[CSDb] - User Forums - Assembler preferences.

You are not logged in - nap

CSDb User Forums

Forums > C64 Coding > Assembler preferences.

2016-02-09 06:03

ChristopherJam

Registered: Aug 2004
Posts: 1409

Assembler preferences.

Two questions:
- what's everyone using these days?
- on large productions, do groups tend to enforce a single assembler for the entire project, or is the code base a bit heterogenous?

I'd like to keep this discussion purely focussed on assemblers; please leave code generators, loader toolchains etc for that other thread.

(as for me, I'm still using xa65 for most projects)

... 204 posts hidden. Click here to view all posts....

2019-09-16 16:13

T.M.R
Account closed

Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 749

Quoting Frantic

the same as 2016..

Yup, nothing has changed here either.

2019-09-16 17:58

TWW

Registered: Jul 2009
Posts: 545

same same...

2019-09-16 19:28

oziphantom

Registered: Oct 2014
Posts: 490

64tass is now even better than it was back then, still the best, and now that I have function identification and break out working, I can now debug at the function level in VICE PDB Debugger..

2019-09-16 19:29

soci

Registered: Sep 2003
Posts: 480

Quote:

the same as 2016..
Yup, nothing has changed here either.
same, same...

I've got fed up with the limitations and gave in last month. I've stopped using 64tass 1.45 for compiling IDEDOS 0.90 and cleaned up the sources to use a more modern assembler. I'm using a recent version of 64tass 1.54 now. True story.

I think this thread starts to get exiting. (not)

2019-09-16 20:24

ChristopherJam

Registered: Aug 2004
Posts: 1409

I've switched over to ca65 for all but the tiniest of projects - mostly for the linker and the multiple segment support.

Having routines in two different areas of RAM that can just reference each other's exported symbols directly is sooo much saner than my old multi-pass hacks of parsing .lst files to generate includes. Nice having an assembler that supports unintended opcodes too.

2019-09-16 20:58

Compyx

Registered: Jan 2005
Posts: 631

Quoting soci

Quote:

the same as 2016..
Yup, nothing has changed here either.
same, same...

I've got fed up with the limitations and gave in last month. I've stopped using 64tass 1.45 for compiling IDEDOS 0.90 and cleaned up the sources to use a more modern assembler. I'm using a recent version of 64tass 1.54 now. True story.

I think this thread starts to get exiting. (not)

Oh Gods, I also use 64tass!!! When did you start using that, and what are your experiences so far? =P

2019-09-16 21:52

Mace

Registered: May 2002
Posts: 1799

Still using Kick Assembler, though I haven't yet updated to the latest version.

2019-09-16 22:27

Golara
Account closed

Registered: Jan 2018
Posts: 212

Used Acme for first few months, then KickAsm. I had to buy a new computer cuz I was sick of the slow KickAsm compilation (it was like 1 second, but still).

2019-09-16 23:20

TBH

Registered: Mar 2010
Posts: 21

Until 2015 I developed natively - used a heavily modified PAL Assembler with 512KB REU. Assemble to memory banks, swap them in and test, etc. Quite fast with no disk access required except for load and save.

Now I use a PC-based system - CBM Prg Studio. It's a bit buggy and some functions are applied in non-standard ways, but it does have some nicely thought-out features, and is quite suitable for my needs.

2019-09-17 02:07

Compyx

Registered: Jan 2005
Posts: 631

Still using 64tass.