JWASM ignores -0 and -1 parameter even when .286 directive is present

[bugthis]

When i use an assembler command like

Code Select Expand


; 286
SHR DL, 3

then i need the .286 directive in the source code too.
Because SHR DL, NUMBER does only work on a 80286 CPUs or better.
An 8086 needs the CL Register as a replacement for NUMBER.

Code Select Expand


; 8086
MOV CL, 3
SHR DL, CL


8086

Code Select Expand


; 8086 code
; Tests shift operator SHL, SHR with JWASM without .286 Directive
; Prog.Name:    s_test.asm
.MODEL SMALL, C

.STACK 256

.CODE
START:
  MOV     AX,0097h
  MOV     CX,0004h
  SHL     AX,CL
  SHR     AL,CL

  ADD     AX,3030h ; Create ASCII digits
  MOV     BX,AX

  MOV     DL,BH    ; Output upper digit
  MOV     AH,02h
  INT     21h
  MOV     DL,BL    ; Output lower digit
  MOV     AH,02h
  INT     21h

  MOV     AH,4Ch    ; return to DOS
  INT     21h
  END START


286

Code Select Expand


; 286 code
; Tests shift operator SHL, SHR with JWASM and .286 Directive
; Prog.Name:    s_test_2.asm
.MODEL SMALL, C
.286
.STACK 256

.CODE
START:
  MOV     AX,0097h

  SHL     AX,04h
  SHR     AL,04h

  ADD     AX,3030h ; Create ASCII digits
  MOV     BX,AX

  MOV     DL,BH    ; Output upper digit
  MOV     AH,02h
  INT     21h
  MOV     DL,BL    ; Output lower digit
  MOV     AH,02h
  INT     21h

  MOV     AH,4Ch    ; return to DOS
  INT     21h
  END START




So far so good. But when i assemble the 286 version with:

Code Select Expand


JWASMR -0 -mz s_test_2.asm

or

Code Select Expand


JWASMR -1 -mz s_test_2.asm


Then JWASMR doesn't complain, but it should. Because the manual says that the parameter options -0 produces a binary for 8086 CPUs and -1 a binary for  80186 CPUs or older.
https://www.japheth.de/JWasm/Manual.html#CMDOPT0https://www.japheth.de/JWasm/Manual.html#CMDOPT0

If i remove the .286 directive in the 286 code, then JWASMR complaines with an ERROR message like it should. But the -0 and -1 command line parameters are ignored.

[_japheth]

Then JWASMR doesn't complain, but it should. Because the manual says that the parameter options -0 produces a binary for 8086 CPUs and -1 a binary for  80186 CPUs or older.
https://www.japheth.de/JWasm/Manual.html#CMDOPT0https://www.japheth.de/JWasm/Manual.html#CMDOPT0

Well, the documentation is probably a bit unclear here. The "number arguments" just set the cpu to a default value, and this may be modified by the cpu directives ( .8086, .286, ...)
So, if you don't want to override the default, don't use those directives. There's the @Cpu equate that is set by both the arguments and the directives, maybe this helps?

[bugthis]

Well, the documentation is probably a bit unclear here. The "number arguments" just set the cpu to a default value, and this may be modified by the cpu directives ( .8086, .286, ...)
So, if you don't want to override the default, don't use those directives. There's the @Cpu equate that is set by both the arguments and the directives, maybe this helps?

I understand. So the argument numbers don't enforce the allowed CPU related assembly commands.

But when i want have a binary, that definitely runs on an 8086, how can i enforce it, that the assembler throws a warning or error, when an assembly command got used, that isn't for the 8086 CPU?

[_japheth]

But when i want have a binary, that definitely runs on an 8086, how can i enforce it, that the assembler throws a warning or error, when an assembly command got used, that isn't for the 8086 CPU?

Hmm, perhaps using the NOKEYWORD option?

By disabling anything beyond .8086 the source must stay with 8086 opcodes.