Re: New three versions of C64 source code

Date: Wed, 03 Dec 2014 21:14:29 +0100
Message-ID: <>
Hallo Soci,

> Don't take it personally.

No, I don't :)

> You're not the first being surprised why .byte is not just an
> alias of .text as on some other assemblers. ......

I understand your reasons completely but.... 
My own assembler behaved exactly as you mentioned. And I noticed it 
wasn't conveniant. Then I noticed that other assemblers, in 
particular, behaved in the "wrong" but more conveniant way. So why 
couldn't mine? So I altered it and never ever regretted it.

You noticed you haven convinced me. But you can probably by giving 
me a good example where things can go wrong very badly by mixing 
bytes, strings and characters after the .byte directive. 

> But then (I think) you enabled PETSCII encoding

Here you have a very good point. 64tass does have this feature and I 
now realise that I used it completely wrong: I even disabled it and 
that's why I got in trouble with 'D'+$80. But at that moment I was 
focussed on creating a one-file source code for three assemblers. 

Question: do XA and CA65 have this feature as well? I cannot 
remember it being mentioned in the manuals.

Again, a very good point and I will build this feature into my own 

> .text "enD"

One remark: what about the BASIC operators in the source codes i.e. 
'+'+$80, '-'+$80 etc.? IMHO it seems this construction is still 
needed. In other words: take the best of two worlds :)

Kind regards / Met vriendelijke groet, Ruud Baltissen

       Message was sent through the cbm-hackers mailing list
Received on 2014-12-03 21:00:03

Archive generated by hypermail 2.2.0.