On C64, VIC-20 and Plus/4, the conio library PLOT routine uses direct
calls into the Kernal, including the Kernal PLOT routine that we're
replacing. These were previously hardcoded addresses; we change these
to use the symbols for those routines defined in cbm_kernal.inc. (This
changes no functionality.)
To do this, we need to import cbm_kernal.inc in a namespace so we
don't have a collision between the PLOT that we're defining and the
Kernal definition.
We also add a UPDCRAMPTR symbol (used by kplot for VIC-20 and C64) to
the direct entry kernal routines in in cbm_kernal.inc, and expand the
comments describing what the "direct entry" Kernal routines are.
<greg.king5@verizon.net> (GitHub: greg-king5) came up with this idea
and did initial testing of it.
This has been tested on VICE xvic, x64 and xplus4 emulators with a
program that does a cputs() call (github.com/0cjs/vic20cc65) to
confirm that it works the same way after as it did before.
This follows a suggestion by Sijmen Schouten in issue #818.
Platoterm64 now works with mouse at 1200 baud.
Bump MOUSE_API_VERSION in asminc/mouse-kernel.inc.
Fix typo in testcode/lib/mouse-test.c.
The situation on the Apple II is rather special: There are several types of RTCs. It's not desirable to have specific code for all of them. As the OS supports file timestamps RTC owners usually use OS drivers for their RTC. Those drivers read the RTC and write the result in a "date/time location" in RAM. The OS reads the date/time from the RAM location. If there's no RTC the RAM location keeps containing zeros. The OS uses those zeros as timestamps and the files show up in a directory as "<NO DATE>".
There's no common interface to set RTCs so if an RTC _IS_ present there's just nothing to do. However, if there's _NO_ RTC present the user might very well be interest to "manually" set the RAM location in order to have timestamps. But he surely doesn't want to manually set the RAM location over an over again. Rather he wants to set it just once after booting the OS.
From that perspective it makes most sense to not set both the date and the time but rather only set the date and have the time just stay zero. Then files show up in a directory as "DD-MON-YY 0:00".
So clock_settime() checks if the current time equals 0:00. If it does _NOT_ then an RTC is supposed to be active and clock_settime() fails with ERANGE. Otherwise clock_settime() ignores sets the date - and completely ignores the time provided as parameter.
clock_getres() too checks if the current time equals 0:00. If it does _NOT_ then an RTC is supposed to be active and clock_getres() returns a time resolution of one minute. Otherwise clock_getres() presumes that the only one who sets the RAM location is clock_settime() and therefore returns a time resolution of one day.
We want to add the capability to not only get the time but also set the time, but there's no "setter" for the "getter" time().
The first ones that come into mind are gettimeofday() and settimeofday(). However, they take a struct timezone argument that doesn't make sense - even the man pages says "The use of the timezone structure is obsolete; the tz argument should normally be specified as NULL." And POSIX says "Applications should use the clock_gettime() function instead of the obsolescent gettimeofday() function."
The ...timeofday() functions work with microseconds while the clock_...time() functions work with nanoseconds. Given that we expect our targets to support only 1/10 of seconds the microseconds look preferable at first sight. However, already microseconds require the cc65 data type 'long' so it's not such a relevant difference to nanoseconds. Additionally clock_getres() seems useful.
In order to avoid code duplication clock_gettime() takes over the role of the actual time getter from _systime(). So time() now calls clock_gettime() instead of _systime().
For some reason beyond my understanding _systime() was mentioned in time.h. _systime() worked exactly like e.g. _sysremove() and those _sys...() functions are all considered internal. The only reason I could see would be a performance gain of bypassing the time() wrapper. However, all known _systime() implementations internally called mktime(). And mktime() is implemented in C using an iterative algorithm so I really can't see what would be left to gain here. From that perspective I decided to just remove _systime().
