Talk:Mapper: Difference between revisions
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
By FCEUX 2.2.1, they allocated mapper 160 to describe an undersize [[NINA-003-006]] board (32k PRG, 16k CHR). This seems superfluous. | By FCEUX 2.2.1, they allocated mapper 160 to describe an undersize [[NINA-003-006]] board (32k PRG, 16k CHR). This seems superfluous. | ||
They also allocated mapper 181 to describe another board like [[iNES Mapper 185]] that didn't fit with the existing heuristic. It would be nice to take the opportunity to promote [[NES 2.0 submappers#iNES Mapper 185]]. —[[User:Lidnariq|Lidnariq]] ([[User talk:Lidnariq|talk]]) 21:41, 23 June 2013 (MDT)<br> | They also allocated mapper 181 to describe another board like [[iNES Mapper 185]] that didn't fit with the existing heuristic. It would be nice to take the opportunity to promote [[NES 2.0 submappers#iNES Mapper 185]]. —[[User:Lidnariq|Lidnariq]] ([[User talk:Lidnariq|talk]]) 21:41, 23 June 2013 (MDT)<br> | ||
Also, wasn't 256-511 supposed to be for developers or debugging use? I need to request a reserved number for future hardware designs. I'll probably go find the IRC channel for that. ;) BTW: The documentation for NES 2.0 header format has different allocation planes. It's best to fix this BEFORE someone goes and tries to update/make any mapper code libraries. Again, going to bring this to attention of mods in chat. | Also, wasn't 256-511 supposed to be for developers or debugging use? I need to request a reserved number for future hardware designs. I'll probably go find the IRC channel for that. ;) BTW: The documentation for NES 2.0 header format has different allocation planes. It's best to fix this BEFORE someone goes and tries to update/make any mapper code libraries. Again, going to bring this to attention of mods in chat. [[NES_2.0]] [[User:Alphamule|alphamule]] ([[User talk:Alphamule|talk]]) 13:51, 29 August 2014 (MDT) | ||
Revision as of 20:38, 29 August 2014
Allocations
By FCEUX 2.2.1, they allocated mapper 160 to describe an undersize NINA-003-006 board (32k PRG, 16k CHR). This seems superfluous.
They also allocated mapper 181 to describe another board like iNES Mapper 185 that didn't fit with the existing heuristic. It would be nice to take the opportunity to promote NES 2.0 submappers#iNES Mapper 185. —Lidnariq (talk) 21:41, 23 June 2013 (MDT)
Also, wasn't 256-511 supposed to be for developers or debugging use? I need to request a reserved number for future hardware designs. I'll probably go find the IRC channel for that. ;) BTW: The documentation for NES 2.0 header format has different allocation planes. It's best to fix this BEFORE someone goes and tries to update/make any mapper code libraries. Again, going to bring this to attention of mods in chat. NES_2.0 alphamule (talk) 13:51, 29 August 2014 (MDT)
