Yeah I like features but if my project depends on too much of them I tend to forget how I set it all up when I get back to the project years later, so simple is generally better for me as well. For that reason I use ASM6. I voted ASM6f because I use that lately, although I forgot if I actually use any of the new features the fork introduces.Bregalad wrote:I use WLA-DX but if I were to start new projects I'd probably use ASM6 instead. I like the idea of the assembler being very simple and portable, because that's the point of assembly language. Feature-creeped assembler should be frowned upon as a general rule, unless you have a very specific feature you need.
I don't like WLA-DX very much. It can do a little bit of everything, but it's not very good at it.
CA-65 is nice, but it's a bit on the heavy side with the config file and all that. For SNES and PC-Engine it's lacking because direct page isn't fully supported.
I stay away from Nesasm but for PC-Engine there's not much choice. I use Elmer's fork of PCEAS for my PC-Engine needs, which is not bad at all (no forced 8 kB banks), as long as you remember to use zero page addressing manually.