Structs in Assembly
in [ASM]
|
From: Bertrand Augereau on 20 Nov 2005 05:25 Randall, No amount of typing theory can shut all these people up. No lambda calculus can make them quiet. 40 years of software engineering can't win the debate. They know better. I suggest you just write the missing x86 code generator for HLA so that they ain' got anything else to say, considering the paramount of algorithmics seems to be a string to opcode converter, in this place. randyhyde(a)earthlink.net a ?crit : > Hi All, > > > I've read several posts concerning structures and their > implementation in assembly language. Given some > misconceptions about structures in assembly language, > I pieced together the following article about structures > in assembly. > Cheers, > Randy Hyde
From: Annie on 20 Nov 2005 05:54 On 2005-11-20 James Buchanan said: > Annie wrote: > > > Ummm...could you put this in PDF format, Randy? Hehe! > > Another sophisticated and interesting contribution to the > debate from Annie. _____ ((( `\ Duh! It was an inside joke, _ _`\ ) sport. (^ ) ) ~-( ) Randy Hyde generates more _'((,,,))) PDF files than Vincent's ,-' \_/ `\ has powders. That's why he's ( , | known in some circles as `-.-'`-.-'/|_| 'Master PDF.' \ / | | =()=: / ,' aa Lighten UP, you silly bloody Aussie stand-over merchant. Are you located in Sinny? If so, you should get acquainted with Steve (also known as "Hutch --"). You two have a lot in common. Hehehe!
From: hutch-- on 20 Nov 2005 06:59 smile, > Said by our prefered Power Basic Programmer, > who redistributes illegaly a weird MicroSoft > C-Side Toy, in the absurd hope of damaging > the Open Source Mouvement. Still crying over not being able to compete with a basic compiler or is it over not being powerful enough to use Microsoft C as a side tool that does not need to pretend to be "Open Sauce" because it has its own EULA ? > Funny. Yep. Regards, hutch at movsd dot com
From: the-o/-/annabee on 20 Nov 2005 07:48 I am still wondering if he really seriously means this, or if indeed, the world has lost a great commedian in Randall Hyde. :)) Well. I sleept well yesterday because of that 74K post. Imo, he could clip it at paragraph two for same effect :)) I mean, and it fully support his view that structures are easier than using equates.......... :)
From: hutch-- on 20 Nov 2005 08:55
smile, > The difference between your opinion and my opinion > is that i effectively wrote an Assembler, and that > i am more than aware of the other Assemblers' authors > works. Big slap on the back by Betov for Betov, shame everyone else can see through the bullsh*t of the author of the broken assembler. :) > For each of us (me, Thomasz, Jeremy, mainly) the devs > time for a decent Assembler was, at least 2 years, > not considering the "around components" (Macros and > Equates Engines, and so on...). You forget that they are both highly skilled programmers who have succeeded where you have spent 6 or 7 years writing a broken assembler. Pull the other leg Betov. Regards, hutch at movsd dot com |