Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

LOAD and SAVE should respect current BANK #345

Open
mist64 opened this issue Oct 24, 2022 · 3 comments
Open

LOAD and SAVE should respect current BANK #345

mist64 opened this issue Oct 24, 2022 · 3 comments
Labels
[BASIC] Part of the BASIC interpreter enhancement New feature or request

Comments

@mist64
Copy link
Collaborator

mist64 commented Oct 24, 2022

No description provided.

@mist64 mist64 added enhancement New feature or request [BASIC] Part of the BASIC interpreter labels Oct 24, 2022
@irmen
Copy link
Contributor

irmen commented Oct 24, 2022

There's a catch, I think.
It's pretty hard already to grok all LOAD, VLOAD , BLOAD differences and arguments
What will happen if we're going to change those once again.... ?

I suppose for example that VLOAD still retains its bank argument (aka vera high address) because it's about vram banks. But this makes it no longer similar to the other LOADs...

@ZeroByteOrg
Copy link
Contributor

I presume this refers to BASIC leaving the active bank unchanged after completing the LOAD, and not the Kernal routines? I say this because regarding the Kernal LOAD function, it's necessary to know what the ending bank was after a LOAD so I'd hope that the Kernal would continue to leave the new bank active.

@irmen
Copy link
Contributor

irmen commented Nov 12, 2022

Yeah this should refer to the BASIC commands LOAD and SAVE (and VERIFY?) . Because there is now a BANK statement but that only works for SYS POKE and PEEK

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
[BASIC] Part of the BASIC interpreter enhancement New feature or request
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants