Squiggle: Difference between revisions
From Lower Ground
Jump to navigationJump to search
(SQUIGGLE!!!!!!!) |
m (→Squiggle files) |
||
Line 67: | Line 67: | ||
!|File!!Size!!Date | !|File!!Size!!Date | ||
|- | |- | ||
|[ | |[http://lwr.wtf/citadel/Squiggle/SQUIGGLE.ZIP Squiggle v0.01.06x (repacked)] | ||
|align="right"|116,106 bytes | |align="right"|116,106 bytes | ||
|align="right"| | |align="right"| | ||
|- | |- | ||
|[ | |[http://lwr.wtf/citadel/Squiggle/SQUIGGLE.orig.ZIP Squiggle v0.01.06x (original .zip)] | ||
|align="right"|124,928 bytes | |align="right"|124,928 bytes | ||
|align="right"| | |align="right"| |
Latest revision as of 21:59, 23 June 2024
Original author(s) | Brent Bottles (aka resident) |
---|---|
Initial release | Late 1980s |
Written in | 8086 Assembly |
Operating system | MS-DOS |
Platform | IBM PC |
Related | Citadel+ |
Squiggle
94Feb13 17:59:48 pst From Brent Bottles @ The Anticlimactic Teleservice As for the question that Levendis posed in Citadel Q&A, "why did you guys write Cits of your own," there were a few reasons why I wrote Squiggle. To start out with, I wanted some practice with programming. I had written lots of small little things, but never a full application of much size. For whatever reason (I have forgotten), a BBS appealed to me. Everyone knows that the only BBS worth using is Citadel, so that is why I based mine on Citadel. I might have just gotten Citadel code and played with it (as many others have done), but I did not own a C compiler, and I did not know C. I owned a BASIC compiler, but I didn't want to write it in BASIC for various reasons. So, as I also owned an assembler, I chose to write it in assembly. So that's why I started. It got to be an actual usable BBS program in there somewhere, though nobody ever ran a BBS with it (not even me). I started making it compatible with DragCit 1.0 networking, but then I got a job. And that's why I stopped working on it; because I found that I had much less free time on my hands when I was working full time. I don't think that there is any code inside of Citadel that could be traced back to Squiggle. I certainly cannot think of any right now. 94Feb15 05:38:32 pst From Brent Bottles @ The Anticlimactic Teleservice Actually, Richard, there is no such thing as Squiggle/86. Upon load, it did processor type detection, and would claim that it was made for that processor. But it was only one program. That is, if run on an 8086, it would say "Squiggle/86" and if run on an 8088, it would way "Squiggle/88" and if run on an NEC V30 it would say "Squiggle/V30" and if run on an 80486 it would say "Squiggle/486" and so on. History time again: Norman was the person who tested the 80486 detection code. You could also override the processor type detection by specifying anything on the command line starting with a /. It would take up to three characters after the / and append them to the name Squiggle. So, for example, you could have a Squiggle/69 if you were err head... Just one of the many cutting edge features of the truly cutting edge software that it was.
Squiggle files
File | Size | Date |
---|---|---|
Squiggle v0.01.06x (repacked) | 116,106 bytes | |
Squiggle v0.01.06x (original .zip) | 124,928 bytes |