🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <7128@jhunix.HCF.JHU.EDU> ins_adjb@jhunix.UUCP (Daniel Jay Barrett) writes:
+In article <220@snll-arpagw.UUCP> paolucci@snll-arpagw.UUCP (Sam Paolucci) writes:
+>I was compiling a sizable code and I got the following error from the
+>assembler (it got through the compiler fine :-)):
+>
+>	"Line 802 #Pc relative out of range, -130."
+
+	I found this bug almost immediately after V3.6 was released.
+I took a few hours, narrowed it down to a minimal code example, and
+sent it to Manx.  About a month later, I received a nice letter that
+the bug had been fixed.
+	I don't know if this means that we will see a bugfix released,
+though.  Maybe not until the next version?  :-(
+
+	The bug is REALLY weird.  My minimal code example was basically
+a large switch statement.  If you changed ONE CHARACTER CONSTANT from
+'x' to 'y', the program compiled and assembled fine.  Otherwise, 
+assembler error.
+	My friend theorized that somehow the 'x' was being interpreted
+as part of a hexadecimal number...???
+	Anyway, if anyone wants so see my program, let me know.
+
+-- 
+Dan Barrett	ins_adjb@jhunix.UUCP			UUCP
+		barrett@cs.jhu.edu	(128.220.13.4)	ARPA
+Dept. of Computer Science, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD  21218

The power of multitasking strikes again.  As soon as I saw you
symptoms, without getting out of rn, I checked my large switch
statement to see if I was using 'x'.  Sure enough I was using 'x' as
well as 'X'.  I changed them to 'y' and 'Y' respectively, recompiled,
and low and behold it solved my problem too.  I get back to rn and
write this followup.  Thank you very much Dan.  My question is why
Manx didn't know about this problem when I called them up about it!
-- 
					-+= SAM =+-
"the best things in life are free"

				ARPA: paolucci@snll-arpagw.llnl.gov