Re: Oberon-2 (oo2c) for 6502

["Mickael Pointier" <nobody@wantspam.net>]

> > I read on google groups that you were planning to add library support as
> > inline assembly, this means a strict cc65 only compatibility. That's a
bit
> > annoying. I would be more than happy to add support for your compiler in
the
> > Oric SDK, but it's not cc65 based.

> oo2c needs ansi compliant compiler, and I think it is possible to use
> lcc65 as a portable assembler for oo2c

Ok

> I thought about lcc because as far as I remember it has float numbers
> support.

Yep, it's handled on the Oric, using the BASIC rom float conversions.
I guess it would be doable on the Apple 2 using things like SWEET


> But firstly I have no lcc sources, so I couldn't compile it under
> linux, and secondly cc65 is more ansi like :)

Are you kidding ?

lcc is for what I tested perfectly compliant with anything I compiled, and
has been for years.
I can send you the source code of the lcc we are using in the OSDK
(except of course if there is a difference between lcc and rcc ? I saw the
two names used interchangeably for a long while)


> Once binaries have been sent to me but I cannot use them under modern
> gnu systems, because glibc changes very fast.


> > I guess I could add support for inline assembly in lcc, but last time I
> > checked, I didn't get the feeling that cc65 inline assembly syntax was
> > really appealing.

> It is not the problem if lcc doesn't support inline assembly
> I want to keep libraries which have roots in c as well. I believe it
> is not hard to port library to lcc65

Well, for me there are no differences between libraries and normal code,
except the automatic inclusion by the linked of adequate external
references.

    Dbug