Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Adds two command line features:
-romout
command line for ROM export-romconf
command line for-romout
configuration paramtersI had investigated this a little with #2288 but afterward I realized it maybe wasn't as complex as it looked.
I don't personally have a use/need for this feature, but perhaps someone else would appreciate it, since it seemed
-zsmout
was wanted previously. One thing I could suggest is that it might be useful for creating unit tests of the ROM exports.The
-romconf
allows setting the export parameters as needed, though it is very simply just adding key/value pairs to theDivConfig
used by the exporters. This is easy to implement, but creates the problem of having to document the possible values, which I did for the existing exporters. The existing parameter names seem a little bit "internal", but they are quite functional as-is.I was thinking it would be more ideal if the ROM config parameters were described in
romExportDefs
, maybe with a vector of String triples (key string, default value string, description). That would avoid the need to maintain a list in the document, since we could provide a way to learn this information in-program instead. It might also avoid the problem of the documentation getting out of sync with the code.Anyway, not sure if this feature is wanted at this time, but it seemed to require only a little bit of code to accomplish, so I thought I should offer it as a suggestion.