Brass 2: Dropping TASM backwards compatibility.

One suite to code them all. An complete IDE and assembler for all your z80 projects!

Moderators: benryves, kv83

User avatar
benryves
Maxcoderz Staff
Posts: 3080
Joined: Thu 16 Dec, 2004 10:06 pm
Location: Croydon, England
Contact:

Brass 2: Dropping TASM backwards compatibility.

Post by benryves »

I've mentioned this, and would like to clarify what I mean.

TASM does things its own way, and Brass 1 tries to follow that and add its own bits too.

In some cases, this causes a problem - supporting TASM's rather strange module system along side Brass's rather more straightforwards one, for example, isn't very nice.

Backwards compatibility with TASM, or even Brass 1, are not going to be features. Some of Brass 1's directives are incredibly messy (for example, the file management, ASCII mapping and image inclusion) and will be stripped down to what I hope will be a far cleaner syntax.

What with the plugin architecture, I don't need to write directives that try to cover each and every possible combination; rather, I can focus on a clean and simplified set of core directives, allowing for people to write their own plugins if they want something more complex.

TASM's modules are one thing I am definitely not directly supporting. I will try and cover most of the things that are in Brass 1, the things that I am dropping will be where there are problems caused by opposing views.
King Harold
Calc King
Posts: 1513
Joined: Sat 05 Aug, 2006 7:22 am

Post by King Harold »

I think that's a good idea, but I also think that most problems regarding opposing views could be solved by adding a define TASM and define Brass, Brass should then compile it like TASM would (without the bugs) or like it would if it were itself. But that's all complicated and messy and basically it would make brass twice as big (or atleast one and a half times). I really hope to see the cool syntax-parsing-highlighting thing you mentioned earlier, it should make newly defined things the right colour and it could even colour label/variable references if you spelled them right.

Good luck :D if you need testers to see if it compiles code like it should I would be glad to help. (but since you made Brass1 I doubt you'd need much testing)
User avatar
benryves
Maxcoderz Staff
Posts: 3080
Joined: Thu 16 Dec, 2004 10:06 pm
Location: Croydon, England
Contact:

Post by benryves »

With regards to highlighting - well, absolutely. And if you spell them wrong, they get highlighted too - but with a red squiggly underline to inform you that you made a mistake.

Latenite will actually be running Brass in the background, and so can ask Brass about each line and get Brass to respond with what it thinks each line should be highlighted as. This has a number of advantages to me... for example, I can easily spot where parser bug errors are in Brass. ;)
King Harold
Calc King
Posts: 1513
Joined: Sat 05 Aug, 2006 7:22 am

Post by King Harold »

You would see them in a blink, but little bugs in the compiled code could still occur, when forexample Brass makes a little mistake with its output which it doesnt make in the highlighting..
Although you're so scaringly good at programming that it probebly won't happen. (what if you accidentally left a line commented out? I do that all the time, but that's me.)
CoBB
MCF Legend
Posts: 1601
Joined: Mon 20 Dec, 2004 8:45 am
Location: Budapest, Absurdistan
Contact:

Post by CoBB »

I think you need to give a more precise explanation of semantics than in the current Brass docs. For instance, what’s the order of matching the signatures of a macro (or how do you decide which one to choose if an expression matches several)?
User avatar
benryves
Maxcoderz Staff
Posts: 3080
Joined: Thu 16 Dec, 2004 10:06 pm
Location: Croydon, England
Contact:

Post by benryves »

Point taken. On that issue, there seem to be a myriad different macro systems out there (TASM, Spencer's, ZDS, WLA-DX, ...) - mine is just a hack on top of TASM's. Any suggestions to what you'd want to see?
CoBB
MCF Legend
Posts: 1601
Joined: Mon 20 Dec, 2004 8:45 am
Location: Budapest, Absurdistan
Contact:

Post by CoBB »

I don’t think it’s a good idea to make it too complicated, since macros are the worst way to pretend using a high-level language. You should definitely do it from scratch. If someone wants to compile a TASM source, they can always use TASM, and you can add a separate compatibility mode later that doesn’t interfere with the Brass way. And of course provide a well-defined behaviour, otherwise the coder is likely to get stuck as soon as something counter-intuitive happens.
User avatar
benryves
Maxcoderz Staff
Posts: 3080
Joined: Thu 16 Dec, 2004 10:06 pm
Location: Croydon, England
Contact:

Post by benryves »

Given the plugin-based architecture; if you wanted TASM compatibility, you could write a pair of plugins; a directive one (to respond to #define) and a text processing one (that would be run on each line).
User avatar
silver calc
New Member
Posts: 73
Joined: Tue 28 Mar, 2006 10:50 pm
Location: Wouldn't you like to know?

