From 05a3ae8be9af7da3caf6a651c49fcfbbf6118985 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Jeff Parsons Date: Sun, 20 Nov 2016 14:19:16 -0800 Subject: [PATCH] Updated the last blog post --- _posts/2016-11-13-curious-pdp-11-features.md | 6 +++++- 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/_posts/2016-11-13-curious-pdp-11-features.md b/_posts/2016-11-13-curious-pdp-11-features.md index 562322126..9824c81e1 100644 --- a/_posts/2016-11-13-curious-pdp-11-features.md +++ b/_posts/2016-11-13-curious-pdp-11-features.md @@ -5,7 +5,7 @@ date: 2016-11-13 13:00:00 permalink: /blog/2016/11/13/ --- -Last week, I ran PDPjs through a series of early DEC PDP-11 diagnostic tests on paper tape. +Last week, I ran PDPjs through a series of early DEC [PDP-11 Paper Tape Diagnostics](/apps/pdp11/tapes/diags/). These tests were originally released in 1970 and are documented in such DEC publications as the [MAINDEC USER REFERENCE MANUAL](http://archive.pcjs.org/pubs/dec/pdp11/diags/MAINDEC_User_Reference_Manual_Oct73.pdf) (October 1973). @@ -71,6 +71,10 @@ successfully on an 11/70. And [Test 15](/apps/pdp11/tapes/diags/#test-15) is no avoided if DEC had decided to designate an opcode as *permanently* RESERVED, and then used that for all future RESERVED instruction tests, instead of using opcodes that would become new instructions later (eg, MUL). +The most recent paper tape diagnostic I've run is the [11/70 CPU EXERCISER](/apps/pdp11/tapes/diags/#md-11-1170-cpu-exerciser), +and after several more bug fixes, PDPjs passes that test now, too. That's something not even +[SimH](https://github.com/simh/simh) is currently able to do. + --- It's worth noting that all these diagnostic paper tape images are in the [Absolute Loader](/apps/pdp11/tapes/absloader/) format,