CMM2: Suggestion to replace Peek(ProgMem, of) and Peek(VarTbl, of)

Author	Message
thwill Guru Joined: 16/09/2019 Location: United Kingdom Posts: 2085	Posted: 12:13pm 18 Oct 2021       Hi Peter, I recognise that PEEK(ProgMem, offset) and PEEK(VarTbl, offset) only have very specialised use-cases but even within those I'm not sure these are the optimal functions to have in the language because they force the user to read a byte at a time. Should you consider replacing them with PEEK(ProgMemAddr) and PEEK(VarTblAddr) ? That way MEMORY COPY and MEMORY SET can be used with these data structures, and also PEEK(SHORT|WORD|INTEGER) ... though the user has to be careful to avoid data alignment errors ... ... or is this deliberate to prevent the use poking into these areas ... in which case why is there a POKE(VarTbl ...) ? Best wishes, Tom
matherp Guru Joined: 11/12/2012 Location: United Kingdom Posts: 5722	Posted: 03:17pm 18 Oct 2021       In both cases there are reasons you may wish to read a byte that isn't word aligned so I don't intend to change this. You can do something completely different in the Linux port as this is of minority interest
thwill Guru Joined: 16/09/2019 Location: United Kingdom Posts: 2085	Posted: 03:35pm 18 Oct 2021       Thanks Peter,   matherp said   In both cases there are reasons you may wish to read a byte that isn't word aligned My suggestion wouldn't preclude that, e.g. Peek(Byte Peek(VarTblAddr) + offset) though you could argue for: Peek(Byte Mm.Info(VarTblAddr) + offset)   matherp said   so I don't intend to change this. You can do something completely different in the Linux port as this is of minority interest Fair enough, I probably won't as I don't envision much call for extensions beyond the capabilities of the CMM2 and PicoMite that aren't specifically related to interacting with a "real" operating-system. Best wishes, Tom