Awesome!! NEW AXE

I was the first person to download the new version

And I was the second!

Now...
Is absorbing appvars like
[pic1]->pic1
but for appvars?

I believe so.

And what are preprocessor conditionals?

Instead of commenting out code like this:
...
.Code
...
You can do something like this:
...If condition
.Code
...
And it will only comment out the code if the condition is true (condition must be a constant).

Also, what does Single argument for loops can now take any expression as an argument mean?

For(A) .loop A times
used to not work (because it wasn't implemented)... now it is!

Also, yet another question, what is
"Now able to use Return in a single argument for loop."

This used to be an error (because it wouldn't work):
For(10)
If A+1→A=B
Return
End
End
Now, Quigibo has found some amazing way to make it work, so it is allowed .

btw, most of this info is probably in the command list

Edit:

Edit:
Yet another yet another question is:
What does select() do? I don't get what the commands list is saying

Select(EXP1,EXP2) finds the value of EXP1, stores it into some secret place, then it evaluates EXP2, and lastly, it looks in that secret place and returns the original value of EXP1.
For example:
Select(A,B→A)→B swaps A and B.
A is stored to a secret place, B is stored to A, then the value of that secret place (the original value of A) is stored to B.

Quick question: do ...'s nest? They obviously can't normally (start and end are indistinguishable) but with preprocessor conditionals they theoretically could.  Not that I need it yet, but it would be a good thing to know.

Select(A,B->A)->B is the correct one.

Quigibo, is there a "...End"?  (There isn't one on the commands list, though it looks like there should be one.)

I believe he said it wouldn't need one.  (ninja'd)

And for the select() part, Thats what I thought. (-Use ->B)
Quigibo, you should fix that post

So surprise surprise, I added a switch statement last minute, it took me under an hour to have it fully functional.  Its also probably the only new feature this version that needs a tiny bit of explaining.

So basically, Z-Test() is a command to built what's called a "jump-table", or if you prefer, a "goto-table".  It basically creates an array of places to "jump" to and then jumps to the Nth item in that list.  That's about it.  The reason this is useful is that otherwise, you have to do something like:

:If A=0:
:<code>
:ElseIf A=1:
:<code>
:ElseIf A=2:
:...and so on...
So when you have a lot of consecutive comparisons, it saves a lot of space in the program.  But the best part is the speed savings.  Normally, you would have to make N comparisons (or log(N) if you're smart ) in order to figure out which of N pieces of code to execute.  This method however, makes a single comparison!  So no matter how large your jump table is, it always takes the same amount of time to get to the code you want to run.

All of this fun is overhead though, and I will say you should only switch over to a Z-Test() if you have 4 or more cases to check against, otherwise it could be larger and slower.

If you want this to be a call table instead of a jump table, simply put it in a subroutine and call it:

:MyTbl(A)
:
:Lbl MyTbl
:  Z-Test(r1,A,B,C,...)
:  <handle errors>
The error handling is for when the number you're testing is outside the range of the table.  This isn't necessarily an error if you're going to use that  to your advantage, but its a good sanity check to have if you're expecting the number to be in the range of your labels.  If you are absolutely positively sure your number is in this range (like you just read a nibble which is always in the 0-15 range and you have 16 labels) then you don't need any code there.

Also as I was typing this, I just realized I forgot to show an error when you try to use this in a For(expr) loop.  DO NOT USE Z-TEST HERE!  You will get a memory leak and eventually a ram clear.

Exactly