Ahaha. I came late to this party! So, to add my $0.02...

You'd usually do the following:.org $9D93
.dw $6DBBinstead of .dw $6DBB
.org $9D95Now, it *shouldn't* make any difference between which one you use, but it does depend on your assembler and what you're trying to make that assembler do. For example, with TASM, your batch files might be assembling your files with the -b or -c switches, which causes all undefined values between known locations to be written out. Which is to say, if you did the latter code, TASM would try to fill in *all* the information between addresses $0000 to $9D95, resulting in a program that's nearly 40KB.

I made this mistake a while back and I'd rather not see it happen again. I don't know how much better the new fancy assemblers like SPASM and Brass and ZDS are, but if this problem hasn't been mentioned, they've gotta be a bit better.

No. Both copy to $9d95. We write .org $9d93 because of the .db $BB,$6D bytes, which should not be counted in. These are equivalent:

Code: [Select]

.org $9d93
.db $bb,$6d
blablabla


Code: [Select]

.db $bb,$6d
.org $9d95
blablabla

And I don't quite get what you mean by shifting labels. If you mean inserting one byte so that all labels are shifted one position 'upwards', then yes.

Thanks for clarifying this.  It make even more sense to me now.   Thanks!