Search found 4 matches
- Sun Jul 24, 2016 9:34 pm
- Forum: Assembly
- Topic: 6510 vs 8500 - support for illegal opcodes ?
- Replies: 10
- Views: 16908
Re: 6510 vs 8500 - support for illegal opcodes ?
^ this, or write test programs!
- Wed Jul 13, 2016 2:52 pm
- Forum: Assembly
- Topic: 6510 vs 8500 - support for illegal opcodes ?
- Replies: 10
- Views: 16908
Re: 6510 vs 8500 - support for illegal opcodes ?
At least the stable illegals and the "stable when used in a certain way" ones behave exactly the same.
- Wed Jul 13, 2016 1:13 pm
- Forum: Assembly
- Topic: Noob question: Adressing problem / how to?
- Replies: 4
- Views: 6747
Re: Noob question: Adressing problem / how to?
If I understand you right, then these are legal: lda ($fb),y lda ($fb,x) but these aren't: lda ($fb),x lda ($fb,y) correct? Correct. The 6510 instruction set is anything but orthogonal, there are many more cases where only one of the index registers is allowed. INC and DEC only allow the X-register...
- Tue Jun 24, 2014 9:58 pm
- Forum: BASIC
- Topic: Fast variables?
- Replies: 6
- Views: 7788
Re: Fast variables?
I'm pretty certain that declaring (and therefore initialising) your variables before they are used (in BASIC v2 anyway) has a slightly positive effect on the speed later on in the program. That's what the DIM-instruction is for: dim a,b,c%,d$,... Speedwise it basically boils down to declaring varia...