We read every piece of feedback, and take your input very seriously.
To see all available qualifiers, see our documentation.
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Consider this 6502 source code created by dasmfw
NUMBER_OF_BYTES_TO_FILL comes from a label (just like UDG_RAM a couple of lines later)
NUMBER_OF_BYTES_TO_FILL
UDG_RAM
Unlike UDG_RAM, NUMBER_OF_BYTES_TO_FILL is not an address, it's just a quantity, but anyway, it appears in the created source code
However, if I swap to using a deflabel
deflabel
then I still get the same equ created in the source code (now in the Used Definitions list)
equ
but it doesn't get used in the code, I only see the raw number instead:
I'm not sure if this is a bug or correct behaviour as designed, but either way, it wasn't what I was expecting.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
No branches or pull requests
Consider this 6502 source code created by dasmfw

NUMBER_OF_BYTES_TO_FILL
comes from a label (just likeUDG_RAM
a couple of lines later)Unlike

UDG_RAM
,NUMBER_OF_BYTES_TO_FILL
is not an address, it's just a quantity, but anyway, it appears in the created source codeHowever, if I swap to using a

deflabel
then I still get the same

equ
created in the source code (now in the Used Definitions list)but it doesn't get used in the code, I only see the raw number instead:

I'm not sure if this is a bug or correct behaviour as designed, but either way, it wasn't what I was expecting.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: