Ok, a slight change to my code:

ld hl, offsetToError
ld (errOffset), hl

ld a, 3
ld (menuCurrent), a
ld a, 1
ld ($85DF), a
ld a, kEnter
bcall(_pullDownChk)
bcall(_clrTR)

ld hl, op1
ld de, progToEdit-1
ld bc, 9
ldir

ld b, a
ld a, kError
ld (cxCurApp), a
ld a, b
bcall(_newContext0)
bcall(_mon)

The previous one didn't quite do the Goto properly, so this version starts off acting like the edit menu, then switches gears and says it's the error menu doing a goto. In any case, (errOffset) is how far it will jump.

You can already do this with this code:

rand^MAX


That makes a random # between 0 and MAX-1.

I'm going to bump a feature request I've probably mentioned multiple times in the past: preprocessor conditionals. It is something that cannot be done in an Axiom and would be useful to every programmer, whether it's for building your program in a debug mode, testing different blocks of code to see which is better/faster/smaller, or (my personal favorite) making Axe libraries that programmers can very easily customize to their needs by changing a few defines. I'm sorry about bringing up this particular request multiple times, but this is the #1 feature I would like to see in Axe, and I'm sure many others would find it useful as well.

Continuing in that vein, I'd like to bump stack access. Both of the suggestions I've seen (using π as a pseudo-variable to access the stack and having a command Save(VAL1,VAL2) that evals and pushes VAL1, evals VAL2, then pops the stored value of VAL1) sound good.

Continuing in that vein, I'd like to bump stack access. Both of the suggestions I've seen (using π as a pseudo-variable to access the stack and having a command Save(VAL1,VAL2) that evals and pushes VAL1, evals VAL2, then pops the stored value of VAL1) sound good.

I believe Quigibo is implementing the Save() command like you suggested

So if its true, it does it, if not, skip it?
Isn't that what a normal If does?

That's exactly what I wanted to do and I tried that originally, but it was extremely difficult because then I can't just search for an "End" like I could with comments.  But even so, suppose I could count the number of statements that require an end minus the number of ends and only quit when that count is zero.  Unfortunately, this also involves me parsing single line comments, character constants, and quotes all of which can contain those tokens I'm searching for.  I'd basically have to parse the whole thing as though it were normal code, except without writing anything.  But if I do this, I have to add special code in lots of places to ignore non-executable writing things like data, not erroring on undefined constants, defining new constants, etc.  So in either case, it complicates things immensely and I'm bound to get something wrong with all these special cases.

EDIT: @epic7
Sort of, except that when the thing you're checking is constant (doesn't change the entire time in the program) you can remove the entire code block completely rather than just skipping over it.  Now why would you want to do something like "If 1" knowing its always true?  Its because if you have different versions of your game, or different parts of a library to use, you switch from including them to not including them by changing a single number instead of having to remove/reinclude code.