From: Ullrich von Bassewitz (uz_at_musoftware.de)
Date: 2000-05-22 22:48:22
Sorry for the late answer... On Sat, May 20, 2000 at 10:10:11PM +0200, Groepaz wrote: > am i just blind or is there really no possibility to repeat code blocks (eg > in macros) ?! i thought it was a quite common thing to have macros like eg You are right, there is currently no feature to repeat pieces of code and it would be nice to have one. A .REPEAT pseudo instruction is planned for the next release, and the token is already reserved in the current development version. > ... what one would expect from the above is, an output file like this: > > $0800- scrn1.bin > $0c00- scrn2.bin > $2000- assembled "bogus.s" > > and that even, regardless the size of the scrn1/scrn2.bin files (as long as > they dont exceed their segment size). > > but instead, the linker puts them seamlessly one after the other, since > "fill=no" is the default value. maybe this is conveniant for use with > compilers, but i think "fill=yes" would be more like what you would want > when hand-writing asm code ;=P Well, it is not, what I would expect:-) More serious: The linker relocates the code and places it into the given file(s). For anything else, it needs explicit commands. I don't think, using a default of "fill=yes" will have any real advantages. It will give larger files and will also fill the last segment, so the binary file will usually get a lot larger than needed. Maybe this is more a documentation problem. What you expect from the linker is a result of what you have read about it, so it seems the docs are not clear enough about the memory layout of the resulting file. I will have a look at it as soon as I find some time. Regards Uz -- Ullrich von Bassewitz uz_at_musoftware.de ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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 : 2001-12-14 22:05:36 CET