That is supposed to be memory indirect with index and displacement (d16/32,ax/pc,ry.w/l), and supressed index?
Just checked with 1.18 and apparently it doesn't work. Base supression works, index doesn't. OK, thanks for reporting it. I'll look into it. |
Great initiative! :great
The problem for me using Asm-One 1.48/AsmPro 1.17 has been that the startup/handover (after allocating memory), debugger, level 7 button/recovery and execute/return sometimes gurus/freezes/does nothing on some modern and some old accelerators. Some versions also had a 'padded' environment different from CLI when executing/returning, which would give a big surprise when a program was finished. I'm not sure if these points have been worked on, or which changes have been made to these code parts over the years. But it would improve AsmPro and make it more robust if you could test those and fix what you can provoke with knowledge :great |
Quote:
|
a/b
I did a fresh install of AmigaOS 3.2.2 and when I start Asmpro 1.9b I get a recoverable address. Once Reqtools is installed the error no longuer appears so there’s something wrong in the code. |
Maybe something wrong with asl.library handling (that's the fallback if reqtools if not found). I've been using a patched asl (to redirect everything to reqtools) since forever so I'll have to install a proper one and check what's going on. Thanks for reporting.
EDIT: OK, asl is only used to select a font. The file/screen stuff goes either through reqtools or you have to type it all out. I tried: - w/ and w/o asl, w/o reqtools: no recoverable alert, only a message that reqtools v38+ is not found - w/o asl, w/ reqtools: no problems, prefs -> select font expectedly doesn't work (since no asl) Is the problem reproducible on your end? I was testing with OS 3.1 software, that's all I got. |
I found a little error in the 68030 MMU instructions:
pmove.w MMUSR,(a0) will be translated to F0105200 (pmove.b cal, (a0)) instead of F0106200 so there seems to be a wrong bit in some lookup table. AsmOne 1.48 gets that right. |
Hmm, this was OK in some older version and then it was changed from 6 to 5 (it's not documented in the history file, can't tell when or why).
This is in the original 1.18 source: Code:
AsmP_PMOVE: Thanks! |
a/b it is time :) well you put a ? So who knows :)
|
I'm not getting paid for this, so it's done when it's done ;p.
I can post the latest development version, there's been a few practical changes and bugfixes, but haven't really started seriously working on broken disassembler stuff (which is the main objective). Did some minor work, there's a lot of code duplication, it looks like it's using similar code twice, to calculate opcode length and to actually disassemble. And those two aren't fully in sync to begin with. So it's one big mess that will have to wait... Here is my unformatted list of changes since 1.19c, if you see anything useful let me know I'll post the latest exe: Code:
; ==== modifications |
Thanks for the info about the latest development. Did you checked the disassembler library on Aminet ?it is still maintained, I read the Trash’M One Pro author wanted to use it.
Take your time sorry for asking too much :) |
Quote:
|
That wasn't quite my intention ;P. I wouldn't accept any $$$ for this kind of work for a number of reasons.
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
a/b Why is Asmpro throwing illegal order at
fmovem (sp)+, fp7/fp6/fp5/fp4/fp3/fp2? This was produced by GCC and Devpac assemble it without error. Monam show the corresponding code though fmovem.x (a7)+, fp2-fp7 so I assume it reorder the code during assembling. |
Because it's only able to handle ascending ranges, and it enforces the same rule to individual regs.
Did a refactoring of the whole thing plus movem, add these to the pile above. Latest dev exe is in the zone. Code:
; ==== modifications |
Nice thanks, is it possible to make Asmpro run on WB screen optionally? It would be then easier to use other tools and doc in the same screen without having to go back and forth between screen.
|
@a/b
Set AsmOne to 68000 The code : move.w $bd.w, d0 should not be accepted an odd address error should be given instead. |
Quote:
|
That (operand alignment) is not checked. There might be some very specific cases, so I won't say it's 100% but in general it's not checked. It will only check instruction and directive alignment (DC, DS, ...), and if 68020+ odd data is not enabled (asm prefs) it will error out.
|
It give odd error directly using Devpac in 68000 settings.
|
All times are GMT +2. The time now is 01:56. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.