>>73306315>The idea was to simply have them as e.g. "<opcode> [my-label-name]";I'm specifically asking about how you place a label in a program written directly in awatalk. In the original spec, labels are simply a 5 bit integer parameter. In AWA5, there is no specification for string structure, and the 0 byte is used for "A" in AWASCII, so it can't be used as a string terminator like in C. Would you just extend the awatalk spec to allow any AWASCII character for labels? That would kind of ruin the whole joke that the language is just "awa" and "wa".
>It already is, thoughSomewhat. But as an esoteric language, part of the fun is keeping it restricted in pointless and arbitrary ways. If you keep extending the language with heaps of convenience elements, then why not just write x86 assembly instead? Especially since I don't think you write directly in awatalk already.
>I was thinking of a "SYS" opcodeThis is very similar to the Unix syscall method, and I think is probably the best way to define calls beyond the AWA environment.
https://man7.org/linux/man-pages/man2/syscall.2.html An alternative if you ever end up with compiled binaries would be to have an opcode to call a function by symbol name. When linked to external compiled libraries, this would be trivial. It's also more generic that a pre-defined table of syscall indices. That said, a procedure like that could be implemented under a syscall index.
