Eldred Habert

I think my rationale for this condition was that it's unclear what should be done with more than 4 colours but the number cannot be divided by 4.

The problem is that we don't know where the colours are being used at this point, so "0–3 and 5–7" is a non-starter.

This is further rendered difficult by the palette being determined before any image processing is done. Doing so being inherent to RGBGFX's processing structure (how do you even read pixel...

I'm not a fan of this, tbh. The redundancy is fine, imo, and adding this would mean creating/deleting/updating an extra symbol on every label creation. Plus, given that RGBASM strings...

If it's not updated eagerly, how would it handle the lack of scope?

As soon as multi-level scopes are implemented, what constitutes "the current scope" becomes murky: is it - the top level, - the last label that was defined, - or the...

Alternative syntax proposed in https://github.com/gbdev/rgbds/issues/506#issuecomment-610909266: `.` refers to the topmost label. By continuity: ```asm Mult: ; hl = h * e ld d, 0 sla h sbc a, a and...

What's the use case for "last label defined"? All I can think of is "offset from a label in the same section", and `.` is sufficient for that.

A macro showing a message to the user seems more likely to want to print the top-level label than any local, imo. `.` should be in the same section (and...

Yes, but I don't see why you'd want the offset between those and something in the ROM section.