SourceGen creates "auto" labels when it finds a reference to an
address that doesn't have a label associated with it. The label for
address $1234 would be "L1234". This change allows the project to
specify alternative label naming conventions, annotating them with
information from the cross-reference data. For example, a subroutine
entry point (i.e. the target of a JSR) would be "S_1234". (The
underscore was added to avoid confusion when an annotation letter
is the same as a hex digit.)
Also, tweaked the way the preferred clipboard line format is stored
in the settings file (was an integer, now an enumeration string).
In the cross-reference table we now indicate whether the reference
source is doing a read, write, read-modify-write, branch, subroutine
call, is just referencing the address, or is part of the data.
If you double-click on the opcode of "JSR label", the code view
selection jumps to the label. This now works for partial operands,
e.g. "LDA #<label".
Some changes to the find-label-offset code affected the cc65 "is it
a forward reference to a direct-page label" logic. The regression
test now correctly identifies an instruction that refers to itself
as not being a forward reference.
When you edit the operand of an instruction that targets an in-file
address, you're given the opportunity to specify a shortcut that
applies the symbol to the instruction's target address in addition
to or instead of defining a weak symbol reference on the instruction
being edited.
This didn't work right for operands with adjustments, e.g. the store
instructions in self-modifying code. It put the label at the
unadjusted offset, which does nothing useful.
We now correctly back up to the start of the instruction or multi-
byte data area.
Allows specification of table data in various ways, for 16-bit and
24-bit addresses. Shows a preview so you can see if the addresses
look about right. Adds permanent labels at target offsets if none
are present. Optionally sets code hints.
Works beautifully on the A2-Amper-fdraw example, but needs some
additional testing, documentation, etc. Dialog is more complicated
that I would have liked, mostly because of 65816 support, but I
think it'll do.
(issue #10)
