The current project I work with is a c64 paint program.
The binary is $0800 to $bfff (thereabout), It uses $2000 for the bitmap (inside the scope of the binary), $0400 is the screen memory (which is one of the colour matrixes in c64 multicolour bitmap mode) and the colour memory is at the hardcoded address of $d800. The program I am disassembling has table to point to the first address of every row of the bitmap, one table for the screen and one for the colour memory.
Making an Address table of this is perfectly fine as it is pointing to a segment of the actual binary:
Bitmap_Lo $00,$40,$80 ...
Bitmap_Hi $20,$21,$22 ...
However the two other ones will not accept this:
Screen_Lo $00,$28,$50 ...
Screen_Hi $04,$04,$04
Colour_Lo $00,$28,$50 ...
Colour_Hi $d8,$d8,$d8
I take it as they are outside the scope of the binary. The references inside the scope of the binary turn to Labels, but if outside, isn't it "just" to make them Project symbols? (I know the use of "just" is totally unfair as suggesting is so easy and implementing could be a nuance, so pardon the use of the word).
The current project I work with is a c64 paint program.
The binary is $0800 to $bfff (thereabout), It uses $2000 for the bitmap (inside the scope of the binary), $0400 is the screen memory (which is one of the colour matrixes in c64 multicolour bitmap mode) and the colour memory is at the hardcoded address of $d800. The program I am disassembling has table to point to the first address of every row of the bitmap, one table for the screen and one for the colour memory.
Making an Address table of this is perfectly fine as it is pointing to a segment of the actual binary:
Bitmap_Lo $00,$40,$80 ...
Bitmap_Hi $20,$21,$22 ...
However the two other ones will not accept this:
Screen_Lo $00,$28,$50 ...
Screen_Hi $04,$04,$04
Colour_Lo $00,$28,$50 ...
Colour_Hi $d8,$d8,$d8
I take it as they are outside the scope of the binary. The references inside the scope of the binary turn to Labels, but if outside, isn't it "just" to make them Project symbols? (I know the use of "just" is totally unfair as suggesting is so easy and implementing could be a nuance, so pardon the use of the word).