Re: [cc65] printf (C64 library) enables interrupts

From: Bill Buckels <>
Date: 2014-07-22 03:11:37
Groepaz said:
>you'd save everyone a lot of time if you would stop ranting and start 
>posting patches in order to improve it.

I've been posting  cc65 programs continually, but not in here.

I don't see much point in posting much in here. But I'll give it one last 

This will probably get me kicked-off this list but as an example (I have 
many) I certainly prefer comments about my cc65 code like:

"I really enjoyed reading this. It is very informative and helped me 
understand Apple II programming and double hi-res. I've read other 
descriptions of double hi-res, but they lack the code one needs to be able 
to actually do it. You're documentation shows the code. And it has the 
historical context. I wish all software was this well documented. :-)"

"Double hi-res capability is really lacking in cc65. I wonder if you would 
consider writing a double hi-res driver for cc65's TGI (Tiny Graphics 
Interface)? It currently only has low-res and hi-res drivers for the Apple 
II. Low-res is just too low and hi-res only has 8 colors."

Here was my response. I certainly hope you don't think this is a rant. It's 
in fairly readable English (not Broken English) as well...

"Yes, talk is cheap:) And it needs to be backed-up by code and demos."

"My gap analysis thus far shows much lacking including tolerance for 
alternate perspective, and imaginative and readable documentation. But I am 
determined to plug-along until I have filled all the gaps."

"Oliver Schmidt has done an excellent job thus far in providing the 
necessary technical framework to make some of this happen but in order to 
provide the Apple II developer with what I know is needed from my experience 
in extending Aztec C65 I have much work and documentation to do."

"I understand but I am not certain that tgi provides the necessary 

"I need to satisfy myself that tgi is the way to go. I never much cared for 
bgi nor for much that Turbo C and Borland C++ did, even BDE. No doubt that a 
driver approach is good for some people though. I am still thinking about 

"My big disconnect comes with the amount of effort that I would need to make 
to get code included in cc65. I also don't find the attitude open to my 
approach and I have been asked to refrain from actively participating in 
their list. So they seem to be satisfied with what they have done and they 
can carry-on. I have no time or appetite to be bullied. I didn't just fall 
out of a tree, and I won't be talked to like I did."

"Aztec C65 was a good compiler and solved many problems. Adapting Aztec 
C65's functionality to cc65 is a relevent exercise and not a discussion that 
should be dismissed as irrelevent. It starts with being objective about 
Aztec C65's features and not ignoring the accomplishments of the past... to 
do so is to ignore the very relevence of retro-computing. After many 
time-wasting engagements it is less stressful for me to simply do what I 
know needs to be done and to forget the general lack of approval and 
dismissiveness of a significantly different approach."

"The missing functionality of a seek function in cc65's libraries (with the 
exception of the Atari) is a really good example of this close-mindedness. A 
seek function is a core library routine. The lack of a seek function is 
indefensible, and justifying the lack of a seek function because it doesn't 
work on a Commodore 64 is not even worth a word as far as I am concerned. 
Looking at how Aztec C65 have done this over 25 years ago seems useful, and 
an excellent test case for determining whether or not a community is willing 
to accept some improvements."

"I could cite several examples over the years. This doesn't diminish cc65's 
value and excellence."

"Unless this attitude changes, which is doubtful, I doubt if you'll ever see 
any contributions from me going into their compiler libraries.  I'll simply 
fork the compiler, and provide my own distribution, with kickass 
documentation and utilities."

"It would of course be easier and much less work for me if the cc65 crew 
would wake-up and realize that someone else might have a great deal to offer 
if the attitude was less one-sided and more encouraging."

"At this point I don't give a rat's ass if my code ever makes it into cc65 
as long as it works with their compiler. I do love what Oliver has done with 
cc65. I may need to ask Oliver to rewrite some of my code at some completion 
point but I am far from that right now, and really just getting started with 
porting my Aztec C65 examples and utilities."


To unsubscribe from the list send mail to with
the string "unsubscribe cc65" in the body(!) of the mail.
Received on Tue Jul 22 03:12:04 2014

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 2014-07-22 03:12:06 CEST