Page 4 of 4

Re: Display test ... not 100% correct?

Posted: Tue Nov 03, 2020 9:13 am
by akaTB
ecsfang wrote:
Tue Nov 03, 2020 9:05 am
Hi Massimo,
I am not sure, either, just a guess.
As far as I can see, the same characters are there (all of them), but I can't match the character code with the table you sent, so for me it looks like the same character set - but with different character codes (eg. the characters are reused in the range 128-255 but not in the same order as in the table).

Anyhow - thanks for the info!

Cheers,
Thomas
Hi Thomas, this should be the full character set.
41x.JPG
41x.JPG (151.22 KiB) Viewed 496 times

Re: Display test ... not 100% correct?

Posted: Tue Nov 03, 2020 9:18 am
by ecsfang
Hi again,
P.S.- Did you try the "blank-comma" bug yet?
Yes, I tried that - very similar to the bug I described in PCC V10N7P19 a long time ago :D

It is almost the opposite of the one I described earlier:

[ALPHA] off
CLA
128 XTOA
58 XTOA
129 XTOA
58 XTOA
[ALPHA] on

The display now shows: "+: :a : :" (6 characters) where I would have expected only 4 characters: "#:#:"
('+' is the append character and '#' is a starburst).
(Also note that there is an extra space shown here after 'a' since the post sometimes treats ':' as an escape character when entering text).

Now try this (with alpha still on):

[shift][ASN] - append string --> "+: :a : :_"
[<--] - delete one character --> "+: :a :_"
[<--] - delete one character --> "+: :a_"
[<--] - delete one character --> "+: :_"
[<--] - delete one character --> "+:_"

In your case, both the space and the colon is deleted by every delete, and here, even if it is only a single character (internaly), delete treats the character as two ... ;)

Cheers,
Thomas

Re: Display test ... not 100% correct?

Posted: Tue Nov 03, 2020 9:25 am
by ecsfang
Hi Massimo,

Yes, that look like it!

All characters, but different codes.
Eg. 0x91 (145) is the delta, 0x94 I don't know ... "LX"? :geek:

But 0xA0 it "text" and 0xA1 is "a" on the DM41X.
So all characters are there (and I haven't seen any other characters in the DM41X not in this table) but the codes are different.

Cheers,
Thomas

Re: Display test ... not 100% correct?

Posted: Tue Nov 03, 2020 9:44 am
by akaTB
ecsfang wrote:
Tue Nov 03, 2020 9:25 am

Eg. 0x91 (145) is the delta, 0x94 I don't know ... "LX"? :geek:
A chair. :D

Re: Display test ... not 100% correct?

Posted: Tue Nov 03, 2020 2:42 pm
by akaTB
Eeny, meeny, miny, moe
why do we need three μ?

:lol:

Re: Display test ... not 100% correct?

Posted: Tue Nov 03, 2020 4:36 pm
by ecsfang
Hehe, that's just a few ...

Code 0x61, 0x81, 0xA1, 0xC1 and 0xE1 all of them generates a lower case 'a' (the last 4 of them accompanied by a colon .. ) ;)
In part 0x80-0x9F is duplicated at 0xC0-0xDF, and 0xA0-0xBF is duplicated at 0xE0-0xFF.

So there is a lot of duplictes in the full byte table ... :D

Re: Display test ... not 100% correct?

Posted: Wed Nov 04, 2020 9:18 am
by ecsfang
This is the complete character map as I have found it (in the DM41X):

charset0_sml.png
charset0_sml.png (28.45 KiB) Viewed 403 times
charset1_sml.png
charset1_sml.png (26.93 KiB) Viewed 403 times
(Note that character 0x2C, 0x2E and 0x3A typically are represented as ',', '.' and ':')

Again, note that all characters in the upper table always are displayed together with a colon, and in multi line [PRGM] mode these characters are displayed with the MSB-bit cleared (eg. character 0xA7 (g) is shown as 0x27 (')) - unless the line is highlighted and [SHIFT] is pressed ;)

The lower table have been extended (compared to the HP41) with all lower case characters, and the three characters 0x7B-0x7D.
There are also 7 new symbols in the upper table that are not present in the lower (0x90-0x95 and 0x97).

So Massimo, as you see, all characters from the table you provided are here, but some at different location(s).
This means that there are actually 5 copies of μ in the table ... :lol:
But the all time high winner is Sigma! There are 7 character codes that are presented as Sigma on the DM41X ... :P

Cheers,
Thomas

Re: Display test ... not 100% correct?

Posted: Sat Nov 14, 2020 4:15 am
by toml_12953
rprosperi wrote:
Sat Oct 03, 2020 3:56 am
toml_12953 wrote:
Fri Oct 02, 2020 10:57 pm
EM41 wrote:
Fri Oct 02, 2020 5:19 pm
It was already reported by Geoff during the beta test viewtopic.php?f=26&t=2448
I think it was the only non resolved "bug".
Is this a hardware or a software issue?
It's not an issue at all.

No issue here.... move along... move along... :)
Well, I'm glad they fixed the "non-issue" anyway.

Re: Display test ... not 100% correct?

Posted: Sat Nov 14, 2020 4:47 am
by rprosperi
toml_12953 wrote:
Sat Nov 14, 2020 4:15 am
rprosperi wrote:
Sat Oct 03, 2020 3:56 am
toml_12953 wrote:
Fri Oct 02, 2020 10:57 pm


Is this a hardware or a software issue?
It's not an issue at all.

No issue here.... move along... move along... :)
Well, I'm glad they fixed the "non-issue" anyway.
Indeed! :) Turns out there is a way to have all the lowercase characters while preserving display of upper character (80-FF) as starbursts. So as I said, not an issue at all... :D