Re: [cc65] C64 fast-loader suggestion?

From: Oliver Schmidt <>
Date: 2011-12-12 11:32:53

>> ofcourse. i am not saying that you shouldnt use kernal loading - thats
>> ofcourse the preferred way to do things, especially when talking about
>> tools/applications. BUT i would always recommend to use cbm_load over
>> fopen/fread,

> The above is of course valid as long as we stick to CBM targets. And yes, the original question was about CBM. I guess it's me who tend to always think "portable" whenever cc65/C code on 6502/6510 is being spoken about. Maybe because for a 64 I feel as good (if not better :-) with pure assembler.. Thus - yes, as long as we speak of CBM only it's all correct.

The other scenario beside cross-65xx development is that cc65 allows
someone like me to do C64 development although I don't know cbm_load -
and basically don't want to learn about it. I'd call the C library
even from assembly language - and by the way still stay

When looking at the read() implementation for CBM I'm sort of having a
hard time to believe that it causes (too) much overhead. Is cbm_load()
really supposed to be noticably faster? I always thought the time is
spent on the serial transfer, not in the C library.

And when it comes to fastloading the open(), read() and friends
functions could even offer an opportunity in that a fastloader
wouldn't need to "emulate" closely the potentially very specific
behaviour of "some" low-level Kernal call but would "just" offer what
open/read/.etc need/want. Meaning that cbm_load() works the way it
always does and only read() is accelerated. Please understand that I
don't actually know if it makes sense what I say, I'm just talking
about potential design aspects.

To unsubscribe from the list send mail to with
the string "unsubscribe cc65" in the body(!) of the mail.
Received on Mon Dec 12 11:33:00 2011

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 2011-12-12 11:33:04 CET