On Sun, Nov 07, 2010 at 10:37:53PM -0800, Agent Friday wrote: > Using a name like LAYOUT or FORMAT, rather than MEMORY, would better > represent its broader purpose. LAYOUT is probably best, since it > can apply equally well to memory as well as files. I'm not sure if I like that better than MEMORY. I've internally called them "memory areas" but "memory layout" is also a good term. But then, MEMORY is as good as LAYOUT - it's just the other word left off. What this section does is to define areas in memory space that have an address. You can later place segments into these areas. > Also confusing about entries meant only for the benefit of binary > file creation is having to supply a START attribute. It's really > superfluous to those sections, and it would be nice to leave it > out. What exactly do you mean with that? Each entry in the MEMORY section *must* have a start address and it *must* have a size attribute given. The address is used to later relocate the segments when they're placed there and the size is used to check if not too much data is placed there. > Since the non-loading file sections have no place in the o65 format, > it seems you would need some such method to identify them. Not sure what you mean with that either. The o65 format has a BSS segment, which exists in address space but is not part of the output file. > Otherwise, would the o65 generation code know to leave them out? It maps segments of type bss to the o65 BSS segment. > It would be nice if you could choose between the binary and o65 file > formats without having to make multiple changes in the config file-- > maybe even w/ a command-line override param. (In case you are > wondering, I do actually have a project in mind where I would want > to produce either format at will.) So just use two config files and switch between them. Regards Uz -- Ullrich von Bassewitz uz@musoftware.de ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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 Nov 9 22:46:05 2010
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 2010-11-09 22:46:08 CET