| |
ChristopherJam
Registered: Aug 2004
Posts: 1380 |
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) |
|
... 210 posts hidden. Click here to view all posts....
|
| |
Zirias
Registered: Jan 2014
Posts: 48 |
Quoting ChristopherJamI've switched over to ca65 for all but the tiniest of projects - mostly for the linker and the multiple segment support. That's exactly the reason I always used ca65. I wouldn't want to do something a bit complex without a linker allowing me to configure the segments and memory layout and the code and corresponding data logically organized in different "compilation units".
If I need something ca65 can't do with macros, I write little C tools generating the code for it. |
| |
oziphantom
Registered: Oct 2014
Posts: 478 |
because 64tass has an internal linker and that lets you perform sheer voodoo :D oh and 1 pass is soo 1984 |
| |
TheRyk
Registered: Mar 2009
Posts: 2076 |
Three and a half years of pondering which assembler to use should be enough procrastination alibi, in that time you could have coded dozens of trackmos in SMON. So finally get coding you damn lazy bastards ;) |
| |
ChristopherJam
Registered: Aug 2004
Posts: 1380 |
Quote: Three and a half years of pondering which assembler to use should be enough procrastination alibi, in that time you could have coded dozens of trackmos in SMON. So finally get coding you damn lazy bastards ;)
But, but, I've just realised I need a smart memory allocator to put my 32 byte tables into pages that satisfy (page+1)&0x1f==0x1f so I can safely use SHX abs,y and SHY abs,x with five bit actor indices D': |
| Previous - 1 | ... | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 - Next |
