It always wrote .bin, whatever it had built. So assembling a loadable
program without -o produced Say.bin containing SBEX - a boot image name on a
file the machine cannot boot, in a repository whose whole convention is that
a .bin is started from and a .sbx is loaded.
Successfully wrote SplitBit boot image to "hello.bin".
Successfully wrote SplitBit loadable program to "Say.sbx".
programIsLoadable() already existed and is already what decides which
writer runs; the name now asks it too. Nothing in the build depended on the
old behaviour, because everything that assembles anything passes -o.
THE ASSEMBLER THAT RUNS ON SPLITBIT ALREADY DID IT THIS WAY. Two assemblers
naming their output differently from the same source is exactly the kind of
difference that wastes an afternoon, and the newer one was right.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01E2JrLzFvuFX9fgi1LDRjrW
"Binary" was doing three jobs. It meant an SPBT file that the machine starts
from; it meant whatever the assembler happened to produce, which is now
either that or a loadable program; and it meant a compiled host tool. A word
that means three things means none of them, and the first of the three has a
name already - this project has been calling them boot images for a while
and the manuals had not caught up.
Where it means an SPBT file -> boot image
Where it means either output -> output
Where it means a host executable -> left alone
Where it means base two -> left alone
The user facing messages move with it:
Error: No boot image specified.
Usage: ./SplitBit [OPTIONS] <boot image>
Error: This is not a SplitBit boot image.
Error: This boot image is in format version 2, and this emulator reads 1.
Successfully wrote SplitBit boot image to "hello.bin".
The assembler's own help was the interesting case. Its -o writes either
format, so "the binary" there was never right - it is "the output" now, and
the message that names the format is the one that says which it wrote.
No recorded output contained the word, so nothing needed re-blessing.
Checked before starting rather than after.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01E2JrLzFvuFX9fgi1LDRjrW
AnachronautandClaude Opus 5
Anachronaut