Re: A89: Re: Re: Re: ASM without libraries
[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: A89: Re: Re: Re: ASM without libraries
----- Original Message -----
From: Niklas Brunlid <e96nbr@efd.lth.se>
To: <assembly-89@lists.ticalc.org>
Sent: Saturday, August 28, 1999 2:15 PM
Subject: Re: A89: Re: Re: Re: ASM without libraries
>
> > ok.. the thing was just that old plusshell attached a 900bytes or so
loader.
>
> OK, now I get what you meant.
>
> > the kernel handles romcalls? why should it interfere with that?
>
> Not the romcalls themselves, but the relocation of them (keeps them in a
list
> similar to the library calls and replaces them with the appropriate
address when
> relocated).
>
Could you please explain this to me -- it's one of those things that I don't
understand that just keeps haunting me. The ROM is never relocated, right?
So all addresses ROM functions could be inserted at compile time, right?
How is relocation involved then? Why does the program's location in memory
affect how ROM functions are called? Do JSR's/BSR's use relative addresses
or something?
Any light you could shed on this would be much appreciated.
Thanks,
Mark Leverentz
Follow-Ups:
References: