| |
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....
|
| |
AlexC
Registered: Jan 2008
Posts: 299 |
Useful addition to current discussion would be explanation why particular assembler is being used IMHO. |
| |
Pantaloon
Registered: Aug 2003
Posts: 124 |
AlexC, don't go there :) |
| |
Peiselulli
Registered: Oct 2006
Posts: 81 |
ACME - because if I miss a feature or find a bug, I can write to the developer directly to fix it in a new version very fast ;-)
And I'm too lazy to build my own. |
| |
Karmic
Registered: Apr 2015
Posts: 66 |
Peiselulli: What, ACME is still being developed? :) |
| |
AlexC
Registered: Jan 2008
Posts: 299 |
Quote: AlexC, don't go there :)
Sorry - I know I'm stepping on very thin ice but I can't resist ;) |
| |
Fungus
Registered: Sep 2002
Posts: 686 |
Crossbow would write SMON |
| |
Slammer
Registered: Feb 2004
Posts: 416 |
Mr Sid: I checked out K2Asm and saw you have bracket scopes for avoiding clash of labels. Nice, I thought KickAssembler was the only one to support this style :-) (And that I was one of the only ones to used it, since people have gotten use to referencing back and forth with multilabels) |
| |
Axis/Oxyron
Account closed
Registered: Apr 2007
Posts: 91 |
@AlexC: I guess 90% of the people will awnser "I someday started cross-dev with this asm and now I´m used to it". As a coder you also build a kind of a framework of libraries and code-snippets you always re-use. And no one feels like porting all this stuff to a different asm. |
| |
Bitbreaker
Registered: Oct 2002
Posts: 508 |
Quote: Useful addition to current discussion would be explanation why particular assembler is being used IMHO.
If it is just about typing in assembler it doesn't matter much which assembler you use, but there are things that can annoy with other assemblers. Therefore ACME is capable of:
- it handles labels without that additional colon, i hate that extra typing work
- it supports short labels like +/- (even though you can fuck yourself really hard if you overlook one of those small labels and then branch too far), as well as *+x as we know them from old tass times, right?
- macros with references
- support of local labels, be it per macro or zone
- supports all illegal menomonics, so noa ugly macro/!byte workarounds
Also as Peiselulli already stated, ACME is still actively maintained and it is fast.
Also, i don't see any problem at all to integrate a multitude of different assemblers with scripts/Makefiles as long as they are called via some commandline. No need to fall back into stoneage and receiving binary blobs. There's repositories we can use in a group and you can still hand out readymade .d64 images to those who are unable to build the whole project. At least all coders can build it (and even more), that is sufficient. |
| |
Fungus
Registered: Sep 2002
Posts: 686 |
64tass is also actively maintained and fast. soci has been active in this thread? |
| Previous - 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | ... | 22 - Next |
