03-08-2010, 06:09 AM
Very, very well spotted. This is why you make the compiler, and I just break it :-)
You are right - the return was put in later on, and it should be before the label, not after it.
Your explanation confused me a little at first, because I'm quite certain I don't call fspdisable at all - but I DO call fspCoords, which pokes exactly where you say.
Erk.
Thankyou for clearing that up!
It turns out I fixed it by redesigning where all the code is, more or less by accident. It does show that mixing compiled code with assembler and worst of all using poke can leave you with unintentional self-modifying code!
Now I feel bad I made you dig through my rookie mistake!
Thanks, Boriel. I bow to your superior skills
You are right - the return was put in later on, and it should be before the label, not after it.
Your explanation confused me a little at first, because I'm quite certain I don't call fspdisable at all - but I DO call fspCoords, which pokes exactly where you say.
Erk.
Thankyou for clearing that up!
It turns out I fixed it by redesigning where all the code is, more or less by accident. It does show that mixing compiled code with assembler and worst of all using poke can leave you with unintentional self-modifying code!
Now I feel bad I made you dig through my rookie mistake!
Thanks, Boriel. I bow to your superior skills