From: Ullrich von Bassewitz (uz_at_musoftware.de)
Date: 2001-08-13 18:40:18
On Mon, Aug 13, 2001 at 06:23:59PM +0200, groepaz wrote:
> UvB> '@' translates to the character code $40 - which is ok. I have confirmed that
> UvB> the code does not work, but I don't know, why.
>
> would have surprised me anyway if the compiler had made mistakes on
> such a simple (and obvious) thing ,=)
Well, for my taste the compiler is quite a buggy piece of software, so I would
not have been suprised if '@' had been translated to the wrong character code.
There are of course reasons for the many bugs but that's another story:-)
> oh btw.... does overwriting with the "@" even work with files other
> than .prg (in the original post he used ,s,w which means a .seq file)?
I don't know myself, but I find this quite interesting. How many Commodore
programmers does it need to solve a simple file I/O problem? :-) The :s
solution is of course better, and it does work, but why does @: not?
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 22:05:41 CET