Memory full in metal TI-99 vs Classic 99 Emulator

[charlietunaz]

I ran the following code on both metal TI and Classic 99 with different results:

10 A=A+8

20 GOSUB 10

 

RUN

 

After the memory full error, I get this.

 

TI BASIC (metal) - PRINT A = 14536 - (PEB unplugged)

TI BASIC (Classic 99) = 12448

TI BASIC (Classic 99) = 13480 - After CALL FILES(1) - > NEW

~1-2K bytes difference.  Could someone explain why?

 

 

 

[+OLD CS1]

Disk buffers.

 

In Classic99, CALL FILES(0) will return the same value as iron without the PEB.

[charlietunaz]

43 minutes ago, OLD CS1 said:

Disk buffers.

 

In Classic99, CALL FILES(0) will return the same value as iron without the PEB.

Interesting, searching for CALL FILES in the forum I found out that CALL FILES(0) is a Classic99 only command.

Edited October 23, 2022 by charlietunaz

[+Ksarul]

1 hour ago, charlietunaz said:

Interesting, searching for CALL FILES in the forum I found out that CALL FILES(0) is a Classic99 only command.

It is, and as already noted, it is the simplest way to free up all of the buffer space normally reserved for the disk controller in the emulated TI system. A bare metal console doesn't reserve any of this buffer space, because no disk controller is present. The emulated Classic99 system generally starts as an expanded system, and the user can tweak it as necessary to change that.

[pixelpedant]

Another exceptional case, just because it's fun trivia: if the Terminal Emulator II cart is inserted (and regardless of whether any of its features are used), memory available to TI BASIC will reflect buffer use one in excess of that specified by CALL FILES, as it reserves a buffer for its own i/o purposes.