4 ms·
> Er, you mean page $01 is bytes $0100 to $01FF, right? Yes, yes, thanks for the correction. > And 6502 in general didn't use flat addressing, IIRC; Not so s
by weinzierl 6y ago
> Er, you mean page $01 is bytes $0100 to $01FF, right?
Yes, yes, thanks for the correction.
> And 6502 in general didn't use flat addressing, IIRC;
Not so sure about that.
> eg `12FE,x` would address 12FE,12FF,1200,1201,... with increasing x register, rather than 1300,etc.
This is correct but I think this is more due to the fact that the index register wraps around, and I would still call it flat addressing. A better argument to not call it flat would be the use of bank switching, which I think was common in 6502 based designs. But, yeah, this is probably just splitting hairs over terminology and I agree with you. Thanks for the corrections.