2011-04-01, 05:01 AM
That should be defs 6912,0 I think. My error.
You might want to do something like defs 6912, 128 just so you can see the code block for the buffer differently to empty ram.
I compiled this and I saw
initialize
gap of zeroes
buffer starting at 32768
E markers
A markers
B markers
C markers
Hmm. Not what I expected at all. I have to concur with your analysis. Darn. I had hopes for that method. I have no idea why the compiler would do that. It must be following a non linear logic. I even tried adding declare statements for the functions.
For:
Asm
ld e, (16384)
End asm
Yes, that looks like a bug in the assembler in accepting that. Looks like it does a LD E,0 instruction there.
You might want to do something like defs 6912, 128 just so you can see the code block for the buffer differently to empty ram.
I compiled this and I saw
initialize
gap of zeroes
buffer starting at 32768
E markers
A markers
B markers
C markers
Hmm. Not what I expected at all. I have to concur with your analysis. Darn. I had hopes for that method. I have no idea why the compiler would do that. It must be following a non linear logic. I even tried adding declare statements for the functions.
For:
Asm
ld e, (16384)
End asm
Yes, that looks like a bug in the assembler in accepting that. Looks like it does a LD E,0 instruction there.