progs nostub par exemple. Je suis presque sur que non, mais pas totalement donc...

Sasume
: D'après Bhuvanesh, la limite des 24ko a été enlévé.

You obviously don't know the whole truth!
* The execution protection still exists, I checked that. (I tried a ttstart without any ghost space use at all, and I got a black bar crash.) Unless of course they are going to disable it in the later AMS betas...
* The ghost space doesn't exist at all! I tried this with a program which checks for RAM ghost spaces (reading only, not executing), and it did not find anything (whereas it did find 0x40000, 0x80000, 0xc0000, 0x100000, 0x140000, 0x180000 and 0x1c0000 on my 2 calculators).

So maybe we don't have a 24 KB limit, but we still have a hard 64 KB limit, and TSRs, kernels, DLLs etc. won't work at all without a patch, unless they are going to disable the RAM execution protection in the AMS updates. And we will have to port all the programs, because they nearly all use the ghost space. Unlike what Pollux's usual FUD [sur le forum TICT] claims, *0x40074 == *0x74 does not work, one of my test programs explicitly tested for that. My test programs were much more thourough than you seem to believe.

#define USE_TI89
#define USE_TI92P
#define USE_V200
#define SAVE_SCREEN
#include <tigcclib.h>
void _main(void) {
 unsigned long *p=(unsigned long *)4;
 unsigned long firstlong=*(unsigned long *)0;
 clrscr();
 try_again:
 while (*(p++)!=firstlong) {
  if ((unsigned long)p>=0x200000) return;
 }
 if (memcmp(p-1,0,1000)) goto try_again;
 printf("%lp\n",p-1);
 ngetchx();
 goto try_again;
}

Unlike what Pollux's usual FUD [sur le forum TICT] claims, *0x40074 == *0x74 does not work, one of my test programs explicitly tested for that. My test programs were much more thourough than you seem to believe.

Pollux
:

Unlike what Pollux's usual FUD [sur le forum TICT] claims, *0x40074 == *0x74 does not work, one of my test programs explicitly tested for that. My test programs were much more thourough than you seem to believe.

Tu serais gentil de pas faire ton XDanger à faire des réponses à un topic sur le forum TICT ici...

vince
:

PpHd
: Faut pas le leurrer. 95% des programmes ne marcheront pas.

c pas plutôt : 95% des programmes ne marchera pas ? "95%" c'est une portion...

Pollux
: Ca n'a strictement rien à voir avec le topic, en l'occurrence

Kevin Kofler
:

Pollux
:

Unlike what Pollux's usual FUD [sur le forum TICT] claims, *0x40074 == *0x74 does not work, one of my test programs explicitly tested for that. My test programs were much more thourough than you seem to believe.

Tu serais gentil de pas faire ton XDanger à faire des réponses à un topic sur le forum TICT ici...

J'ai posté exactement le même message là-bas. Cela était un repost pour mettre tout le monde au courant. (J'ai reposté le message une troisième fois sur Ti-Gen d'ailleurs.)

Kevin Kofler
:

Pollux
: Ca n'a strictement rien à voir avec le topic, en l'occurrence

En effet, ça ne colle pas très bien ici, mais en revanche ça colle très bien pour ta pub anti-TIGCC.

vince :
on verra mais j'ai un fort doute...
si ils passent par un chip esclave, ça sera chaud de faire un hack pour se convertir en hote...