дa, можно. (BSD-3 license, open source). But not *me*.Сообщение от NEO SPECTRUMAN
Again, if anyone [else] wants to create it, I certainly can't stop him.
But as long as we are talking about extra option to the sjasmplus I'm helping to maintain, the syntax of sjasmplus is to stay basically without change.
Luckily I don't know IDA, so I have no idea what's different, so for me this kind of comments (without actual content) are easy to ignore.
My question was if `ldi a,(hl)` is "good enough" (people will use sjasmplus even with this), or the `ld a,(hl+)` *must* be supported to make people even consider using sjasmplus for GB dev.
If the syntax must be modified as whole, because GB devs will not accept sjasmplus syntax, then this leads nowhere, I don't have time/will to rewrite all of it, and then later to maintain it.
I can add few exceptions here and there, maybe even "(hl+)" and "(hl-)", but if that will happen, it will be probably treated as fixed string, requiring it to be used in source in literal way (no extra space inside/etc). But as long as we are talking about *me* adding it to *zoom128's* branch, it's sjasmplus Z80 syntax in 95%, plus few important exceptions (which you must describe in greater detail than "like IDA", that means nothing to me and I don't want to invest my time googling how IDA looks)
I guess this one can be easily implemented with some macro in `DEVICE ZXSPECTRUM48` mode, just like there were those macros to calculate XOR/ADD checksums before. Even if it needs more complex formula of checksum. Such macro can be added to tests/macro_examples folder, so you will just include the asm file from there for definition, and use the macro at proper place after you have the header data in device memory defined.
Meanwhile I did create a summary of the opcode differences, if somebody wants to check if I have them Oll Korrekt:
LR35902_Z80_diff.ods.7z (it's ODS spread sheet file, two sheets)
Basically it all boils down to somebody else investing their time to prepare the resources/details/info for me, so I don't need to waste my time on that. And after implementing it, again somebody else will have to review + check the result.
You seem to be actively helping with this, so if you think you can go all the way along from start to finish, then it may become real (just don't expect it to be super simple, to deal with me... I'm sometimes quite an ass ... and hole...
)
Ответить с цитированием