First and foremost, Virtual AGC is about providing AGC/AGS related documentation that cannot (or at least, previously could not) be found elsewhere online. Examples of items that will always be in demand are these:

Legible scans or page-by-page digital photographs of assembly listings for any Apollo software versions not already on this site. These do not have to be listings from actual missions, and could be intermediate versions. By an "assembly listing", I mean a printout showing assembly-language source code and the binary to which that source code reduces upon assembly.
Scans of any original Apollo documents not already available here at Virtual AGC or elsewhere. Of particular value would be software patches applied at runtime, software problems reports, mission checklists, and detailed technical documentation of hardware interfaced to the AGC. Click here for hints of where to find such documentation.
Or even information about where such material resides, such as "Museum XYZ has a listing of Luminary 1D".

If you have such material, you'll probably want to contact me directly to determine that we don't already have that item in process, to discuss methods of preparation, to discuss means of delivery to me, etc. A pretty complete description of all the available options is available on our "how to digitize" page, so you'll probably want to at least skim that page. When you contact me, a page or two of scanned images (including the title page) attached to the email might be useful.

Wiki

If you have AGC/AGS information other than original Apollo documents you'd like to make publicly available, you could do so by contacting me directly. But in some cases you may find a better and more straightforward approach may be to contribute your knowledge to the wiki. Examples of things that are useful are theoretical discussions, historical information or anecdotes, tutorials on how to perform certain tasks with the AGC or AGS, etc. Editing of the wiki is members-only, so you must request membership (hint: click "How to join?"). Yes, this is a hassle, but it's a one-time thing and it helps to keep the wiki reliable.

Coding

If you have a simple bug-fix, it might be easiest to submit a patch directly to me. Please be sure to tell me when you do so which development snapshot or which subversion revision you started from.

For more extensive coding, we have a subversion code repository and if you have ideas for new features then you can contribute them to the project via the repository. Anybody can check code out of the repository, but check-in is member-only, so you must request membership (hint: click "How to join?"). Yes, this is a hassle, but it's a one-time thing and the reasons for it are obvious.

Some particular sore spots which could be addressed by an ambitious coder include:

Fixing the yaAGS program so that it can interpret downlink telemetry streams emitted from the yaAGC program in order to update LM state vectors.
Fixing yaAGS so that its downlink telemetry streams work.
Fixing yaTelemetry (or providing a supplemental program) to display yaAGS downlink telemetry.
Adding an IMU simulation program.
Adding an FDAI simulation program.
Adding an AOT simulation program.
Working out the details of using the hand-controller simulations (yaACA, yaACA2, yaACA3) and/or IMU in the Command Module.
Adding simulated peripheral devices for the AGS.
Addition of more control-panel visual realism. (For example, control panels that look like control panels, with switches that look like switches, in proper locations, rather switches that look like GUI push-button widgets, located wherever is convenient.)
Integrating Virtual AGC into an existing open-source spacecraft simulator program.

While the excellent LM-Simulator contributed program by Stephan Hotto already provides a simulated IMU and FDAI, it has a couple of drawbacks in that it is written in the Tcl/Tk interpreted language, and that it is closely tailored to the LM (making it only of limited value for the CM). The fact that it is in Tcl/Tk makes it relatively slow, and almost unusable on slower computers. Of course, as time goes on and computers become faster and faster, this becomes less of a concern. The unusability with the CM will remain a concern. One possibility is to simply update LM-Simulator itself. Another is to convert it to C/C++. Still another is to replace it with IMU/FDAI workalikes. Any such effort, other than the latter, would preferably be coordinated with Stephan rather than being done unilaterally without his knowledge.

More generally, while we will likely accept any useful code that is supplied, you should keep the following suggested guidelines in mind:

All programs are cross-platform, with the minimum acceptable list of supported platforms being Linux, Windows XP, and Mac OS X 10.4 (and later).
Only open-source development tools are used.
Non-GUI programs are preferentially written in C.
GUI programs are preferentially created using the wxWidgets toolkit, in the C++ language.
The compilers used are gcc and g++ (or MinGW in Windows).
The code-formatting style used is the GNU style. This doesn't necessarily mean you have to change all of your coding habits, as there is a handy program called indent readily available on most Linux systems and Mac OS X that will reformat C/C++ source files into this style. It is also available for Windows.
Primary code development is done in Linux, which means that UNIX-style line endings ("\n") are used in preference to Windows line endings ("\r\n") or Mac endings ("\r"). While this is not a problem for gcc, it may be a problem for your source-code editing software.
You retain the copyright for the code you write, but you are expected to license it under the terms of the GNU GPL version 2. The license text within the source files should quote the license as "GPL version 2 or later".

