Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'atasm'.
Found 4 results
I've been playing with some code and using atasm to assemble it. Loading the code and using the Altirra debugger is ready easy, especially with the -l options to dump the labels to a file. As long as the labels file has the same base filename as the executable all is ok. The only thing missing from the joy was source level debugging; Altirra's documentation mentioned you had to use mads or xasm. But atasm is my tool of choice, so I pulled the source code and made the changes. If you assemble a file with the -l and -g options you will now get a .lst file that allows source level debugging under Altirra. Also added support for the ;##TRACE and ;##ASSERT diagnostics. If you assemble the above file with atasm 1.11 (https://github.com/CycoPH/atasm) and launch Altirra like this: Altirra.exe altirra.xex /debugcmd:.loadsym /debug you will see Altirra break into the debugger and showing you where the display list is located. Clicking Debug and selecting "Source file list ..." will give you altirra.asm as an option. Load it and you will have full source level debugging
Hello, I recently got a 130XE off EBay as a way of getting back into Atari 8-bits. (I sold my original Atari 800, with a Happy 1050, in 1985 to upgrade to an Amiga 1000). I have an Assembler/Editor cartridge left over from my '90s retrogaming collector days. I think it would be fun for learning 6502 programming since it's on the actual hardware. When I get going with "real" projects, I would switch to a cross-assembler and I wondering which is best to use for a newbie. I definitely would use WUDSN IDE, since I'm already familiar with Eclipse. ATASM seems nice because it is compatible with MAC/65, but judging from this forum all the cool kids seem to be using MADS. My concern with MADS is that if you know only English, the documentation seems a bit like folklore. It also seems like a "power user" tool that might be overwhelming at first. Interested in hearing comments from people who are using these tools now. Thanks!
I was trying to do something that my feeble memory thought worked 30 years ago in Mac/65 and not getting any joy in atasm. I'm making macros to act as wrappers to function calls in a library of routines. Then I'm conditionally assembling routines in the library, so if they are not referenced, they don't get included and waste space. I was figuring this would work.... (only important parts included) .macro mFunc ; other stuff happens jsr libFunc .endm ; Later in the main code.... mFunc ; Later.... .if .ref libFunc libFunc ; fun stuff ensues rts .endif This does not work. The .ref does not see the libFunc referenced, so it does not build libFunc. Should this work? Or am I insane? If the forward referenced label doesn't work, how about a declared value in the macro like this?... .macro mFunc DO_FUNC .= 1 ; other stuff happens jsr libFunc .endm ; Later in the main code.... mFunc ; Later.... .if .ref DO_FUNC ; and .def does not work either. libFunc ; fun stuff ensues rts .endif DO_FUNC set in the macro is also not seen. neither .ref or .def sees it. Next fallback plan... DO_FUNC .= 0 ; Later on.... .macro mFunc DO_FUNC .= 1 ; other stuff happens jsr libFunc .endm ; Later in the main code.... mFunc ; Later.... .if DO_FUNC>0 libFunc ; fun stuff ensues rts .endif This (annoyingly) does work. DO_FUNC defined outside the scope of a macro can have its value changed in a macro, and THAT value change is seen by the conditional assembly. Rather not have to throw in a bunch of flags in a header file separate from the library file which is included in the end of the assembly.