[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
cc65 competition?
- Subject: cc65 competition?
- From: Harry Potter <maspethrose7@aol.com>
- Date: Sat, 12 Apr 2008 16:08:46 -0700 (PDT)
- Complaints-to: groups-abuse@google.com
- Injection-info: l64g2000hse.googlegroups.com; posting-host=172.164.61.190; posting-account=xRocggoAAACFej4w6sQauoZjUP9yroE5
- Newsgroups: comp.sys.cbm, comp.sys.apple2
- Organization: http://groups.google.com
- User-agent: G2/1.0
- Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.sys.cbm:47017 comp.sys.apple2:34026
I want to create some software for the C64/128, Plus/4, Apple 2, NES
and maybe the Vic-20, Apple 2gs and SNES, under Win32 and an running
into problems. I tried cc65, but it isn't exactly feature-rich. I
tried Aztec C, and the programs in the SAMPLES directory (for the C64,
anyway) are *large* (>11k). I have Quetzalcoatl, and it could
probably produce small C64/Vic20 programs, but I haven't really tried
it. I want to create a cross-platform C compiler with the following
features:
* (Main feature) Support for hidden memory (i.e. $A000-$FEFF on a
C64) and banked memory (C128/Apple 2 128k memory)
* Support for longs and computer-specific float formats (both
disablable, saving code)
* Better optimizations
* Better __fastcall and register declarations
* Full zeropage support (direct pointer access and C variables in
ZP)
* Large programs separated into modules, each with its own main()
function, called through a stub
* The ability to replace a library module with another on the linker
command line
* Linker list files, rather than just on the command line
and whatever else I can think of. This program is giving me a hard
time with debugging, as it's so complex. Later, when I get the main
tools working sufficiently, I'll ask for help. Is this a good idea,
or did somebody already beat me to itr?