Re: A85: Rigel, where'd it go??
[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: A85: Rigel, where'd it go??
Sam Davies wrote:
>
> Ben Sferrazza wrote:
>
> > Michael Pearce wrote:
> > >
> > > And don't forget that program sizes are smaller in Rigel than they are
> > > in Usgard.
> > >
> > > -mike pearce
> > >
> > > BTW, does it take 2 additional bytes for every "&" you stick in a
> > > Usgard program to put in the relocation table?
> >
> > Sure. Since Usgard uses some sort of fixup table for all relocation,
> > you must have at least two bytes for every fixup. Ah, the beauty of
> > fixed address relocation.
>
> Actually, no! It takes in most cases only *1* byte to store the address!
> How can we do this, you ask? We store addresses relatively -- that is we
> store the offset from the last relocation address. So if there are two &'s
> within 256 bytes, it will only take one byte :)
> Sam
>
> --
> Sam Davies <sdavies@mail.trilogy.net>
Hm, how can you tell if the next 2 relocations are relative or if the
next relocation is absolute? Do the absolutes take 3 bytes?
--
Terry Peng <tpeng@geocities.com>
Follow-Ups:
References: