RE: [stella] DASM update -- 2.20.10b

Subject: RE: [stella] DASM update -- 2.20.10b
From: mathys66@xxxxxxxxxx
Date: Mon, 15 Aug 2005 15:30:54 -0400
You, changed a lot of types. Probably you changed something from signed to
unsigned (or vice-versa) you shouldn't have, but the diff output is huge...

>-- Original-Nachricht --
>From: mathys66@xxxxxxxxxx
>To: stella@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>Subject: RE: [stella] DASM update -- 2.20.10b
>Date: Mon, 15 Aug 2005 14:40:05 -0400
>Reply-To: stella@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>PS: I have been made aware of an error introduced into 2.20.10 -- lda #-1
>>and similar will not compile.  Use instead lda #<-1.  If someone could
>>this bug for me, I'd be delighted.  It's to do with the assembler using
>>16-bit value where only 8 is allowed.  I touched it, I broke it.  You would
>>think a 'diff' on the code would make the problem obvious, but I can't
>>it :(
>which versions are you comparing against eachother ? 2.20.10 and 2.20.07
>btw : have you ever thought about creating a sourceforge project for dasm
>? having a version history available to the public could help here...
>Archives (includes files) at
>Unsub & more at

Archives (includes files) at
Unsub & more at

Current Thread