Significant Pure Assembler Application In MASM ?
in [ASM]
|
Prev: aeBIOS Test Request
Next: CMOVcc vs. Jcc
From: Betov on 7 Oct 2007 10:45 "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have(a)nohavenot.cmm> �crivait news:feaop2$shp$1 @aioe.org: > Norton If you install Norton, you are not in any situation where you could complain about the Windows crashes: You just wanted it, and you got it. Betov. < http://rosasm.org >
From: Betov on 7 Oct 2007 10:56 "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have(a)nohavenot.cmm> �crivait news:feaoq5$stv$1(a)aioe.org: > You've got a point. Once you've downloaded FASM, HLA's backend, just > what do you need HLA for? You've now got an assembler, and if you > want high level functionality there is always C, correct? Exactly. Not even considering that FASM Macros can do things that HLA could much probably never do, like the famous example of a real FASM .asm Source, which, once compiled was resulting into a... bitmap, entirely drawn by Macros. > I take you're implying it's just a fanciful assembly preprocessor and > that it's not a complete high level language like C with an assembler > as a backend? Right. More than this, C Inline Assembly would be more accurate for learning the basics of Assembly, because, at least, when doing Asm Inlines, a beginner can see what is Assembly, and what is HLL. With HLA it is even impossible to make any difference. So, not only HLA would be ridiculous, as an HLL, but it would also be ridiculous as a tool for learning Assembly "Top-Down". Betov. < http://rosasm.org >
From: santosh on 7 Oct 2007 11:58 Rod Pemberton wrote: > > "santosh" <santosh.k83(a)gmail.com> wrote in message > news:fea1pr$j5n$1(a)aioe.org... >> I don't know about ease of configuration, (though things are _vastly_ >> improved since the early days, I admit that some configuration issues >> still are obscure to sort out), but as for stability, I found no >> difference between Linux and Windows NT. They are both very hard to >> crash and are very stable. >> >> You and Betov seem to have the gift of crashing Linux everytime you >> put your finger on it? >> > > I'll admit newer Windows like XP crash less, but it also seems to > thrash, have spontaneous uncontrollable high cpu usage, random high > disk usage, Yes it uses paging aggressively, and God only knows what else it does, concealed from the user. Microsoft are not known for transparency. > If my almost computer illiterate mother can crash XP > SP2 semi-regularly, then I'm not sure how it can be called robust. In my experience Windows XP's stability has been comparable to Linux, but then again, I've never used high-end or "exotic" hardware, just stock and pretty well known pieces. So unstable drivers may not affect me as much as someone else. > I've also experienced many odd problems with XP SP2 with "invasive" > software like Norton 360. Norton came pre-installed with the Windows 98 that came with my first machine, (back in 1999). One of the things I did within a few weeks was to rip out Norton and replace it with AVG Antivirus. That machine finally died a month back. My current one is a Pentium Dual Core (1.6 GHz) with an Intel 945 chipset based mainboard. The only OS right now is Ubuntu 6.06 LTS. > Linux's EXT2 filesystem seemed to crash and corrupt once a week. Most unusual. My Linux installation is now 16 months old and I've experienced ext3 corruption exactly twice, both times automatically fixed by fsck.
From: santosh on 7 Oct 2007 12:01 Betov wrote: > santosh <santosh.k83(a)gmail.com> �crivait news:fealgi$ibr$1(a)aioe.org: > >> the ".deb" Format >>> of the Ubuntu stuffs, seems to be Code-Only. >> >> It's just a package format like ZIP. It can contain source too. > > Probably, but the one coming with the Ubuntu Synaptic manager > do not seem to do that netively. Which is a rather (surprisingly) > good thing considering backward compatibilities. > > >> BTW, Linux _can_ run very old a.out binaries. a.out was the first >> executable format for Linux, (and lots of UNIXes), and was replaced >> by ELF with version 1.2. But if you compile your kernel with a.out >> support added, then you can still run these old executables. > > Do not joke me. > > >> What's more Linux can run DOS files from the early 80s through >> DOSEmu. Can Windows run ELF or a.out? > > I suppose yes. I never took a look but there exist Linux emulators > for Windows. And then? Somebody even wrote a "NES emulator for > Windows", with RosAsm: This whole discussion of backwards binary compatibility is downright silly. Just install a VMM like VirtualBox or VMWare and you can run any number of OSes to your heart's content, (actually to your machine's capacity.)
From: Wolfgang Kern on 7 Oct 2007 10:08
Wannabee mentioned: ..... > RosAsm could, and imo _should_ be able to provide an editor for HEX, (at > least a listing in hex) and all other x86-32-64 variants of syntaxes. If I > ever would write or rewrite an assembler I would write its encoder in a > way that this would be easy. Eg : Likly Less spesific. Ren� could > implement this when he rewrites for 64bit. If he doesnt do it, then maybe > Wolfgang could step up to the plate. Much better for him, who has all this > experience, and could do such a thing in a few weeks, or a few months > whereas I could take years maybe at doing such a task, for which I have > absolutly no competanse and would need to learn all the stuff from allmost > square one. Much better that it is written by an experienced programmer. > And here Wolfgang seems to me an obvious choise if not Betov himself wants > todo it. > Somehow. It _will_ be done. It will take much longer if I must do it. :) You forgot one major thing, I became old and sick and that slows all my actions down a lot ... now at least my brain still works, ... if enough oxygen around :) So we need a few youngsters who once can continue with our ideas. RosAsm got an hex-option already, even it looks a bit different to my (olde standard) ascii/hex-dump view. I haven't upgraded HEXTUTOR for all the new found things like SSE3,4,5, NASM-, FASM64-, RosAsm64??-syntax yet, but planned to do it soon and then it could be implemeted into RosAsm or Linux or whatever else tools, because DISASS is written self-relocating and OS-independent and the returned struct may even satisfy Herbert's view of the CPU. __ wolfgang |