marcokitt2000 Posted February 22, 2022 Share Posted February 22, 2022 6 hours ago, JAC! said: File handling of the input stream and the pasers for reading XEX and other file types has been revised. Now, instead of simply returning "false" and a generic error message like "is corrupted or contains more then 4096 segments", you now get a specific error message for every error situation. The texts are not yet great, but there is a different text not for every error which should already be helpful. With this instrumentation you can see that in the sample file given above there is a file with broken DOS file links (corrupted file) and one which is valid file, but not a valid XEX file with and $FFFF header. The last file loaded was OK, so no error message. Daily is updated. UPDATE: Name of the inner EXE and number sectors are now also output in the status message and the message texts have been revised already. Note that adding freely selected sectors does not yet work. That's next. Great shop Peter, Thnx for all the hard work. Gr. Marco Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+JAC! Posted February 23, 2022 Author Share Posted February 23, 2022 Update: Selecting, loading individual disk sectors from 90k (SD) / 130k (ED) and 180k (DD) now works again. The first 3 sectors of DD images are assumed to be 128 bytes. 1 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ascrnet Posted March 9, 2022 Share Posted March 9, 2022 (edited) Hi @JAC! Is version 02-23-2022 is it normal that the segment submenu does not work? Also when opening a binary .xex file it does not mark the records that are in the open file? greetings Edited March 9, 2022 by ascrnet .xex Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+JAC! Posted March 9, 2022 Author Share Posted March 9, 2022 3 hours ago, ascrnet said: Questions: Is version 02-23-2022 is it normal that the segment submenu does not work? Answer: Thanks for reporting. This has been fixed with https://sourceforge.net/p/dis6502/git/ci/b77606e531843fcd18cbc3f06d46be2b02b90908/, daily is updated. Question: Also when opening a binary .xex file it does not mark the records that are in the open file? Answer: What exactly do you mean with this? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ascrnet Posted March 9, 2022 Share Posted March 9, 2022 1 hour ago, JAC! said: What exactly do you mean with this? in the previous version the system registers used by the disassembled program are marked, e.g. : 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marcokitt2000 Posted March 30, 2022 Share Posted March 30, 2022 Hello Peter, I see that you are very busy with reprogramming dis6502 4.0. Thnxx i was very busy with our kitchen building. I hope on the weekend i can test the latest dis6502 beta. Keep the good work. Gr. Marco Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+JAC! Posted April 1, 2022 Author Share Posted April 1, 2022 Yes, I've also received support from Thomas Scott Giese who has provided fixes and some good ideas. And besides that I keep on adding tests primarily. I haven't pushed a new binary though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marcokitt2000 Posted April 4, 2022 Share Posted April 4, 2022 On 4/1/2022 at 9:44 PM, JAC! said: Yes, I've also received support from Thomas Scott Giese who has provided fixes and some good ideas. And besides that I keep on adding tests primarily. I haven't pushed a new binary though. Hello Peter, Thnxxx for the info i will wait for a beta version or test version. Keep the good atari work. Gr. Marco Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marcokitt2000 Posted April 11, 2022 Share Posted April 11, 2022 On 4/1/2022 at 9:44 PM, JAC! said: Yes, I've also received support from Thomas Scott Giese who has provided fixes and some good ideas. And besides that I keep on adding tests primarily. I haven't pushed a new binary though. Wow Peter, You are very busy with dis6502 when is a beta test version coming? Or a rc versio 4.0? But thank you for all these good work. Gr. Marco Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+JAC! Posted April 18, 2022 Author Share Posted April 18, 2022 On 4/11/2022 at 12:27 PM, marcokitt2000 said: You are very busy with dis6502 when is a beta test version coming? Or a rc versio 4.0? Sorry, but I'm still in the process of making the logic parts work and creating real unit tests for them. This weekend I've completed the parts dealing with keeping the disassembly listing in memory (finally no linked lists anymore) and the logic to save it to .asm files in the different forms (one file, one file plus one include, main file with all includes, main file with chained includes). This gives me the confidence that for all of this, I'm really done and don't have to touch it again. In other words: I am not yet on the UI layer and the link between the different controls doesn't work yet. In the original code, there basically every control calling every other control. I want to change that to a regular MVC approach, so I can ultimately also test the UI logic without clicks. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marcokitt2000 Posted April 18, 2022 Share Posted April 18, 2022 20 hours ago, JAC! said: Sorry, but I'm still in the process of making the logic parts work and creating real unit tests for them. This weekend I've completed the parts dealing with keeping the disassembly listing in memory (finally no linked lists anymore) and the logic to save it to .asm files in the different forms (one file, one file plus one include, main file with all includes, main file with chained includes). This gives me the confidence that for all of this, I'm really done and don't have to touch it again. In other words: I am not yet on the UI layer and the link between the different controls doesn't work yet. In the original code, there basically every control calling every other control. I want to change that to a regular MVC approach, so I can ultimately also test the UI logic without clicks. Wow Peter, Thnx for the info. Gr. Marco Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alfred Posted March 8, 2023 Share Posted March 8, 2023 (edited) There appears to be a bug in the address counting, to wit: L3200 JMP ECHO L3203 JMP ECHOS L3206 JMP PRINTS L3209 JMP CRLF L320C JMP GETSTRNG L320F JMP SUSPEND L3212 JMP MIOSUSP L3215 JMP RESUME L3218 JMP MIORESUM L321B JMP OPNULOG L321E JMP CLSULOG L3224 JMP RDUSER ====>> This should be $3221 not $3224 Second quirk further on: L3254 JMP TOASCII L3257 JMP TOSTR L325A JMP ECHOB L325A JMP ECHOC =====> duplicate address L325D JMP DATESTMP Edited March 8, 2023 by Alfred Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marcokitt2000 Posted March 8, 2023 Share Posted March 8, 2023 Hello Peter, Are there any updates for version 4.00 or is this still the backside. We have time to wait use the older version. Gr. Marco Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+JAC! Posted March 11, 2023 Author Share Posted March 11, 2023 On 3/8/2023 at 3:15 AM, Alfred said: There appears to be a bug in the address counting, to wit: L3200 JMP ECHO L3203 JMP ECHOS L3206 JMP PRINTS L3209 JMP CRLF L320C JMP GETSTRNG L320F JMP SUSPEND L3212 JMP MIOSUSP L3215 JMP RESUME L3218 JMP MIORESUM L321B JMP OPNULOG L321E JMP CLSULOG L3224 JMP RDUSER ====>> This should be $3221 not $3224 Second quirk further on: L3254 JMP TOASCII L3257 JMP TOSTR L325A JMP ECHOB L325A JMP ECHOC =====> duplicate address L325D JMP DATESTMP In which version of DIS6502? And could you please provide the workspace. On 3/8/2023 at 11:45 AM, marcokitt2000 said: Hello Peter, Are there any updates for version 4.00 or is this still the backside. We have time to wait use the older version. Gr. Marco My focus is currently on WUDSN still. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alfred Posted March 11, 2023 Share Posted March 11, 2023 10 hours ago, JAC! said: In which version of DIS6502? And could you please provide the workspace. How would I know what version ? There's no version number in the About box. Just says (c) 2017 by you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kenames99 Posted March 12, 2023 Share Posted March 12, 2023 hi, good point Alfred, I always wondered why no real version number. that really should be added in. Ken Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+JAC! Posted March 12, 2023 Author Share Posted March 12, 2023 23 hours ago, Alfred said: How would I know what version ? There's no version number in the About box. Just says (c) 2017 by you. Then that is very old intermediate version. The latest stable 3.6 does have it. https://sourceforge.net/projects/dis6502/files/dis6502/3.6/ 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alfred Posted March 13, 2023 Share Posted March 13, 2023 Here's a bug in the latest 3.6: When you delete the first user equate that you added, it deletes it from the box, but the next time you open the user equates, it's back. You can delete any other equates and they stay deleted, but the very first one you create, no matter how many times you delete it, it always comes back. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+JAC! Posted March 26, 2023 Author Share Posted March 26, 2023 On 3/13/2023 at 9:33 PM, Alfred said: Here's a bug in the latest 3.6: When you delete the first user equate that you added, it deletes it from the box, but the next time you open the user equates, it's back. You can delete any other equates and they stay deleted, but the very first one you create, no matter how many times you delete it, it always comes back. Thanks for reporting. I've filed it as https://sourceforge.net/p/dis6502/bugs/29/. I don't think there'll be a fix in 3.6 but I'll make sure it'll be fixed in the newer version. There the whole equate handling will be reimplemented. