Re: Aw: Re: [stella] Player data loading...semi newbie

Subject: Re: Aw: Re: [stella] Player data loading...semi newbie
From: "B. Watson" <urchlay@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2001 17:29:22 -0400 (EDT)

On Thu, 18 Oct 2001 cybergoth@xxxxxxxx wrote:

> Yup! But that's only a part of it. Another important aspect is,
> that I don't want to deal with X slightly altered DASM versions.
> It'd be ok to add the @...X...X graphics format to Thomas 
> (most recent) version. Good idea, nice thing. Cool to have feature.

And it's already done as of this morning...

> But what's the point in having two different illegal opcode enabled
> DASMs, both with different usages?

No point at all. My illegal opcode stuff doesn't add any features that
Thomas's doesn't have, so I'm not going to be releasing it. Only reason
I even mentioned it, is somebody asked about it (they didn't search the
archives anyway), and I was in the mood for a spot of C coding...

> Here I come, take another DASM, say 'Nah! illegal opcodes, not for me!'
> put in a §__#_____ graphics format and publish it without illegal 
> opcode support. Voilą - One more DASM.

No, now you're talking about the Linux kernel, not DASM :)

> Next day I want to compile a new [STELLA] source - Ooops wrong DASM!
> Version DASM_Saunders_2001_build_friday needed.
> There's really no offense intended, but for me one DASM is enough.
> Evolve that one version step by step (just like Z26 - it works!)
> Ok - But don't have everybody brewing his own...
> Phew... again, this was not meant to step on your toes Brian,
> I really think it's cool that you want to update DASM,
> but please, start from the right point.
> If you had known about Thomas' version right from the start,
> you'd have used his version as a base, I'm sure.

Right. If I'd known about it... but at the time when I was considering
it, I was sitting behind a 28.8k dialup (I just lost my cablemodem
last week), so it didn't even occur to me to use a web browser, because
it's just too painful :(

> That's all what I meant with:
> "I wish people would start browsing the archive"

Point taken.

Part of the reason for talking about it on here, was to get people's
opinions, anyway.. Now I've got your opinion, and when you put it like
that, I agree with you.

So I'll take Thomas's illegal opcode DASM, add my (well, Glenn's)
@X...X... stuff for graphics. Now I've thought of another feature
that I'd find useful, don't know if anyone else would.. how about
a `reverse/revend' pair of pseudo-ops? Their purpose would be to
reverse the order of the stuff that comes between them, so you no
longer have to draw your graphics upside-down in source... If you
wanted to draw an Atari symbol in DASM source, you'd say:

 byte @..X.X.X.
 byte @..X.X.X.
 byte @..X.X.X.
 byte @.XX.X.XX
 byte @.X..X..X
 byte @.X..X..X

...and the reverse/revend would take care of flipping it upside down,
if you were going to draw it with a dey/bne loop...

Does anyone think this is a good idea? Would anyone use it?


Archives (includes files) at
Unsub & more at

Current Thread