On Fri, May 4, 2018, 20:39 allison via cctalk <cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:
> On 05/04/2018 09:16 PM, dwight via cctalk wrote: > > I'm not sure how much good a 2900 assembler would be for a 3000 series > part. The 2900 has an address controller more like a typical micro > computer, while the 3000 is more like playing a game of chess. > There seems to be the presumption the bit slices have a uniform organization > like a micro. They generally don not. AMDASM is a metaassembler; it has no such presumption. The opcodes and micro code are > assigned > and created by the developer and their minions along the lines of some > architecture they wish to create. they tend to have a pattern and thats > about it. > AMDASM works fine with that. It can even support bitfields that are discontiguously stored in the microword.