If you're using your own custom Interrupt, then you're not using Mirage's interrupt.  Therefore there's no conflicts.

Is your calc in Full speed mode?  That would make the delays too short and the key group would not be switched properly.  You have to take it out of full speed mode to use the getkey() command.  Maybe I'll triple the delay next version so that it works better in full.  It's 2-3 more bytes, but its a subroutine so 2-3 bytes total for the whole program.  Any added delay is negligible.  We're talking about 2 microseconds here.

What about doing a full backup of the calculator?  Maybe that will be able to group the app.

I can try adding a dummy signature to see if it will change anything and yes, I can always export the binary and write a simple program to convert it to the app format, but I'd rather find a way to do it directly.  If it's the calculator that is doing the validating and not the computer (presumably) I might be able to overwrite the checking of the signature somehow.

Runer112 Made one... in Axe.
http://ourl.ca/4832/94254

It won't be compatible with 0.3.x becasue it uses the outdated "SetupEditor" command, but you can either just use the executable or remove it and compile from source.

Even a well designed system can be unsuccessful if there aren't enough developers making applications for it.  I would therefore say that the feature I would like to see most is a comprehensive guide for developers.  It would also be really convenient if you could have some of your own bcalls that mimic the most common TI-OS bcalls so that people can simply redefine their equates and maybe changes to their header to make their programs compatible with KnightOS.  Its going to take a lot for people to switch from developing from a very popular operating system (the default anyway) to an initially unpopular system.

It's been on the wish-list for a while, I have all the routines written already.  They were just commented out becasue I need to get the token data working first so you can actually use the feature.  Like the same way you can do 'A' to get the ascii value, you would be able to use tA to get the token value.  Also, like you can use the double quotes to define a string, I'm going to add some way to define a series of tokens.  That will be especially useful if I decide to add a "Parse" command to execute the token data as BASIC code.

I think he means smooth scrolling, not block by block scrolling.  Both can be done with the Copy() command, but when the letters get to the edge with smooth scrolling, they disappear suddenly.  You can fix that by copying the non-text part of the screen to the back buffer, using the Horizontal Scroll command, and then copying the buffer back, but that's more complicated and can't always be done.

EDIT: Ninja'd

I've got a feature request.

Would it be possible to make 'checkpoints' in the program editor and be able to jump between them using something like 2nd+Right/Left? Just wondering because my code is getting really long and it takes a while to scroll all the way to the bottom just to change 1 or 2 things before compiling again.

Also, for the Error scrolling, wouldn't it be better to scroll to 7 lines before the line with the error, so that it is at the bottom instead of the top? That's how the TIOS does it. I always have to scroll up to see what I wrote to cause the error.

That's another direction I might be headed eventually.  I might just make full fledged editor improvements to the TI Program editor during Axe Edit sessions like "sprite previews" of hex code, "bookmarks" in the code (which is what you're talking about), maybe a "Condensed View" in which labels have little plus signs next to them that expand and hide the code for each subroutine, these are just ideas I'm throwing out there.  They are all possible with the clever use of Key Hooks.  I'm just not sure if I want to go that far until I finish more commands and features, it might be an Axe 2.0.0 thing.

In fact, I would like to turn this thread into a poll, so if any administrators reading this can do that, that would be great.  After each update, I will edit the poll to list several choices of major features to include in the next update so I can get a sense about what people want me to do first.  Also, while you're at it, could you unsticky the token poll since that's already been resolved.  Thanks!