6502.org Forum  Projects  Code  Documents  Tools  Forum
It is currently Fri Nov 22, 2024 11:32 pm

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 15 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: The Woz FP routines
PostPosted: Tue Oct 30, 2018 2:27 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 14, 2018 2:33 pm
Posts: 1488
Location: Scotland
For a little project I need a single precision/4-byte solution. (It has to be 4 bytes for other reasons).

I'm probably going to just use the Woz routines, but was wondering if there is any merit in coding an IEEE-754 solution, given the recent thread. The numbers won't be exported in anything other than on-screen so a compatible binary format isn't required.

It's not for anything vaguely critical, just a little interpreter for a bit of fun.

So just wondering if anyone has used/is using the Woz routines on a daily basis if if they're happy with them..

Cheers,

-Gordon

_________________
--
Gordon Henderson.
See my Ruby 6502 and 65816 SBC projects here: https://projects.drogon.net/ruby/


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: The Woz FP routines
PostPosted: Tue Oct 30, 2018 3:00 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2008 1:28 pm
Posts: 10986
Location: England
I haven't used them, but I would use them! I lack the sense of impending joy from implementing my own. In other words, I'd say it's worth implementing a floating point package if you really want to implement a floating point package. But not worth it as a means to an end. This is of course only my take on it!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: The Woz FP routines
PostPosted: Tue Oct 30, 2018 6:29 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon May 21, 2018 8:09 pm
Posts: 1462
For simple purpose, the Woz routines do work - after all, they shipped in millions of Apple ]['s. They have similar theoretical range and precision to IEEE-754 single precision - with some caveats.

Caveat 1: AFAIK, the Woz routines have no guard digits, and thereby have only a primitive treatment of rounding error. This could seriously hurt practical precision in some cases.

Caveat 2: the Woz format has no support whatsoever for Infinities or NaNs, so must treat overflow, range or other errors with exception traps instead of returning an interpretable value. Conversely, it does have a slightly extended dynamic range for representing finite values.

It would probably be good practice to design your interpreter in such a way that the Woz routines can be swapped out for something else later, in case you find a need or use for something more capable.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: The Woz FP routines
PostPosted: Tue Oct 30, 2018 6:36 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jun 24, 2013 8:18 am
Posts: 83
Location: Italy
Just as suggestion: why don't use the Microsoft 5 bytes f.p. implementation as in commodore line?

_________________
http://65xx.unet.bz/ - Hardware & Software 65XX family


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: The Woz FP routines
PostPosted: Tue Oct 30, 2018 6:46 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 14, 2018 2:33 pm
Posts: 1488
Location: Scotland
Chromatix wrote:
For simple purpose, the Woz routines do work - after all, they shipped in millions of Apple ]['s. They have similar theoretical range and precision to IEEE-754 single precision - with some caveats.


Yes, they were, but I don't know anything that actually used them - Applesoft used a 5-byte format (from Microsoft I presume)

Chromatix wrote:
Caveat 1: AFAIK, the Woz routines have no guard digits, and thereby have only a primitive treatment of rounding error. This could seriously hurt practical precision in some cases.

Caveat 2: the Woz format has no support whatsoever for Infinities or NaNs, so must treat overflow, range or other errors with exception traps instead of returning an interpretable value. Conversely, it does have a slightly extended dynamic range for representing finite values.

It would probably be good practice to design your interpreter in such a way that the Woz routines can be swapped out for something else later, in case you find a need or use for something more capable.


Noted, thanks, however hopefully it's not an issue to start with - I just need something get get going with and If needed I can change to something else later. The only caveat I have is that it needs to be 4 bytes storage.

Thanks,

-Gordon

_________________
--
Gordon Henderson.
See my Ruby 6502 and 65816 SBC projects here: https://projects.drogon.net/ruby/


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: The Woz FP routines
PostPosted: Tue Oct 30, 2018 6:47 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 14, 2018 2:33 pm
Posts: 1488
Location: Scotland
granati wrote:
Just as suggestion: why don't use the Microsoft 5 bytes f.p. implementation as in commodore line?


Everything is optimised for 4 bytes of storage. Integers, floats, pointers...