It should be noted that making choices other than these is likely to make inclusion of your code into Virtual AGC binary installer packages impractical, and that such omission is likely to greatly reduce the number of people actually using your code.

For a more-technical view of the operation of Virtual AGC code and what it might take to supply code, please visit the developer page.

Cash

Virtual AGC is a non-commercial project in the public interest and does not accept monetary donations in general. However, it is sometimes necessary to procure documents via the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), and if not waived FOIA fees can be substantial. In such cases, contibutions to defray those fees may be accepted, if it can be determined that there are no adverse legal implications in doing so. If that situation arises, the amounts needed and received will be posted here.

If you represent an educational or research institution which might be able to provide an affiliation that would likely result in waiving of FOIA fees in obtaining AGC/AGS related documentation, please contact me directly.

Code Conversion or Proofing

This is an area where no technical expertise is requred for participation, particularly in proofing.

A situation arises from time-to-time in which AGC assembly-listings have been received and require conversion to machine-readable form for integration into Virtual AGC. Such conversion tasks are quite dreary and time-consuming, and therefore are very wearying when done by a single individual. On the other hand, there is a certain pleasure involved in participating in such a conversion, because you can know that you are helping to make available for actual use code which has not seen the light of day for 40 years. So volunteer assistance is welcomed in these cases.

Code conversion from page images to source-code files

The following AGC assembly listings are awaiting conversion:

Apollo 13 Lunar Module (Luminary 131)
Apollo 9 Command Module (Colossus 249)
Apollo 11 Command Module (Comanche 55)
Apollo 11 Lunar Module (Luminary 99)
Apollo 4 Command Module (Solarium 55)
Apollo 15-17 Command Module (Artemis 72)
Apollo 8 Command Module (Colossus 237)

Code conversion is a process wherein we take the scanned or photographed images of a hardcopy listing of an AGC program, and convert it to source code (text files) that can be processed to created the executable software which runs on the simulated AGC CPU. It is not necessary to understand AGC assembly language, or any computer language, to do this; but if you are somewhat familiar already with the AGC programs, you will be awarded with some small thrills along the way.

Here is a basic outline of the conversion process:

Contact me to receive an assignment. The AGC source code is divided into a sequence of well-defined modules, with names such as INTERPRETER or IMU MODE SWITCHING ROUTINES, and you'll be given a list of one or more modules to convert.
The AGC code does not change much from mission to mission, or from spacecraft to spacecraft. (For example, the software for Apollo 11 is likely to be similar to the software for Apollo 13, and the software for the CM is likely to be similar in many respects to the software for the LM.) Therefore, the appropriate conversion technique is to start from existing source code from a different mission or spacecraft, and then to simply make whatever changes are needed. You will therefore first need to obtain that existing source code by installing Virtual AGC on your computer via the appropriate binary installer program, or from the development snapshot, or from the subversion repository. I'll instruct you as to the likeliest close mission/spacecraft matches in the instructions I send you.
Download or examine online the appropriate scans of the assembly listings being converted. (I'd recommend looking at them online on an as-needed basis, but you're free to do it however you like.)

Copy the appropriate starting source-code files into a new, clean folder, retaining the names of the files unchanged.
Edit the file header to provide correct information (such as mission number, module name, your name, the date, etc.). (See picture below.) In the instructions I send you, I will give you a template file-header that can be used. Note: Source code is 7-bit ASCII only! If you use a Unicode-enabled editor, you will produce something that looks fine, but which will be a big mess for me to use, since I will have to seek out and destroy all of the Unicode characters you had added.
Compare the source file line-by-line against the scanned file, making changes where necessary. Note certain differences between the scans and the textual source-code files (referring to the picture below):

In the scans, "comments" begin with a special character such as 'R' or 'P' in the first column, or simply appear on the right-hand side of the page, following the actual code without any special marking to distinguish them. In the Virtual AGC source-code files, however, they should be preceded by the '#' character.
In the scans, each line begins with several columns that are not part of the source-code itself and are instead produced by the action of converting the source code to binary executable code. These columns are omitted in the source-code files being created.
Each line of source code begins with an optional location label of up to 8 characters in length, followed by an optional machine-language "opcode", followed by one or two optional parameters, followed by optional "comments". In the source-code files being created, we prefer to have tab-stops that are 8-spaces wide, and for the optional label to begin at the left-hand margin, the opcode to begin at the 2nd tab stop (i.e., 16 spaces in), and for each of the other fields to begin at the next succeeding tab stop. It doesn't really matter where comments are aligned, except that it's nice if they all line up at the same tab stop within any given file.
Each time you move from one scanned page to the next, put in a comment giving the page number (from the upper right-hand corner of the scan), such as "# Page 292". This helps you or other people when finding or fixing errors.
We use all upper-case text for the labels, source-code, and AGC program comments, to duplicate the whole AGC developer "experience". Comments you add to the code yourself should be lower-case or mixed upper/lower case to distinguish them, and you might want to mark them with the date or something so that we know they weren't part of the original code. You should add comments for any unusual condition, such as missing or garbled code.
Presumably because of limitations of the character sets originally used, you may find that the assembly listings have used some character substitutions like "-" for apostrophes. Wisely or unwisely, I chose to reverse these substitutions. I'd suggest that for consistency you continue the trend.
When to raise your hand and ask for help:

Tell me if you can't read some code or program comments. (Though note that zooming in or zooming out may help.) I may have higher-resolution images which can be consulted than those posted online.
Tell me if you encounter pages which are cropped so badly or with such poor contrast or brightness that you think they are unacceptable. Again, I may have better images available.
Tell me, but do not panic, if you find small sections of code which are missing or garbled, as this is almost always a situation for which workarounds exist.
If you think you have detected errors in the source-code files you started from, let me know (with some precision, please) what the error was and where it was located. This is a great opportunity to fix errors—in program comments, naturally—that may have been lurking unnoticed for years. Common errors are replacing 'O' with 'C', 'O' with 'D', 'O' with '0', 'F' with 'E' or 'P', 'P' with 'R', '2' with 'Z', and so forth.

Email the new source files you've created directly to me. If you have been assigned several, email them to me as you finish them.

In the following pictures, some of the points mentioned in items #5 and #6 above are illustrated using the first page of the SERVICER module of AGC program Luminary 131. (It is perhaps worth pointing out that according to the scan, this is page 852, while according to the converted source-code file it is page 857. This is because the Luminary 131 page images were originally supplied as a PDF file in which the page numbering within the PDF file did not exactly match the markings on the pages themselves. I hope to avoid this kind of discrepancy in future conversions.)

Before

After

Finally, I'd offer the following counter-intuitive observation: Make every effort to eliminate error, but take comfort in the fact that I have means of detecting and correcting programming errors, and thus you don't need to worry too much about them. However, there is no method other than proof-reading to detect errors in program comments, so please take special care with those. In other words, it is more important that you get program comments right than that you get the program code itself right.

Proofing of octal listings

The following AGC octal listings are awaiting proofing:

Apollo 13 Lunar Module (Luminary 131)
Apollo 8 Command Module (Colossus 249)
Apollo 11 Command Module (Comanche 55)
(Urgent!) Apollo 11 Lunar Module (Luminary 99)

Background

In addition to converting source code and comments from AGC program listings into source-code files, it is necessary for quality-control purposes to convert the executable code (which appears in the page images as 144 pages of octal numbers near the end of the page images) into a machine-readable text file as well. The accuracy of this conversion is extremely important. You see, the AGC source code is debugged only to the point at which the executable code that can be created from it matches the "octal listing" from these 144 pages ... so the AGC source code conversion can only be as good as the octal listing conversion. If the octal listing has conversion errors in it, then the source code is assured to have conversion errors as well.