Post by silver calc »

Will Brass2 (and LateNite) have support for apps (single and multi-page)?
Please "encourage" me to work more on Image any way you deem necessary
User avatar
tr1p1ea
Maxcoderz Staff
Posts: 4135
Joined: Thu 16 Dec, 2004 10:06 pm
Location: I cant seem to get out of this cryogenic chamber!
Contact:

Post by tr1p1ea »

Its a safe bet, considering that the current version already has support for apps.

When he talks about breaking TASM ompatibility im assuming he is talking about the fact that TASM seems to calculate a few things incorrectly, however BRASS1 made allowences for this.

BRASS2 should be very nice and customisable.
"My world is Black & White. But if I blink fast enough, I see it in Grayscale."
Image
Image
User avatar
benryves
Maxcoderz Staff
Posts: 3080
Joined: Thu 16 Dec, 2004 10:06 pm
Location: Croydon, England
Contact:

Post by benryves »

The lost backwards compatibility is on things that Brass handles one way and TASM handles the other (such as modules). TASM has a pretty primitive (and in some cases, rather weird) module system, which Brass implements by default. You need to add all sorts of odd directives to enable Brass modules, which are to my mind slightly more logical. What I am therefore doing is dropping TASM modules completely, and only allowing Brass-style modules.

In terms of application support; all output binaries are exported using a user-customisable "Output" plugin. In the mix_core.dll package will be a the usual suspects (Intel hex and raw binary). There will be a TI-specific plugin package which will contain all of the "standard" output types (8xp, 83p, 82p, ...) and yes, app signing. Probably with the WappSign COM interface as the current one does for the moment.
User avatar
silver calc
New Member
Posts: 73
Joined: Tue 28 Mar, 2006 10:50 pm
Location: Wouldn't you like to know?

Post by silver calc »

benryves wrote:Probably with the WappSign COM interface as the current one does for the moment.
How do you get a working project using the included template? I tried to modify it but it doesn't produce a working application.
Please "encourage" me to work more on Image any way you deem necessary
King Harold
Calc King
Posts: 1513
Joined: Sat 05 Aug, 2006 7:22 am

Post by King Harold »

you could try this as header.asm

Code: Select all

.variablename "$PROJECT_NAME$"
.binarymode ti8xapp                 ; TI-83+ Application
.deflong bjump(label)               ; Jump macro
    call BRT_JUMP0
    .dw label
.enddeflong
.deflong bcall(label)               ; Call macro
    rst rBR_CALL
    .dw label
.enddeflong
.include "ASCII Mapping.asm"
.include "ParseEquates.inc"
.local
.include "../Program.asm"
.endlocal
.include "TIOS Variables.asm"
and don't forget the app header and page defenitions.
(I had a lot of trouble with this.. but i got it to work)
User avatar
silver calc
New Member
Posts: 73
Joined: Tue 28 Mar, 2006 10:50 pm
Location: Wouldn't you like to know?

Post by silver calc »

I tried that header, but it keeps telling me that page0 needs to be 16K long.
I tried this, but it still didn't work:

Code: Select all

.db $80, $0F				 ;Field: Program length
.db $00, $00, $40, $00	;Length
What am I doing wrong?
Please "encourage" me to work more on Image any way you deem necessary
User avatar
benryves
Maxcoderz Staff
Posts: 3080
Joined: Thu 16 Dec, 2004 10:06 pm
Location: Croydon, England
Contact:

Post by benryves »

Try using that header, but just before .include "../Program.asm" insert the following:

Code: Select all

.defpage 0, 16*1024, $4000          ; Page 0 definition
.page 0                             ; We're in page 0
                                    ; ← header is added in here for us
    .block 128                      ; Advance 128 bytes for header
Note that the .block 128 is important - otherwise the header overwrites your code, so you need to skip 128 bytes to leave space for it.
Post Reply