Apple-2-SW/prog8
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/irmen/prog8.git synced 2024-11-23 07:32:10 +00:00
Code Issues Projects Releases Wiki Activity

clarification

Browse Source
This commit is contained in:
Irmen de Jong 2024-04-06 14:31:39 +02:00
parent 35f3e8708b
commit 8dd3faf395
2 changed files with 3 additions and 3 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

5
docs/source/syntaxreference.rst
View File

@ -694,8 +694,9 @@ So for instance::
Examples of these second 'convenience' definition are library routines such as ``cbm.STOP2`` and ``cbm.GETIN2``, Examples of these second 'convenience' definition are library routines such as ``cbm.STOP2`` and ``cbm.GETIN2``,
that only return a single value where the "official" versions ``STOP`` and ``GETIN`` always return multiple values. that only return a single value where the "official" versions ``STOP`` and ``GETIN`` always return multiple values.
**Skipping values:** you are allowed to omit assignments of one or more values by putting ``void`` as the assignment target. **Skipping values:** Instead of using ``void`` to ignore the result of a subroutine call altogether,
One of the cases where this is useful is with boolean values returned in status flags such as the carry flag. you can also use it as a placeholder name in a multi-assignment. This skips assignment of the return value in that place.
One of the cases where this is useful, is with boolean values returned in status flags such as the carry flag.
Storing that flag as a boolean in a variable first, and then possibly adding an ``if flag...`` statement afterwards, is a lot less Storing that flag as a boolean in a variable first, and then possibly adding an ``if flag...`` statement afterwards, is a lot less
efficient than just keeping the flag as-is and using a conditional branch such as ``if_cs`` to do something with it. efficient than just keeping the flag as-is and using a conditional branch such as ``if_cs`` to do something with it.
So in the case above that could be:: So in the case above that could be::

1
docs/source/todo.rst
View File

@ -81,7 +81,6 @@ What if we were to re-introduce Structs in prog8? Some thoughts:
Other language/syntax features to think about Other language/syntax features to think about
--------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------
- allow returning multiple values from normal (non-asmsub) subroutines as well? Once that is done we can also clean up more of the library routines that now struggle to return multiple values.
- add (rom/ram)bank support to romsub. A call will then automatically switch banks, use callfar and something else when in banked ram. - add (rom/ram)bank support to romsub. A call will then automatically switch banks, use callfar and something else when in banked ram.
challenges: how to not make this too X16 specific? How does the compiler know what bank to switch (ram/rom)? challenges: how to not make this too X16 specific? How does the compiler know what bank to switch (ram/rom)?
How to make it performant when we want to (i.e. NOT have it use callfar/auto bank switching) ? How to make it performant when we want to (i.e. NOT have it use callfar/auto bank switching) ?