Date   : Thu, 05 Nov 2009 21:32:41 -0000
From   : jumbos.bazzar@... (Mark Haysman)
Subject: Basic6809 1.00

> Why do people still use assembler embedded in basic programs to build
> stuff with ? Especially considdering some of the limitations of such ?
> Moreso on the BBC than on the Arch, as at least the arch doesn't have
> the limitations of memory that the BBC does.
>
> I have tried understanding the code of some projects (the menu program
> for BeebMMC is one example that springs to mind), but the total lack of
> formatting, comments and meaningfull names (all due to lack of memory),
> make this task very difficult, in some ways I feel I would be better
> working from a dissasembily, at least that way I know it's just code :)
>
> Personally I prefer to use assemblers like BeebASM(6502) and
> Toolshed(6809) as they allow me to not limit the size of my source
> files, and so make my source more maintainable as I can lay it out in a
> way that is easier to understand, plus I can add verbose comments
> without fear of overflowing the memory limits of the assembler.
>
> I'm probably going to get branded a heritc for this, but so what I feel
> the question has to be asked :)

I tend to use the built in basic assembler if I'm writing short routines 
that fit into memory easily. It's quick and easy to make changes, as long as 
you remember to save it before running every time, incase you get the 
inevitable loop mixed up and wipe the entire memory contents! I have to 
agree on the commenting though, not much room for it. If you want to see 
some real tight code, have you looked at the Elite Sourcecode? That's all 
written in Basic assembler! A real tribute to DB and IB, for proving the 
capacity of the human brain to remember what every label actually meant!

When writing or patching ROMs, I use a PC. Write the code in TextPad, 
assemble it with BeebASM then use a DataMan S4 as an EPROM emulator to run 
it on a real beeb, so for larger code, I do agree it's a lot easier.

Mark.