🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1991Mar1.014835.7651@athena.mit.edu> mmshah@athena.mit.edu (Milan M Shah) writes:
}I am trying to assemble Fontedit.asm, a program published in PC-Magazine
}vol 7 no. 15 using Turbo Assembler 1.0 (Yup, its 1.0 alright). In the program,
}there's a couple of lines that go:
}
}LOADER 	LABEL	BYTE
}LOADER_OFFSET	EQU	100H - LOADER
}
}Simple enough, but TASM complains. It says 'Can't add relative addresses.'
}First off, 100H is a constant, and not a relative address. Second, I think
}its pretty ridiculous for TASM to give an error and die. Maybe a warning,
}but to refuse to assemble? Sheesh, here's a number, here's another, and I
}want TASM to subtract one from the other, and TASM can't do that? That's
}ridiculous, I sez.

It's actually a linker limitation.  LOADER doesn't necessarily end up in the
executable at the same offset as the assembler's location counter indicates.
You *can* say "EQU LOADER-100h", because the assembler can put a -100h in
the location and tell the linker to adjust it by the offset of LOADER.
Unfortunately, the assembler can't tell the linker to fixup a location
by the negative of an address....  The assembler used by FONTEDIT's author
probably has a bug that lets it do the arithmetic and store the value as
a constant in the .OBJ.  Unfortunately, you will get rather hard to find
errors on multi-file programs (I know, I once got bitten by such a problem 
with MASM 2.04) because the final executable will address the wrong
location.

BTW, TASM 2.0 has a more informative message: "Can't subtract dissimilar
relative quanties".  (If they were the same, i.e. LOADER1-LOADER2, where
both are in the same segment, the result would be a constant and would
be independent of any relocation performed by the linker)



--
{backbone}!cs.cmu.edu!ralf  ARPA: RALF@CS.CMU.EDU   FIDO: Ralf Brown 1:129/3.1
BITnet: RALF%CS.CMU.EDU@CMUCCVMA   AT&Tnet: (412)268-3053 (school)   FAX: ask
DISCLAIMER?  Did  | It isn't what we don't know that gives us trouble, it's
I claim something?| what we know that ain't so.  --Will Rogers