Significant Pure Assembler Application In MASM ?
in [ASM]
|
Prev: aeBIOS Test Request
Next: CMOVcc vs. Jcc
From: Evenbit on 11 Oct 2007 03:48 On Oct 11, 2:02 am, "Rod Pemberton" > > No. The work is copyrighted automatically, post 1987. The US uses term > copyrights. Releasing a work into the PD expires the copyright term. All three of these statements are exactly correct. This is also mirrored internationally to some degree. > > I'm reiterating my arguments way too much for my liking. It seems you > aren't fully reading, comprehending, or remembering them before you comment. > You need to reread my posts carefully when less enthused by the > conversation. Happy to see that I am not the only one to notice. Nathan.
From: Betov on 11 Oct 2007 03:48 "randyhyde(a)earthlink.net" <randyhyde(a)earthlink.net> �crivait news:1192062366.008892.247650(a)o80g2000hse.googlegroups.com: > Please explain that "RosAsm Public License" that accompanies your > product, then. Simple, clown: It is just there to bother you. :) Betov. < http://rosasm.org >
From: Betov on 11 Oct 2007 03:53 "randyhyde(a)earthlink.net" <randyhyde(a)earthlink.net> �crivait news:1192061812.530026.137830(a)50g2000hsm.googlegroups.com: > HLA is an assembly language. To date, > I've seen no one give a credible argument that the HLA language is > *not* an assembly language that doesn't also eliminate a good number > of the other "assembly languages" out there. C inline Assembly is also "Assembly Language", clown. And nobody ever claimed that C was Assembly, even though C inline Assembly is way better Assembly than the HLA pseudo Assembly you pass down to FASM after restoring a normal Syntax. Betov. < http://rosasm.org >
From: Betov on 11 Oct 2007 03:56 "randyhyde(a)earthlink.net" <randyhyde(a)earthlink.net> �crivait news:1192061209.543311.257570(a)k79g2000hse.googlegroups.com: >> > Perhaps if FASM compiled HLA code, you would have a point >> >> :)) >> >> Is not HLA now self-compilable, clown? > > What does that have to do with the above comment? If you had not obfuscating FASM that dramaticly, clown, you still could compile FASM with FASM. :)) Betov. < http://rosasm.org >
From: randyhyde on 12 Oct 2007 11:50
On Oct 11, 12:46 am, Betov <be...(a)free.fr> wrote: > "randyh...(a)earthlink.net" <randyh...(a)earthlink.net> écrivaitnews:1192058985.886556.220360(a)v3g2000hsg.googlegroups.com: > > > Then why do you keep talking about the "applications" they wrote? > > Re-read the thread, clown. > > I am talking about the fact that the pioneers works, in the times > of the Assembly Rebirth, were for programming Applications in full > Assembly, and that they failed, at the end, because MASM was not > the tool for the job. Well, you provided a "tool for the job". Where are all these significant applications? Please don't link us to the demos on your web page. Show us the real-world applications that people are using in businesses, on the Web, etc. Sure, anyone can come up with a handful of applications written by zealots (your slap on the wrist with respect to "No significant MASM applications" shows that), but if this "assembly rebirth" really happened, then I'd expect to see lots of applications written in assembly at this point. Where are all the FASM applications? Where are all the NASM applications? Where are all the RosAsm applications? Where are all the GoAsm applications? Have any missed any product you consider a "real assembler"? The fact that one or two individuals, such as yourself, have managed to spend a fair chunk of their lives cranking out several tens of thousands of lines of source code doesn't prove your point. Any crackpot can "prove" the 'assembly rebirth' exists in their own minds by writing a few small apps in assembly. But you defined the assembly rebirth in the early 2000s as the event that would occur when people gave up their HLLs and started writing their applications in assembly language. Since that date, I've seen no more than a couple dozen programs that fall into the "bigger than just a demo" category (let's say, 10,000 lines of code, or more). And I've written a couple of those, personally. Granted, I don't see everything that's out there, far from it, but if this "rebirth" you talk about really occurred, wouldn't we see just a little more evidence of it? If this "rebirth" really occured, would you be asking people for links to their "assembly apps" all the time? If this "rebirth" really occured, wouldn't you have a few more users of your product? The bottom line is that after a slight bump in popularity earlier in this decade, and despite the arrival of four or five new books on assembly language programming this decade, interest in assembly language seems to be waning again. At one time, it was "cool" to write Win32 apps in assembly language, because people like yourself had been fooled into thinking that Microsoft believed that it couldn't be done. But once that was shown just to be marketingspeak, the hackers went on to the next challenge, leaving your "assembly rebirth" behind. Don't believe me? Well, where are your "pioneers" today? Don't believe me, look at your own demos you post on your web site -- are all those people active RosAsm programmers today? People move on. That's a fact of life. The bad thing is that, unlike the early 2000s, there aren't as many newcomers filling in the spots that were left behind. hLater, Randy Hyde |