Hello, * On Tue, Mar 03, 2009 at 11:52:20AM -0800 Dirk Jagdmann wrote: > > My question is, since these all (should) refer to the same memory > > location ( 0x0284 ), they should produce the same output. The correct > > output value is '1', not 225. Is there some issue with doing indirect > > loads ( de-referencing an unsigned char * )? > > You did not set mouse_port to any value yet! > > How about: > > static volatile unsigned char *mouse_port=(unsigned char*)STRIG0; What about: static volatile unsigned char * const mouse_port = (unsigned char * const )STRIG0; The const prevents accidentially setting mouse_port to something different without a little bit more effort. It might also produce some more efficient code (although, I did not test it for cc65). Regards, Spiro. -- Spiro R. Trikaliotis http://opencbm.sf.net/ http://www.trikaliotis.net/ http://www.viceteam.org/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list send mail to majordomo@musoftware.de with the string "unsubscribe cc65" in the body(!) of the mail.Received on Tue Mar 3 21:20:11 2009
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 2009-03-03 21:20:13 CET