Re: A82: Re: GWv2.0 bug/ASHv3.0 bug
[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: A82: Re: GWv2.0 bug/ASHv3.0 bug
On Wed, 11 Feb 1998 22:23:20 +0100 (MET), you wrote:
>
>I have been concidering another possibility. I am still working on Ash
>4.0, and it will take some time to finish it (real relocation is actually
>hard to do), but i could release a small update of Ash (3.1). This could
>solve the problem with large programs, and I could document simpel
>relocation so making Game Wizard work would be no problem at all. Both of
>these things are very easy to do so if anyone is interested i can do it.
>(It might be possible to use some VAR functions too).
>
>Is anyone intersted ? Is it worth spending the time on it ?
>
>Dines
>
>BTW I do think that 2 shells is enough, a 3rd would just mean more
>problems with different versions of the programs.
>-----Original Message-----
>From: CrASH Staff <crash.staff@mailexcite.com>
>To: assembly-82@lists.ticalc.org <assembly-82@lists.ticalc.org>
>Date: 10. februar 1998 22:01
>Subject: A82: GWv2.0 bug/ASHv3.0 bug
>
Speaking of too many shells, you may want to talk to Ben Sfarazza
about Rigel (for the 85). It uses fixed address relocation and
updates the vat (i am pretty sure, anyways).
-mike
mgp4007@omega.uta.edu
References: