-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 > 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. There's no one true way ;) I didn't tried to convenience you, just explained that it works differently then you expected, and why. >> .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 :) '+'+$80 and similar stuff works of course. Ok? - -- -soci- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 iEYEARECAAYFAlR/lPsACgkQyBOVYiJltRaoYgCeLmnrc4zV8acgDjwXPRX+lO/X +3IAnRvV6bIqNVurR7nBdvyC6+erTedE =OtDr -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- Message was sent through the cbm-hackers mailing listReceived on 2014-12-03 23:00:34
Archive generated by hypermail 2.2.0.