Re: A89: Quitting ASM

To: assembly-89@lists.ticalc.org
Subject: Re: A89: Quitting ASM
From: TurboSoft@aol.com
Date: Sat, 5 Dec 1998 14:05:29 EST
Delivered-To: assembly-89-outgoing@towerguard.unix.edu.sollentuna.se
Reply-To: assembly-89@lists.ticalc.org

In a message dated 12/5/98 1:17:43 PM Eastern Standard Time,
nlmueller@students.wisc.edu writes:

> Don't give up, asm is hard and non-intuative but it _really_ teaches you a
>  lot.  I admit though, after discovering C/C++ compilers for the 89 I really
>  don't do much asm either.
>  http://www.mot.com/SPS/HPESD/devprg/frames/members1.html has a list of
>  third party venders for the 68000, many of which have free C/C++ compilers.
>  
>  	--Nate

There were only a few questions that l needed answered about tables and
indirection that l needed answered, and it seemed as though l was writing only
questions to the list that didn't get answered, except by maybe a couple
people. 

After figuring out macros and strings and everything, l'm finally able to
compile my .asm program (l think).  the DoorsOS compiler STILL can't find my
source and the Plusshell only returns a file which, when loaded on the calc,
just gives a memory error.  l tried compiling programs like tron89 and others
and it would either take a protection fault or give me a 69 (hehe) byte .9xz
file back.

Can C/C++ language be used to make games for the 89?

Also, another thing that irritates me is how, for important lib.s like util
and tios, many don't even tell you how to give input for the function (what
registers to load data into).  lt's kinda hard to draw XY strings and such
when there is no way of knowing the input methods.