search for: mos6502

Well, the stack pointer be a single byte, so pushing things on there doesn't work terribly well. Assuming I pass by reference, that's 128 values absolutely total before it wraps around and silently clobbers itself. It means single byte values will be incredibly inefficient... Tricky stuff. I'm lucky on the C64 since it's rare to exit back to the kernel with machine language apps

I suppose that once you've got a 6502 working, adding support for a 4510 shouldn't be too difficult.... (http://c65gs.blogspot.com.au/) On Fri, Jul 4, 2014 at 10:38 AM, Bruce Hoult <bruce at hoult.org> wrote: > On Fri, Jul 4, 2014 at 12:02 PM, Edwin Amsler <edwinguy at gmail.com> wrote: > >> Well, the stack pointer be a single byte, so pushing things on there

Hey there! I've started to embark on a path to try and create a backend for a 39 year old CPU with only an accumulator, two index registers, and a 256 byte stack. It does have a bank of 256 bytes before the stack that are pretty quick though. Really, if I can get an assembler out of `llc`, that'll be success enough for me. Clang would be better, but I think that might be crazy talk.

I've mentioned my sneaky plans to target the MOS6502 here before. The big issue I think is that a lot of instructions don't really have a choice for output register. It all just goes into the accumulator, X index, or Y index based on the specific instruction. So, my question is, when I'm defining my ins, outs and registers for these instruc...