From: Groepaz (groepaz_at_gmx.net)
Date: 2003-09-25 18:43:42
On Thursday 25 September 2003 10:51, Ullrich von Bassewitz wrote: > On Wed, Sep 24, 2003 at 06:16:50AM +0200, Groepaz wrote: > > so is there a possibility to make ca65 ouput the "preprocessed" assembler > > code? something like the list-file, but in a format that can be assembled > > by ca65 again? > > No, sorry. It is possible but not easy, so in my opinion the > effort/usefulness ratio is too bad. mmh ok :) thought so :) maybe its still possible to output the list file in a less "compact" format (currently for eg .repeat statements and alike arent exactly emitted as they appear in the actual binary...) ? i could probably come up with a script then that strips away what i dont want :) > Same as above: Possible but too much work just to have a small debugging > help. Problem is that this influences pointer arithmetic as well, because > currently the result of ptr-ptr is an int (which is not standard compliant > but ok for a 6502 platform). ok...mmmmh.... another thing i tried was just putting typedef signed long myint; #define int myint at the top of that particular source, but still didnt get the expected results (the source IS self-contained so its not beeing messed up by library calls or sth) mmmmh..any simple reason why that must fail? :o) or possibly a problem with 32bit arithmetic in the compiler? (i suspect the latter actually :/ ...that testsuite thing suggests that aswell :/) > Well, it is my personal opinion that using the emulation features to mimic > other assemblers is a Bad Thing(tm). mine too, however the "professional" approach of ca65 (ie an assembler/linker combo) can be quite confusing if you have used TASS for 15 years before :o) so its still kinda useful if you are coming from a simplier dev environment.... you'll switch to the full thing sooner or later anyway :) > And your text is rather specific, so I > don't think adding it to the FAQ is a good idea. If I start adding it, I > will also have to add information on how to convert from xa, xasm, acme and > all other assemblers out in the wild. add JA and CASM to that list - thats all my table shows then :o) but ofcoz you are right...maybe the faq is just the wrong place for this :) > But how about a new section in the ca65 docs "Porting sources from other > assemblers"? The ca65 docs would be the perfect place for such a text, > adding information about other assemblers is no problem, because there's no > reason to be brief, and I can add a pointer to the FAQ. sounds like a good idea to me. however its done.... the info shouldnt be hidden in the documentation of the ".feature" directive :=P > > > oh and in ca65 docs you suggest using "pc_assignment" for emulating > > xa65... are you sure about this? in TASS (and several crossassembler that > > are clones of it) atleast a programmcounter assignment really moves the > > programcounter (ie, both run AND load address) and not only the > > (run-)address (eh tricky terminology here...so whats the correct term for > > "the address we are assembling to" and "the address we are currently > > assembling at" ? :=P) > > Assignment to PC with ".feature pc_assignment" enabled is the same as using > a .org directive. It may not be the same as a PC assignment in TASM, but it > is rather difficult to mimic every feature in every assembler out there. yesyes... i just was wondering that you are suggesting to use that emulation feature with xa65... AFAIK programmcounter assignments work the same as in TASS there. (i've personally never seen an assembler that uses progcount assignments in the sence of ".org" - and i've tried a whole lot of crossassemblers :=P) > > tjam...that reminds me of the "ca65 vs other assemblers" table i have > > started once...maybe i should bring it into a useable state too :=P > > How about adding it to the same section in the ca65 docs? yeah, makes sence :) > > (can anyone > > recommend a way to layout a large table? its currently in html, but not > > really useful due to its size - lots of scrolling involved etc :/) > > Split it into several tables that each have the same layout, but do compare > just one assembler to ca65. mmmh yeah that could work better > This way, we can have a section "Porting > sources from other assemblers", with one assembler per subsection, and each > subsection can contain such a table. The only problem is that I haven't > managed to create tables using LinuxDoc until now:-( mmmmmh.... any pointers to some docs? (i have it installed but "man linuxDoc" doesnt give any results :/) gpz ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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 : 2003-09-25 18:48:42 CEST