Re: [cc65] Extra Zero-page Segments

From: "Ullrich von Bassewitz"; on Thurs., Feb. 18, 2010  02:47 AM -0500
>
> On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 11:13:20PM -0500, Greg King wrote:
> > I am not happy about that!  The compiler has "stolen" the ZEROPAGE
> > segment.  When we want to do something in the zero-page, we are
> > forced to create special segments (and, invent names for them).
> > I prefer that it be the other way around.  The compiler should have
> > its pseudo-registers in a special segment ("CC65ZP", perhaps).
> > Then, we assembly programmers can take advantage of CA65's
> > easy-to-remember, easy-to-summon, built-in .zeropage directive
> > whenever we want to use the zero-page!
>
> Typing  .segment "EXTZP"
> instead of  .zeropage
>
> when interfacing with C code won't kill anyone. Or, will it? :-)

:-D

But, it would be more convenient.  We would be able to use the
zero-page -- or, not to use the zero-page, whichever choice we happenned
to want at any particular time -- without needing to edit a
configuration file that didn't have an extra zero-page segment for our
use.  Also, _some_ of us ;-)
would forget what that extra segment's name's exact spelling is, if we
hadn't used it for awhile.  We would need to go way over to the .cfg
file, in order to find out what to type.  I doubt that anyone could
forget how to spell ".zeropage"!

Besides, it simply seems more rational for the compiler to be the one
that uses the special segment; and, we programmers to be the ones who
use the general ".zeropage" segment.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list send mail to majordomo@musoftware.de with
the string "unsubscribe cc65" in the body(!) of the mail.