[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Here is a case of "trade off". If the *big trouble*
Just to show what I mean, a wrong evaluation of something like pt.spcln equ 16*4+pt.spmax*2+pt.blmax*2 ; length of sprite cache would have unhealthy effects. > in using GWASS on SMSQ/E sources is solved more easily by changing > GWASS than by changing SMSQ/E then that should be done. While (leaving the processor issue for one moment aside) I basically like the idea of using an assembler that is actively supported by the author, I am /personally/ still the opinion that a tool must in any case obey the rules of basic mathematics (i.e. at least that *,/ precedes +,-). I personally use many different assembler and compilers every day and I am just used to the fact that 1+2*3 results in 7 instead of 9. > If anyone wants this I would appreciate a definition of how the > expressions should be evaluated. The precedence Per posted is pretty usual. I am currently quite satisfied with Qmac and I have no reason to switch (apart from the fact that I can't anyway). However, in the long run it might be nice to have an assembler that outputs debugging information like a line number table. A future debugger could use that for real source code debugging. By the way, is there still somebody responsible for the Qmac/Qlink combination around? Marcel
