8080 Complier Recommendation

From: Cini, Richard <RCini_at_congressfinancial.com>
Date: Fri Feb 23 07:52:42 2001

Dick:

        Indeed. I'd prefer to stick with the Intel nemonics since the source
files that I have to compile, er, assemble, use the Intel nemonics.

Rich


-----Original Message-----
From: Richard Erlacher [mailto:edick_at_idcomm.com]
Sent: Friday, February 23, 2001 2:39 AM
To: classiccmp_at_classiccmp.org
Subject: Re: 8080 Complier Recommendation


The mnemonics are quite different for the Z80, though. I think he wants to
stick with the Intel mnemonics, which are quite different from Zilog's and
which
some folks find somewhat easier to decipher.

Dick
----- Original Message -----
From: "Edwin P. Groot" <epgroot_at_ucdavis.edu>
To: <classiccmp_at_classiccmp.org>
Sent: Friday, February 23, 2001 12:08 AM
Subject: Re: 8080 Complier Recommendation


> Are you talking about an ::assembler::? If so, Z-80 doesn't matter as
> an assembler for the 8080, since Z-80 is a superset of 8080. Just don't
use
> the Z-80 - specific opcodes. TASM reminds me of Borland Turbo Assembler.
> With regards to a higher-level language compiler, there might be
> directives to specify 8080 or Z-80 opcodes in the object file.
>
> Edwin
>
> At 16:02 2/22/01 -0500, you wrote:
> >Hello, all:
> >
> > Does anyone have a "favorite" compiler recommendation for the 8080?
> >I have TASM, which I like for the 6502, but it only does the Z80, which
has
> >different opcodes. Thanks.
> >
> >Rich Cini
>
>
Received on Fri Feb 23 2001 - 07:52:42 GMT