Re: Gamma 65C Worth It?

[mdj <mdj.mdj@gmail.com>]

On Nov 26, 2:58 am, Harry Potter <maspethro...@aol.com> wrote:
> I am working on a project called Gamma 65C to make up for the short-
> comings of cc65 and include the following features:

I expect you'd find it much more satisfying to choose a project closer
to your current level of expertise.

There probably as many reasons to *not* add floating point to cc65 as
there are reasons to do it, and what may naively appear to be a
shortcoming can be regarded as a feature, when you consider the target
is a 6502.

In my view, optimising cc65 for more efficient calling semantics and
zp/stack support is mutually exclusive with adding floating point and
if you don't understand the reasons why I suggest try biting off
something a little easier to chew.

How about actually writing some mathematics code with cc65. For
example, a small set of macros/functions to allow dealing with ratios
might alleviate much of the need for floating point without adding 8kb
+ to the language runtime.

Matt