The "octal listing" files so created are given names such as Luminary131.binsource or Colossus249.binsource, and are provided in a Virtual AGC download along with the AGC source-code files. These days, it is no longer necessary to manually create these files, so no volunteer help is needed for binsource creation. However, regardless of the method used to create the binsource files, the files are just as prone to error as the source files, and therefore just as in need of volunteer assistance for proofing.

Those who are attuned to issues of this kind will recognize that the danger here is not error as such, but rather the possibility that errors in binsource and source may match. Therefore, one may naturally wonder how likely it is that the binsource file and the source-code files will just happen to have identical errors at corresponding memory locations? In other words, is there really much chance of there being undetected errors? The answer is that it depends on the method to create the binsource files. Under the present time-saving methods being used, it is very likely that errors will coincide, and therefore it is very important for proofing to be done. Another logical question is this: given that each memory bank—each 4-page block of the 144 pages—has an associated checksum, how likely is it that a bank with a correct checksum will still have undetected errors in it? The answer is that it is not likely for any given memory bank, but that in the past several cases have been encountered where banks with correct checksums have been found to have two or even three undetected errors in them that canceled out when the checksum was created. In other words, the bank checksums can make us feel better about the odds the conversion has been accurate, but only up to a certain point. So again, the quality of the code conversion can only be insured by having very good proofing of the octal listings in the binsource files.

Procedure

Here are the procedures for helping out with the proofing of an octal listing:

You don't really need an assignment from me—in other words, you can simply start proofing something without consulting with me—but it may be helpful if you send me a list of binsource files and page ranges you'd like to work on so that I can warn other people to work on different page ranges.
On a page by page basis, compare a memory page from the AGC page images to a corresponding page in a binsource file. The binsource files are provided in the same folders as AGC source code when you download or install Virtual AGC.
You do not need to edit the binsource files. Rather, you merely need to take notes of what you're doing.
For each page you complete proofing, inform me of the following. (See the explanations following this procedure to understand what some of the things being asked for are.)

The binsource file being proofed (Luminary131.binsource, Comanche055.binsource, etc.)
The page number that was proofed.
The number of errors found on that page, even if it is zero.
The memory locations of those errors.
The proofing method used.

The data being compared

Below, you see examples of corresponding areas of the octal listing from an AGC page image and a binsource file (click to enlarge either:

Page image, Luminary 131 p. 1642

Binsource, Luminary 131 p. 1642

As you can see, the page image has various things in it that are simply ignored in the binsource file. For one, there is header info at the top of the page which is all discarded except that the binsource file has a comment giving the page number. (In binsource files, comments are prefixed with a semi-colon.) Each line in the page image is prefixed with a column that gives the memory address of the data, and this column is not put into the binsource file. Instead, the address from the first line on the page is placed in the page-number comment. You'll also notice notations like "C:" or "I:" interspersed throughout the data, and that these are discarded. (They indicate that the memory address is a Constant or Interpretive data, and were in the original program listing only for informational purposes anyway.) Finally, note that the contents of each memory location is a 5-digit octal number, but that in the page image it is a 5-digit octal number followed by a single digit of 0 or 1. This extra number is a parity bit, and is of no value to us so we ignore it.

Conversely, the binsource file has a couple of things in it that the page image does not. One thing that you cannot see in the example is that at the beginning of each 4-page block we place a notation that reads "BANK=n", where n is the memory-bank number. In our example, this would have been on Page 1640, and would have been an extra line reading "BANK=15". One thing you can see in the screenshot above, however, is the notation ", A" in the page-number comment. We'll discuss this a little later.

As far as the methods for comparing the page image with the binsource file are concerned, I think that many people's first inclination—mine included!—is to print out one or the other and put them side by side. I'd offer the observation that this method is essentially useless, and you will very likely give up after trying a page or two. I have hit upon a couple of methods that seem far superior to me in the sense that they are far less exhausting and detect many more errors than the side-by-side comparison method.

Audio/visual proofing

If your computer is equipped with text-to-speech capability, you can do the following:

View the appropriate page image on the screen.
Use text-to-speech to cause the computer to speak aloud the corresponding page from the binsource file.
Follow the page image with your eyes while the computer speaks.

