Re: [cc65] [ld65] Overwriting fillval for one segment only?

From: Ullrich von Bassewitz <>
Date: 2012-09-14 14:12:12

On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 09:12:26PM +0200, Spiro Trikaliotis wrote:
> Yes, this was the intepretation.
> The reason to do it so was to make sure the whole memory area can be
> controlled by the segments. Otherwise, we happen to have "whole" where
> the filler bytes cannot be controlled by the segment to override the
> memory section value.

I don't know if this requirement is necessary. Why do you think anything
should be controlled by the attributes in the segments?

> Yes, my specification was meant for exactly this:
> I wanted to make the filler bytes before the next segment to count for
> the current one - and, likewise, the filler bytes at the end of a memory
> section to count for the last segment.

This leads to the situation where changing attributes for one segment will
change the length of another segment. Which I think is highly unintuitive.

> An alternative would have been to make the filler bytes before a
> segment to count for that one. Unfortunately, with this approach, there
> would still be filler bytes at the end of the memory segment that could
> not be overwritten by a section.

So what is the problem if that cannot be done? Having the space between the
segments not assigned to a segment, but just being "something else" that is
part of the memory area seems more logical to me.



Ullrich von Bassewitz                        
To unsubscribe from the list send mail to with
the string "unsubscribe cc65" in the body(!) of the mail.
Received on Fri Sep 14 14:12:24 2012

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 2012-09-14 14:12:27 CEST