Hi Steve, > ...but it is counter to what I would want. This behaviour is very popular and quite useful. This way the asm programmer can easily express which symbols are to be considered the interface to the C code - and which are considered just implementation artifacts. Or view it from adifferent perspective it allows the asm programmer to have symbols visible to the linker (aka public) while yet not polluting the C namespace. > Is there some trick to keep from having to add all the unders > to public symbols? Given my statement above I'd doubt that very much... Regards, Oliver ---------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list send mail to majordomo@musoftware.de with the string "unsubscribe cc65" in the body(!) of the mail.Received on Wed Apr 28 12:20:02 2010
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 2010-04-28 12:20:05 CEST