This method is the least-tiring method as far as I'm concerned. It produces the least eyestrain, and allows you to view the page images at any size you like. However, it has the drawback that most text-to-speech systems will try to pronounce something like 12345 as "twelve thousand three hundred forty five" and something like 00006 as "six", which can cause the playback speed to vary greatly from number to number, and takes a while to become familiar with.

Visual proofing

In this method, you view the page image and the corresponding page from the binsource file at the same time, but you perform some tricks to make the comparison easy. What you do is to:

Adjust the zoom of the page image so that the vertical spacing of the text rows is exactly the same as the row spacing of the binsource file in a text editor program. (This is super-easy if you view the page image online with the Mozilla Firefox browser. All you have to do is to adjust the Firefox window size.)
You make the text-editor window in which you're viewing the binsource file really narrow so that only a single 5-digit column (or perhaps a little more) is visible.
You drag the text editor so that the columns being compared are side-by-side.

For example (click to enlarge):

"Visual compare" of page image to binsource

On newer sets of AGC page images, in which superior digitizing techniques are used, the ease of use of this method is even more striking.

Proof markings

Every time a given memory page is proofed an extra field like one of the following is added to the page-number comment:

"V" means that the page was visually proofed and that no errors were found.
"V(n)" means that the page was visually proofed and that n errors were found.
"A" and "A(n)" are the same, except that the proofing was an audio/visual proofing rather than a visual proofing.
"FV", "FV(n)", "FA", and "FA(n)" are the same except that it indicates a "final" proofing done after the bank checksum is already correct and thus when we're not really expecting to find any errors.

I actually add these notations myself, so you don't have to worry about them other than as guides to which memory pages are worth proofing. A page with a notation like "V(15), V(5), A(1), V, FV", for example, has already been proofed 5 time, including a final proofing, and the last two passes haven't found any errors ... so there's not an urgent need to proof it again. On the other hand, a page with no proofing marks, or with a mark like "V(15)" is in urgent need of more proofing.

Perhaps you will invent some wacky new method of proofing that works even better. If so, let me know about it and we'll invent a new notation for it.

Proofing of comments in source-code files

The following AGC assembly listings can profit by having comments proofed:

Apollo 13 Lunar Module (Luminary 131)
Apollo 8 Command Module (Colossus 249)
Apollo 11 Command Module (Comanche 55)
Apollo 11 Lunar Module (Luminary 99)

After the code-conversion activities described in the preceding sections, we have a reasonable assurance that the program code is 100% correct—i.e., that the AGC program will execute properly unless there is a bug in the AGC CPU simulator itself. However, we also have good reason to believe from past experience that the program comments still have many errors. Normally, computer programmers treat program comments as an afterthought, and don't worry too much about them as long as the code itself is correct. But when trying to understand very old code such as the AGC programs, the program comments are very important.

Normal Procedure

If you want to help in proofing comments in existing source files, here are the instructions for doing so, assuming you have already installed Virtual AGC on your computer and therefore have all of the existing AGC source code available to you:

You don't need any special assignment from me. I have no better idea as to where there may be bugs in program comments than you; they could be anywhere, in any source file; nor is there any team working on this problem in a fashion that needs coordination. However, the more times that a source file has been proofed, the less likely that you'll find errors in it. So simply choose an AGC source file whose modification history (in the header of the file) doesn't indicate that it has already had its comments proofed, or has been proofed less than other source files.
Download or examine online the assembly listing for the same AGC spacecraft/mission/version. (I'd recommend looking at it online, but you're free to do it however you like.)
Edit the file header "mod history" to show that you are comment-proofing the file. (See the pictures in the code-conversion section above.) Note: Source code is 7-bit ASCII only! If you use a Unicode-enabled editor, you will produce something that looks fine, but which will be a big mess for me to use, since I will have to seek out and destroy all of the Unicode characters you have inadvertantly added. This has proven to be a particular problem when people use Macs. If you are using a Mac and you are not certain that you can completely disable Unicode editing, it is perhaps best if you don't participate in this particular activity.
Compare the source file line-by-line against the scanned file, making changes where necessary. Step #6 in the "code-conversion" section above gives a lot of hints as to how to do this effectively.
Important note: If you find a comments which needs to be corrected, it is very likely that the same mistake exists in source-code files for other spacecraft or other missions. For example, suppose you are working on proofing INTERPRETER.s for Luminary131. There is also an INTERPRETER.s for Luminary099, Colossus249, Comanche055, etc. So if you correct all of these files, then you are multiplying the effectiveness of the proofing you are doing. But remember that the comments may actually have changed in the page images, so you can't blindly assume that a fix is necessarily applicable to a different AGC version unless you examine the page images for that AGC version as well.
Email the new source files you've created directly to me.

