As mentioned before I really would have liked to have a callable version of TAQOZ running in a COG while other programs run in HUB.
Sadly Peter did not get this done with his current implementation, or did he?
The current version of TAQOZ and Clusso99's Monitor/Debugger gives me hope to acomplish my goal. So lets see:
TAQOZ needs currently one COG, the lower 64KB of HUB and some place in HUB for stacks and dictionary, not sure where it is in HUB now, but recall to have read that this is somehow settable via TAQOZ.
So one should be able to restrict TAQOZ to one or two HUB areas and one COG thus leaving 7 COGS and the remaining HUB for a USER program.
The simplest way would be to use two other pins for a serial connection from user program to existing pins of TAQQZ serial prompt,
Now the user program can talk serial to a parallel running TAQOZ subsystem.
It is not easy to explain to Peter, since his point of view is that once in TAQOZ there is no need for SPIN or C. And I still think that it is a waste of ROM space if we end up in a either/or situation.
Being able to write a SPIN/C/PASM/BASIC/BLOCKLY/whatever program that can use TAQOZ onliners by just writing them out serial make a very easy 'mailbox' system.
And since TAQOZ allows inherently the ability to switch consoleIO to different targets, it might even be possible to avoid pins for communication.
What is needed for that?
-The loader needs to be able to load something behind TAQOZ low HUB area without overwriting TAQOZ. One can do this right now by hand with the current ROM.
-TAQOZ redirection instead of two extra pins and two wires. or is it possible to use some Smartpin feature that two COGS can use the existing 2 serial pins to let the 2 COGs talk to each other?
-SPIN/C/PASM/BASIC/BLOCKLY/whatever need to build a normal image or one keeping the running TAQOZ alive.
I am just another Code Monkey
A determined coder can write COBOL programs in any language. -- Author unknown.
Press any key to continue, any other key to quit
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this post are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119