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alfred Posted April 11, 2023 Share Posted April 11, 2023 How do you disassemble a large ROM file ? I tried RAW but it doesn't work and other modes complain about missing segments. Is there a way to disassemble a plain ROM that has no binary header ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Irgendwer Posted May 6, 2023 Share Posted May 6, 2023 (edited) Hi, I played a bit with the 3.6 version and I'm unsure if I just do things the wrong way or nobody tested the program with ca65/m65 so far: * the system equates are still given as "equ" even if "=" is configured for the assembler. ca65 and atasm won't assemble without manual change. * the default profile has ".w" as absolute 16 bit addressing. This should be " a:" in the ca65 profile or " !" for m65 (thankfully it doesn't seem to matter for the assemblers that there is a space between the mode an operand "ora.w $FE" -> "ora a: $FE" * when going for single file output without any includes the result is garbage. Is this a known issue (or a problem while I'm testing under Linux with "wine")? - the system equates do not have the official names, which I find a bit strange. Any chance to change that (e.g. $50 is called "TEMP" while the official label should be "TMPCHR")? I'm asking while it would be quite nice to abstain from re-defining them but just do an ' .include "atari.inc" ' f.e. in the ca65 case. @JAC!? There are other issues which prevent an identical binary after re-assembling the disassembled source, but I was to lazy to track them all down yet but used "6502bench" instead (needed also some manual work). I would prefer working with "DIS6502" as "6502bench" doesn't like wine very much... Edited May 6, 2023 by Irgendwer 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+JAC! Posted May 7, 2023 Author Share Posted May 7, 2023 On 5/6/2023 at 2:31 AM, Irgendwer said: Hi, I played a bit with the 3.6 version and I'm unsure if I just do things the wrong way or nobody tested the program with ca65/m65 so far: * the system equates are still given as "equ" even if "=" is configured for the assembler. ca65 and atasm won't assemble without manual change. * the default profile has ".w" as absolute 16 bit addressing. This should be " a:" in the ca65 profile or " !" for m65 (thankfully it doesn't seem to matter for the assemblers that there is a space between the mode an operand "ora.w $FE" -> "ora a: $FE" * when going for single file output without any includes the result is garbage. Is this a known issue (or a problem while I'm testing under Linux with "wine")? - the system equates do not have the official names, which I find a bit strange. Any chance to change that (e.g. $50 is called "TEMP" while the official label should be "TMPCHR")? I'm asking while it would be quite nice to abstain from re-defining them but just do an ' .include "atari.inc" ' f.e. in the ca65 case. @JAC!? There are other issues which prevent an identical binary after re-assembling the disassembled source, but I was to lazy to track them all down yet but used "6502bench" instead (needed also some manual work). I would prefer working with "DIS6502" as "6502bench" doesn't like wine very much... Thanks a lot for your feedback. I've turned them into tickets for better tracking, so you can also subscribe to them. Bugs: Many things may already be different in 4.0 and fixes will most like only be there. https://sourceforge.net/p/dis6502/bugs/30/ https://sourceforge.net/p/dis6502/bugs/31/ https://sourceforge.net/p/dis6502/bugs/32/ Features: https://sourceforge.net/p/dis6502/feature-requests/70/ 4.0 aims at much better equate handling and I anyway wanted to include proper equates with comments. Note that there are difference between 800 and XL, too, which might be the reason why some are "incorrect" now. The TEMP is simply wrong, though and must be TEMPCHR of course. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+JAC! Posted May 20, 2023 Author Share Posted May 20, 2023 Pirx reported issues using DIS6502 4.0 under Wine. I went a little to extremes with "DIS6502 on Wine on Linux in Virtual Box on macOS / Intel MacBook Pro". Works, except for the double font size (and other known issues in 4.0) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tschak909 Posted July 21, 2023 Share Posted July 21, 2023 (edited) ... Edited July 21, 2023 by tschak909 ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tschak909 Posted July 21, 2023 Share Posted July 21, 2023 (edited) This does not play nice on HiDPI displays under Wine, at all. Windows applications _ARE NOT_ supposed to _HARD CODE_ font metrics. sigh. Edited July 21, 2023 by tschak909 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Like us on Facebook
Follow us on Twitter
AtariAge on Instagram
Watch us on YouTube
Chat on Discord
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.