Advanced Technique

If you have the appropriate software to do so, there is a quick technique by which comment fixes that have been made in the past for one type of spacecraft or mission can be ported to the source code for other spacecraft or missions. This is so because of the way the source-code files have been created. We started with the source code for one mission, then modified it (via the "code conversion" technique described earlier) for another mission, then modified those files for still other missions. Each time the code was modified, some comment-fixes may have been made, but probably were not back-ported to earlier source-code files. So if we compare the corresponding source code for different missions, we can easily pinpoint where some corrections can be made. While this doesn't find all of the broken comments, it can help to find a lot of them with reduced effort by leveraging work that others have already done.

In terms of the way we have created the source files—as opposed to the software evolution of the original Apollo Program's AGC development—the ancestry of the source files is as follows:

Luminary131 → Colossus249 → Comanche055
Luminary131 → Luminary099

So we would expect to see more comment fixes in Comanche055 (relative to Luminary131) than we would in Colossus249.

Fortunately, there are automated techniques for locating such differences, but you need the appropriate software to do so. On Linux, I use a (free) tool called kompare for this, but there are any number of such tools for different computer platforms that may be suitable. Similar programs which can be had for free on Windows and Mac OS X are WinMerge and FileMerge, respectively. I'll simply illustrate the technique using kompare. If I run kompare on Luminary099/INTERPRETER.s and Luminary131/INTERPRETER.s (as of 2009-06-20), an excerpt of the comparison is seen below. (Click to enlarge if it's hard to read.)

A number of differences are immediately apparent:

At lines 189 and 193 (using the numbers from the left-hand pane), we see page number differences. These are perfectly appropropriate since the code does appear on different pages in these two versions of the AGC code.
At lines 182, 220, and 224, we see some code (rather than comment) differences, but actually, this is a case in which the change might be profitably ported over from one file to the other. The difference is that a space has been changed to a tab, and while this difference is unimportant to the software that processes the source code, the use of the tab instead of the space means that the fields line up better according to the preferred code-formatting described in step #6 of the "code conversion" section above.
Finally, at line 195 we seen actual fix to a program comment, namely that the word "ARTGHMETIC" has been corrected to "ARITHMETIC".

Source-Code Annotation

For those who are interested in providing help that requires a much greater involvement in understanding the technical aspects of AGC/AGS source code, such as the Luminary program, there is an interest in having an on-going program of providing modern annotations to the AGC/AGS source code. Such modern annotations can provide assistance to others examining the code, and can therefore be viewed as an educational service. Annotating the source code can help the student in several ways:

It can provide entertaining background information. For example, in the source code which produces 1201/1202 alarms, background information about the 1201/1202 alarms during the Apollo 11 landing can be added.
It can supplement the sometimes sketchy program comments provided by the original developers. They say that you never really understand a subject until you can teach it to others. Well, here's your chance!
It can list or hyperlink helpful relevant resource materials. For example, INTERPRETER.s could have a hyperlink to the manuals describing AGC interpreter language.
It can give information about the developers themselves, which is almost entirely lacking in the original source code.

At present (20090703), this effort has barely begun. To get an idea of what some annotations might look like, you can look at the Apollo 11 LM PINBALL program.

In order to provide such annotations, it is necessary to understand the markup language and strategy being used, which is described here.

There is presently not total agreement as to the best method of managing the annotation efforts. For now, if you wish to participate, I'd suggest that you decide which source file(s) you'd like to work on, chosen from among the programs Luminary 99, Comanche 55, or Flight Program 6. Then contact me so that I know you're working on it. Make changes directly in the source files and send them to me.

Last modified by Ronald Burkey on 2009-08-17.