Wednesday, March 03, 2021

#CSpect V2.13.01

#CSpect V2.13.01 changes

A few fixes and some new Next hardware that's coming soon....
  • Put some guards around break point setting to check ranges a little.
  • Symbols are uppercased on load (they aren't case sensitive)
  • Fixed memory window. Any address < $10000 is not a physical address, its the 64k mapped. If you need this, use bank/offset
  • Fixed some BASIC key issues - holding down control keys etc
  • Fixed a ULA global transparancy issue
  • Fixed NEX loading and initialising of ULA colours
  • Rewrote the ULA colour system - was a mess.
  • Fixed some Timex rendering issues
  • Basic CTC timers (4) added. Timer mode only, no cascading. Timers can generate IRQs.
  • NextReg $CC and $CD - IRQ DMA suspend mode for timers, liner interrupts and ULA added
  • Z80 CTC Timer example source included in demo





9 comments:

Tony Dang said...

Thank you?!

Mattsteel said...

My antivirus says it detects Trojan.Gen.NPE
Any help ?
_M

Mike said...

False positive - add an exception.

Ivan Rubesa said...

Hi!
I'm downloading this to run cspect on a mac, but my virus scanner detects Gen:Variant.Razy trojan.
Is this the same as above and it's safe to ignore or should I be concerned?
Thanks in advance.

Hendrikk said...

You can add a exception for it, no problem, did it for mine and it is working.

Unknown said...

...same problem on Window 10 and Defender Anti-virus it works after add as exception but after a few days it gets deleted. The stable version is still 2.12.36...

Hendrikk said...

I am trying to use next basic in zx next, I pres F10 to use keys on laptop, but how do you go back to edit mode in cspect.
Did read the readme.txt. but could not find answer in there.

48K said...

Hi Mike,

I am having some (potential) problems with transparency on LAYER 0. I'm not sure if I am doing things wrong or if this is a Cspect bug. I don't have real hardware to test.

My post from FaceBook copied here: https://www.facebook.com/groups/ZXNextBasic/permalink/1090177098175295?comment_id=1090193821506956&notif_id=1620744073355198&notif_t=group_comment&ref=notif

PALETTE problems > Help needed!
Are there any known Palette issues with Cspect? (v2.12.36)
I am using LAYER 0, but I don't think it is behaving as expected.
At the moment I have ULA>SPRITES>LAYER2 using:
LAYER OVER 4.
I also have set black to be transparent using:
PALETTE OVER 0
In LAYER 0, I also use:
BORDER 0, PAPER 0: BRIGHT 1: INK 7: CLS
I also use:
SPRITE BORDER 1
To enable SPRITEs over the border area.
These combinations enable LAYER 0 text (BRIGHT white, or any other INK colour) to appear on top of SPRITEs, but all the LAYER 0 black background to remain transparent.
BUT: Things go wonky when I try asigning different palette colours to the LAYER 0 "Black" index.
For example, I have determined empirically that the indexes used for LAYER 0 palette are as follows:
# Regular Layer 1 palette indexes for INK are:
BRIGHT 0, INK 0-7 = Index 0-7
BRIGHT 1, INK 0-7 = Index 8-15
# Regular Layer 1 palette indexes for PAPER are:
BRIGHT 0, PAPER 0-7 = Index 16-23
BRIGHT 1, PAPER 0-7 = Index 24-31
Given the above info, I can alter the "black" PAPER index (for non-BRIGHT and BRIGHT) to a differ colour using, e.g. Blue ("5"):
LAYER PALETTE 0,16,5:
LAYER PALETTE 0,24,5:
This works, but the transparency does not (as expected - because I have not yet set "5" to the transparency colour).
However, if I now do this via:
PALETTE OVER 5
...it makes no difference...
See screenshot: The SPRITEs appear above the blue BORDER area, but not above the main blue PAPER area. Is this a CSpect bug? Can anyone reproduce this on a real Next?
Or does the value specified in PALETTE OVER need to be some different value (other than "5")?
EDIT: I also get the same results with v2.13.00 and v2.13.01:

Anonymous said...

Hi
I tried out to extract v2_13_01 and win defender says instantly on extraction:
that he found Win32/Uwamson.A!ml malware in cspect.exe ???
I read then the comments here and triey also v2_12_36 and on manual scanning it said the same.
I fact I think it is a wrong alert but can you proofe it that is wrong and do you know why this could be the case?
Are there some potential suspicious code-parts used or so in the emulator itself?
I really want to use the emulator to emulate a ZX Spectrum next (my real one is coming in august hopefully, from the 2nd kickstarter campaign :) ).

Thx Wolfgang