David Cantrell 🏏Fairly sure I just spotted a bug in some #Intel8008 code. Yes, 8008, not 8080 or 8086.
It's at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Intel_8008&oldid=1346138297#Code_example_2
I think that `CAL XCHGI` should assemble to `206 015 002`.
OK, I can't read #octal as easily as #hexadecimal, so I didn't check that the 206 is correct. But that address in the 2nd/3rd bytes looks proper dodgy.