Release of RosAsm V.2.025a
in [ASM]
|
From: Paul Dunn on 9 Sep 2005 12:27 Betov wrote: > Hopefully for Master Pdf, Paul, there really exists > guys like you. I doubt it - I'm not real, just a figment of your imagination :-) > What is one another amaizing thing, > on an Assembly News Group, but on that point, our > famous swindler might be right on, when betting on > stupidity. This is exactly what I mean. I think that your being french and Randy being american is conflicting somewhat - while you mean one thing, it comes across as something else, and when Randy says something you mis-translate and fly off the handle somewhat. For example, when you say "single pass optimisation" you really mean (at best) "peephole optimisation", or "multiple pass optimisation" since that's what your explanations seem to describe. What Randy means by "single pass optimisation" is that you start from one end of the source, step through each instruction, optimise where you can and then finish. No backtracking, no jumping around the source etc. Your table sounds awfully like you're doing some jumping around, optimising when the chances to do so become available. In that way, you can do a lot more, and better, optimisation than a single pass ever could.
From: Alex McDonald on 9 Sep 2005 12:34 Betov wrote: > > Let me tell you that it sounds a bit strange to me, that you > could ask questions about the details of the Implementation, > whereas the Source is GPLed, extreemely readable, and offered > in the context of an IDE where pointing anything out is always > a matter of "Click"... Well, I've looked at it, and I'm none the wiser. Let's leave it there; the syntax of RosAsm has defeated me (along with the lack of comments), and the description you give of how it does the work hasn't cleared it up. The learning curve is too steep and long for me to work out what technique you're using. It's not that important anyhow. > > But, maybe, you are going to ask me to discribe what is > called, exactely... For the one interrested by the method, > the Source is provided, and for the ones not able to read > RosAsm unified and simplified Syntax, go and play football. That'll be most people playing football, I suspect. -- Regards Alex McDonald
From: Betov on 9 Sep 2005 12:48 "Paul Dunn" <paul.dunn4(a)ntlworld.com> ýcrivait news:GJiUe.5259$zw1.2333(a)newsfe2-gui.ntli.net: > This is exactly what I mean. I think that your being french and Randy > being american is conflicting somewhat - while you mean one thing, it > comes across as something else, and when Randy says something you > mis-translate and fly off the handle somewhat. > > For example, when you say "single pass optimisation" I did not make any usage of this expression. > you really mean > (at best) "peephole optimisation", or "multiple pass optimisation" > since that's what your explanations seem to describe. Then, if this is what my explanation describe, why are you saying that i am saying otherwise? > What Randy means > by "single pass optimisation" is that you start from one end of the > source, step through each instruction, optimise where you can and then > finish. No backtracking, no jumping around the source etc. What a nobody like Master Pdf can say has the exact value of _zero_. > Your table > sounds awfully like you're doing some jumping around, optimising when > the chances to do so become available. In that way, you can do a lot > more, and better, optimisation than a single pass ever could. There is another logical way, boy, but implementing the Optimization Multi-Pass is the simplest way, at an implementation point of view, and as it does not take any real time in the whole Compilation Process, i keep happy with it. Betov. < http://rosasm.org >
From: Paul Dunn on 9 Sep 2005 13:08 Betov wrote: > "Paul Dunn" <paul.dunn4(a)ntlworld.com> ýcrivait > news:GJiUe.5259$zw1.2333(a)newsfe2-gui.ntli.net: >> For example, when you say "single pass optimisation" > I did not make any usage of this expression. No, what you actually said is: "And, if i may add, anyone wishing to develop an Assembler doing Jumps Size Optimizations, - in one single and simple additional Computation, taking almost no time , instead of the traditional Multi-Passes -, can take a lesson from RosAsm Source." Which I kind of took to mean that you (having written the rosasm source) had implemented a single-pass jump optimisation routine - when you say "instead of traditional multi-passes" then that indicates that you don't so multiple passes, which leaves you only one pass to do it in. Single-pass, if you will. Apologies if my reading isn't up to scratch there. >> you really mean >> (at best) "peephole optimisation", or "multiple pass optimisation" >> since that's what your explanations seem to describe. > > Then, if this is what my explanation describe, why are > you saying that i am saying otherwise? See above - I honestly thought you were claiming one thing and then *doing* another. I now see that you meant something completely different and the rest of us, in our ignorance, didn't quite understand what you meant. I really do think that a lot of your blowing off is just the result of this language barrier that you're fighting against. Still, your English is doubtless better than my French, so I shall try harder in future. > What a nobody like Master Pdf can say has the exact > value of _zero_. I think we can dismiss that as having no relevance. >> Your table >> sounds awfully like you're doing some jumping around, optimising when >> the chances to do so become available. In that way, you can do a lot >> more, and better, optimisation than a single pass ever could. > > There is another logical way, boy, Thanks :-) At my age, that's quite the compliment. > but implementing > the Optimization Multi-Pass is the simplest way, at > an implementation point of view, and as it does not > take any real time in the whole Compilation Process, > i keep happy with it. And so you should! The simplest way is often the best, and if it works then why fix it? Common sense, no?
From: Betov on 9 Sep 2005 13:15
Alex McDonald <alex_mcd(a)btopenworld.com> ýcrivait news:dfsdj4$6d0$1 @nwrdmz03.dmz.ncs.ea.ibs-infra.bt.com: > [...] You know, i don't discuss with you in any hope that you could have the required intelligency, competency and intellectual honnesty: I well know that you are just a troll. The only real thing that matters to me, here, is that, after one another insane attack of Master Pdf against RosAsm, about one of the new things in the last release, his level of stupidity could be made public one more time. So, all of the neo-nazi friends of Master Pdf can come along and simulate not understanding a word about my explanations, their own stupidities will have the hard time at obfuscating reality, and i have just played with you, above, like a grand'pa with a child. :) Same has it always been, for each RosAsm innovation, like with the famous "RosAsm Symbols Table Bug", the attacks against the Two-Clicks-Disassembler-ReAssembler, against the speed of RosAsm, against its security in Developement, against its unified and simplified Syntax and so on..., and so on..., so that i can now rely quietly on the attacks to make the facts public, which are that: * RosAsm Symbols Table is a Model to take for any such job. * RosAsm Two-Clicks-Disassembler-ReAssembler is the first ever seen such Tool. * RosAsm is the most secure Environnement ever seen in matter of Assembly Developements. * RosAsm Syntax is the very cleanest ever seen around. * RosAsm is the fastest of the actual Assemblers. Not all readers are not completely stupid, mind you, and facts are robust enough to resist by themselves. :) Betov. < http://rosasm.org > |