fasmg ez80 integration take 2 - support needed

I’m back on trying to let the fasmg compiled code to be source level debugged by DeZog!

Last time I started two routes:

r1. Convert the source listing to a supported one (here the old details)

r2. Complete new native integration, where I was not able to finish the changes since it took more than expected (it is my first .ts project) and then I changed computer loosing all development environment setup and didn’t come back to finalize until now

Now, I would need some suggestion if to continue with route 1 or to continue with route 2.

For content:

r1. The current listing available from fasmg is in the “.lst” file. From it I was already extracting (with a php program) the “.sym” files in order to debug on no$zx and EightyOne, and for DeZog I created the conversion (with a python program) to the “.list” dezog compatible file

r2. I’ve rebased my old “draft” code changes on the new main line upstream (available to be seen in the fasmg-ez80 branch of my github fork)

Now:

r1. For the listing adaptation seems that the accepted structure has changed. In this case would be nice to have the details of the new format. And even nicer would be to have an “assembler neutral” (fully DeZog oriented) format in order everyone willing to integrate with DeZog would simply adapt this format (that taking into consideration the specifications in AddingNewAssemblers.md could be for example something like a series of lines “L|labelname|labelvalue” and “A|address|filename|linenumber”)

r2. To continue on the native integration I will surely need some more support than r2, and in case this would be suggested would be nice to get some feedback on my current changes (settings.ts and labels.ts)

Thank you in advance for the suggestions!

[maziac]

Found it: The path contained a space and I forgot to put it in parenthesis when passing to Zesarux. I uploaded a fix to the the DeZog repo.

[maziac]

Do I understand correctly: by modifying the fasmg include file one could basically create any output listing.

That would mean there would also be a 3rd implementation alternative: If the fasmg include file would create the same output list file/sld file as sjasmplus does, it could be used without any change in DeZog. Is this right?