[Featured][Dev] Zelda (Best Project 2005)
Moderator: MaxCoderz Staff
Happy to report that Zelda assembled in just under two seconds. Apparently nobody's tried making an efficient assembler before! The error system still sucks (gives you line numbers but not file names), but honestly, since TASM was generating millions of pointless unmaskable errors anyways, this is much better.
-
- Regular Member
- Posts: 86
- Joined: Fri 17 Dec, 2004 8:20 pm
- Contact:
- benryves
- Maxcoderz Staff
- Posts: 3089
- Joined: Thu 16 Dec, 2004 10:06 pm
- Location: Croydon, England
- Contact:
Tried, maybe... success, maybe not.Spencer wrote:Apparently nobody's tried making an efficient assembler before!
I don't do anything special, just dump opcodes/labels/macros into a hash table. The slowness of Brass is because of the macro preprocessor.
Should do, but I'm not sure how bug-free it is. (It's early days!). I'm more familiar with the (much simpler) mapper on the SMS so will "practice" with that; Gambit's sent me a whole bunch of useful stuff to do with the 83+ app format so hopefully Brass will output straight to 8xk.Hmmm....Brass added Defpage directive.... does that work for intel hex?
- Jim e
- Calc King
- Posts: 2457
- Joined: Sun 26 Dec, 2004 5:27 am
- Location: SXIOPO = Infinite lives for both players
- Contact:
Nice! I give it try later.benryves wrote:Should do, but I'm not sure how bug-free it is. (It's early days!). I'm more familiar with the (much simpler) mapper on the SMS so will "practice" with that; Gambit's sent me a whole bunch of useful stuff to do with the 83+ app format so hopefully Brass will output straight to 8xk.Hmmm....Brass added Defpage directive.... does that work for intel hex?
Now it's a race between the 2 of you. Let's see who finishes the dream assembler first!!!
Unmark....
Get Set....
CODE!!!!
-
- MCF Legend
- Posts: 1601
- Joined: Mon 20 Dec, 2004 8:45 am
- Location: Budapest, Absurdistan
- Contact:
Has anyone thought of integrating an assembler into PTI? I've been playing with the thought myself. Just imagine, the whole building cycle would consist of nothing but sending your main source file to the emulator. No stupid dependencies and directory structures or whatever, just a single independent standalone taking care of everything. Mmmm...
- dysfunction
- Calc Master
- Posts: 1454
- Joined: Wed 22 Dec, 2004 3:07 am
- Location: Through the Aura
Do you mean the ability to just hit "Build" then "Run" and it sends your file straight to PTI (with Ion or Mirage if they are dependencies) and executes it? Because that would be awesome. Perhaps such a thing could be integrated into Latenite?CoBB wrote:Has anyone thought of integrating an assembler into PTI? I've been playing with the thought myself. Just imagine, the whole building cycle would consist of nothing but sending your main source file to the emulator. No stupid dependencies and directory structures or whatever, just a single independent standalone taking care of everything. Mmmm...
"You're very clever, young man, but it's turtles all the way down!"
@CoBB: Why don't you make it? Afraid Spencer's or Ben's will be better?
Anyway, I think Latenite with Brass and PTI "integrated" would be better for my purposes. So it doesn't really matter if Brass compiles my code or Latenite, as long as it gets compiled and runs
Anyway, I think Latenite with Brass and PTI "integrated" would be better for my purposes. So it doesn't really matter if Brass compiles my code or Latenite, as long as it gets compiled and runs
http://clap.timendus.com/ - The Calculator Link Alternative Protocol
http://api.timendus.com/ - Make your life easier, leave the coding to the API
http://vera.timendus.com/ - The calc lover's OS
http://api.timendus.com/ - Make your life easier, leave the coding to the API
http://vera.timendus.com/ - The calc lover's OS
-
- MCF Legend
- Posts: 1601
- Joined: Mon 20 Dec, 2004 8:45 am
- Location: Budapest, Absurdistan
- Contact:
It's Ben's turn to improve integration now, let's wait for him to cook up your new dream environment.
Since Spencer's assembler is a C program just like PTI, I don't think a marriage would pose too much technical difficulty. Of course, I might write my own assembler just for the fun of it. (To be honest, it's been a recurring thought for years, but since TASM always worked for me, I never had real motivation to realise it.) But this is really just a vague idea, there are much more important things to do first.
Since Spencer's assembler is a C program just like PTI, I don't think a marriage would pose too much technical difficulty. Of course, I might write my own assembler just for the fun of it. (To be honest, it's been a recurring thought for years, but since TASM always worked for me, I never had real motivation to realise it.) But this is really just a vague idea, there are much more important things to do first.
I'm no IDE maker , that's up to Ben. I've got a little ways to go before mine is "user friendly" and completely compatible with TASM (I'm mostly lacking in the directive area).
As for integrating, the output functions are generalized (in order to support varying methods ... hex, binary, binary + list file, etc), so it would be very reasonable to just hand it a pointer to a function which writes to a provided buffer in addition to a file. I'll work towards making a general and consistent error system, as well .
As for integrating, the output functions are generalized (in order to support varying methods ... hex, binary, binary + list file, etc), so it would be very reasonable to just hand it a pointer to a function which writes to a provided buffer in addition to a file. I'll work towards making a general and consistent error system, as well .