Subject: Re: [stella] DASM wish list From: Kevin Lipe <kevin.lipe@xxxxxxxxx> Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2005 16:44:25 -0400 |
What features could be added to a 6502 assembler to optimize the syntax for VCS prgramming? I don't really have a problem with the need for whitespace, but when I first started using DASM it took me a while to figure out it's quirks, and it made learning the 2600 a lot more frustrating. I've used the WLA-DX assemblers some (I'm not sure where the site is but they're open source) and I liked using them a little bit more than DASM. Just my $0.02, since I never say much on the list :) ~ kevin On 8/16/05, B. Watson <atari@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > On Tue, 16 Aug 2005, xucaen wrote: > > > Hi, I just had a thought: A new assembler should be compatible with the > > books that have aleady been written on 6502 assembler. > > A good idea. > > However (there's always a however)... > > So far as I know, there are no 6502 assembler books that have any > information on the illegal opcodes. There are at least two different > sets of names for the illegal opcodes... > > Also, different books are written for use with different assemblers. Some > of them call "ROR A" just plain "ROR", and some don't... different > macro assemblers use different syntax for defining and calling macros. > Some assemblers, you set the current origin by assigning to "*", some > you use an "ORG" directive, and some allow both. Some assemblers use < > and > to mean low-byte and high-byte, and some don't support this (so you > have to use value/256 and value%256, except sometimes it's \ instead of % > to mean "modulus", and sometimes there's no modulus operator so you have > to use value>>8, except when there's no >> bit shift operator)... > > The list goes on. There never was anything like an ANSI or ISO 6502 > assembly standard. The chip documentation (as far as I know) specifies > the opcodes and addressing modes, but doesn't say anything about how an > assembler should handle symbols, expressions, directives, macros, etc. > > I think it'd be literally impossible to support every 6502 assembly > dialect in the same assembler, even if it were desirable... The ATASM > project attempts to mimic the MAC/65 assembler, which is probably the > closest thing to a "standard" syntax in the Atari world, but it's a > limited syntax compared to DASM. > > Sorry, I didn't mean to go into rant-mode on you. This is just one of > those irritating things that sets me off. Today seems to be my day for > ranting about problems without providing any useful solutions :( > > -- > B. > Archives (includes files) at http://www.biglist.com/lists/stella/archives/ > Unsub & more at http://stella.biglist.com > > Archives (includes files) at http://www.biglist.com/lists/stella/archives/ Unsub & more at http://stella.biglist.com
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: [stella] DASM wish list, B. Watson | Thread | Re: [stella] DASM wish list, mathys66 |
Re: [stella] DASM wish list, B. Watson | Date | Re: [stella] DASM wish list, mathys66 |
Month |