2011/05/09 3:00 Yutaka Amanai wrote: > But if this behavior is valid, I think it is troublesome to write data > on a line if the data is large. And, your "#BAR-FOO" method certainly > works, but generally "FOO" is not always relevant to "BAR", so it is > annoying that I have to be concerned with "BAR" when I want only to get > the size of "FOO". Is there a good way to get the size of large data > written on multiple lines? Probably I found a solution by myself. For .proc labels, .sizeof() seems to return the size of the whole content (until .endproc). So, I can define large data on multiple lines enclosing it with .proc and .endproc. It is data, not "procedure", but the method seems ok for my purpose. But still there is a strange behavior. I wrote a test code: STR: .byte "str" .proc myproc lda STR,x lda #.sizeof(STR) .endproc Giving ca65 this code, it causes error: "Size of `STR' is unknown". If you comment out the line "lda STR,x", ca65 doesn't cause any error and .sizeof() returns 3. And, it seems that there are some ways to suppress this error: * removing the lines ".proc" and ".endproc" * explicitly specify STR as "::STR" (global label) Is it related to scope? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list send mail to majordomo@musoftware.de with the string "unsubscribe cc65" in the body(!) of the mail.Received on Sun May 8 20:59:00 2011
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 2011-05-08 20:59:03 CEST