Cheers,

-Gordon

_________________
--
Gordon Henderson.
See my Ruby 6502 and 65816 SBC projects here: https://projects.drogon.net/ruby/


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: The Woz FP routines
PostPosted: Tue Oct 30, 2018 6:48 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2008 1:28 pm
Posts: 10986
Location: England
Note this fix needed for Woz and Rankin's LOG:
viewtopic.php?p=63993#p63993


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: The Woz FP routines
PostPosted: Tue Oct 30, 2018 6:50 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2008 1:28 pm
Posts: 10986
Location: England
BTW, Microsoft's Basic came in a 4 byte version as well as the more commonly seen 5 byte version:
https://www.pagetable.com/?p=46


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: The Woz FP routines
PostPosted: Tue Oct 30, 2018 6:54 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jun 24, 2013 8:18 am
Posts: 83
Location: Italy
drogon wrote:
granati wrote:
Just as suggestion: why don't use the Microsoft 5 bytes f.p. implementation as in commodore line?


Everything is optimised for 4 bytes of storage. Integers, floats, pointers...

Cheers,

-Gordon


in an 8 bit micro this is important?

_________________
http://65xx.unet.bz/ - Hardware & Software 65XX family


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: The Woz FP routines
PostPosted: Tue Oct 30, 2018 6:57 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon May 21, 2018 8:09 pm
Posts: 1462
I imagine there are code size/complexity/speed advantages if all objects are the same size.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: The Woz FP routines
PostPosted: Tue Oct 30, 2018 7:05 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 14, 2018 2:33 pm
Posts: 1488
Location: Scotland
granati wrote:
drogon wrote:
granati wrote:
Just as suggestion: why don't use the Microsoft 5 bytes f.p. implementation as in commodore line?


Everything is optimised for 4 bytes of storage. Integers, floats, pointers...

Cheers,

-Gordon


in an 8 bit micro this is important?


It makes life easy in some cases and actually this is ultimately aimed at the 65816 when doing stuff like (virtual machine) register to register move might be more efficient to do in 16-bit chunks. It's a 32-bit vm running on a 16-bit machine with 8-bit memory... It won't be the fastest thing on the 65xxx planet, but that's not my aim.

Cheers,

-Gordon

_________________
--
Gordon Henderson.
See my Ruby 6502 and 65816 SBC projects here: https://projects.drogon.net/ruby/


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: The Woz FP routines
PostPosted: Tue Oct 30, 2018 7:07 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 14, 2018 2:33 pm
Posts: 1488
Location: Scotland
BigEd wrote:
BTW, Microsoft's Basic came in a 4 byte version as well as the more commonly seen 5 byte version:
https://www.pagetable.com/?p=46


Thanks, I'll have a look at that. Also seen the errata and have the original Apple II "Red Book" and "Wozpack ][" too which gives good insight into using them.

Cheers,

-Gordon

_________________
--
Gordon Henderson.
See my Ruby 6502 and 65816 SBC projects here: https://projects.drogon.net/ruby/


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: The Woz FP routines
PostPosted: Tue Oct 30, 2018 10:14 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jun 30, 2013 10:26 pm
Posts: 1949
Location: Sacramento, CA, USA
Also, be aware of this thread:

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=3633

_________________
Got a kilobyte lying fallow in your 65xx's memory map? Sprinkle some VTL02C on it and see how it grows on you!

Mike B. (about me) (learning how to github)


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: The Woz FP routines
PostPosted: Wed Oct 31, 2018 8:46 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2008 1:28 pm
Posts: 10986
Location: England
It looks like there's also a 4-byte floating point package in the 6502 Software Gourmet Guide & Cookbook:
http://www.classiccmp.org/cini/books/Sc ... okbook.pdf
(Chapter 5, page 93 of the PDF)

(There's no text layer in this PDF! So lots of typing ahead, or some OCR and proof-reading.)

Edit: also at the Internet Archive, with text layer, here.


Last edited by BigEd on Sat Jan 21, 2023 8:01 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: The Woz FP routines
PostPosted: Wed Oct 31, 2018 11:18 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2003 3:37 pm
Posts: 1004
BigEd wrote:
It looks like there's also a 4-byte floating point package in the 6502 Software Gourmet Guide & Cookbook:
http://www.classiccmp.org/cini/books/Sc ... okbook.pdf
(Chapter 5, page 93 of the PDF)

(There's no text layer in this PDF! So lots of typing ahead, or some OCR and proof-reading.)

Unrelated to the topic, but specific to the book.

If you look at the code, the author does a curious thing.

You see a lot of this:
Code:
    LDX #LBL1
    STA PAGE0, X

or, simply:
Code:
    LDX #LBL1
    STA $0,X

It's like the 6502 he was using (or perhaps the assembler!) didn't know about Zero Page. i.e. why not just "STA LBL1".

Very odd.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 15 posts ] 

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 16 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to: