On 24 maj 2012, at 21:18, Agent Friday <64subnet@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 5:24 AM, <silverdr@wfmh.org.pl> wrote: >> >> On 2012-05-24, at 13:47, Agent Friday wrote: >>> LDA Z:FOO >>> >>> FOO = $12 >> >> I think the forward declaration is a problem. I recall discussing >> similar thing with UZ some time ago. Check if you get warning when >> the forced Z: is omitted (this would be result of my discussion) and >> if you get the same if the declaration of FOO is _before_ its first >> use. > > Yes, the "warning: didn't use zeropage ..." Ok. > ... > LDA Z:FOO ; _NO_ ERROR! Right, this confirms my suspicions. > So it seems that Z: _is_ in fact recognized as zero-page addressing > override, but instead of being used as the default size for FOO > (when not yet defined), it is still assuming FOO must be 16 bits, Yes, I recall discussing exactly this. But in the context of Z: ... > ..I conclude that this is a bug in the implementation of Z: .. I believe your conclusion is a valid one ;-) -- Sent from mobile phone (so please have understanding) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list send mail to majordomo@musoftware.de with the string "unsubscribe cc65" in the body(!) of the mail.Received on Fri May 25 12:41:54 2012
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 2012-05-25 12:41:58 CEST