From: Jason Robertson (jkr_at_westol.com)
Date: 2002-05-23 16:27:21
On Wed, 22 May 2002 19:44:49 +0200, groepaz <groepaz_at_gmx.net> wrote: >Hello Jason, Hello Groepaz, >JR> 1. Where in the C64 can I stick a char set that won't be touched by >JR> the compiler/object code? Ie function code won't overwrite it etc. > >with cc65, i'd suggest putting it to either $0800 or (better but a bit >harder to handle) to $e000 (you need to move videoram to sth like >$e800 then aswell). the first solution is relativly easy to achive, >just edit the ld65 script so it uses memory from $1000... not >$0800..., but it will steal 2kb from your executeable.... the $e000 >solution would steal nothing from cc65's useable memory, but some >screen-orientated functions might no more work (those who expect >videoram at $0400) Heh, a size vs. functionality issue. For game testing purposes right now I'd probably use the first method. >JR> 2. With a custom set in place and being used how will the conio >JR> functions cprintf(), cputc(), and cputs() etc. be effected? I assume >JR> that they'd be useable with the new set? > >uhmz, depends on their implementation :=) conio is usally done using >direct-screen access, so i'd expect those to work on videoram at $0400 >only..... (they could be implemented differently though, but i dont >think so). "normal" screen i/o (using the 3v1l kernal routs ;=)) can >be done just like before, since the kernal routines support a moveable >videoram. (i forgot how to tell them the new adress though, some >zeropage adresses you can find in some book ;=)) Ah! or I can create some small inline asm code do handle as well ;-). I'll have to see if I can find the zero page address for the kernal routines, it'd be interesting to use those. Thanks! Jason ---------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list send mail to majordomo_at_musoftware.de with the string "unsubscribe cc65" in the body(!) of the mail.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : 2002-05-23 19:59:19 CEST