The bulk of this patch is ggn's; I rolled a few more macros after I
realized that the EOL check in the RISC assembler required checking its
return value as well as EvaluateRegisterFromTokenStream()'s. :-/
There's still a ways to go before this will work properly as we need to
add proper fixup handling and origin (".org") bookkeeping. As it is now,
the addition of all the miscellaneous bits and bobs to support the main
56K assembler are in place but they don't cause any regressions to the
existing assemblers already present in RMAC. Stay tuned for Round 2!
Turns out if you blindly promote arithmetic expressions to
ABS + DEFINED, it causes things to assemble wrong. This crept in around
v1.9.1; Now at version 1.12.5.
RMAC has needed a struct for fixups for some time, and now it has one.
All of the credit for pushing (and patching!) in that direction goes to
ggn; blame for the way it's implemented goes to me. There's still room
for improvement; but for now, this should leave us in much better shape.
Now at v1.12.0.
Some of the following changes are ggn's, and some are mine:
- When tokenizing floats we need to store them using a double pointer
- PTR union needed a (double *)
- Major changes to float depositing in eagen0.c
- Reverted the changes in expr.c so at least floats are processed by
expr() and friends
- SYM svalue needs to be 64 bits
- When EQUing a float symbol don't chop off the upper 32 bits from eval
- Added fltpoint.{c,h} in order to properly create IEEE-754 floating
point and Motorola extended numbers
- Fixed float evaluations in evexpr()
- Fixed floating point depositions in direct.c (in d_dc())
- Upped the BSD image limit in object.c to 8MB for crazy people making
6MB Jaguar ROMs (will need a real fix at some point)
The last commit had gone a bit overboard with the 32 vs 64 bit token
changes; this has been rectified. There's still a ways to go with the
floating point code, but this should be stable for now. Version now at
1.10.1.
The float changes will need some going over to ensure that we don't end
up with what we had when pointers were shoved into the token stream
willy-nilly.
Version bump to 1.9.0. Right now the only thing that supports it is
dc.d; now that the infrastructure supports it, anything else that needs
64-bit support (such as FPUs and the like) can be done very easily now.
Somehow I put a unicode character in my assembly source and RMAC then
barfed up an internal error #2. Chasing this down, I finally determined
that the debug traces weren't lying to me and the input file had a
problem. However, RMAC wasn't reporting the illegal character correctly
either, so that was fixed (who knew that gcc was silently killing bit 7
of chars now?). I also realized that having five separate functions for
reporting errors (and the cruft of using those crippled things) was just
a wee bit insane, so now we have proper variable argument error and
warning functions (they can be used just like a printf). Enjoy!
Last time it didn't work because our target number was an unsigned int
(as opposed to a signed int). So now that we know, we have a proper
check for it now.
ggn deserves most of the credit for this, as my job was going through
and tossing out the stuff that wasn't needed. ;-) There might be some
ELFish things that still need fixing; time, as usual, will tell.
This stemmed from the fact that EQUR symbols somehow made it on to the
symbol declaration list. If such symbol was later .equrundef'd, it would
find it's way back onto the the sdecl list *twice*, with the result
that any symbols that came after it would be summarily discarded into
the ether. Really, really bad mojo.
For some reason, there was code in several places that marked fixups/symbols
as belonging to a RISC section when it was clearly not the case. As a result,
it caused serious problems by reversing words in 68K sections just because a
symbol had been seen in a MOVEI # statement in a RISC section. Probably not
the last nasty surprise in this pile of spaghetti. :-/
Basically, expr() was looking at the token following the one it was
looking at and bypassing the longer parse path if it found an EOL token
there. Problem is, some tokens have follow on values and so can be
considered compound tokens. In this case, the EOL token codes to 101,
having a constant with a value of 101 will not evaluate correctly in
this case as the CONST token is a compound token.
The short of this is that making assumptions is BAD! Don't do it! It
WILL come around to bite you in the ass eventually, in the form of
subtle bugs that are difficult to chase down. Assume nothing!
ggn