Structs in Assembly
in [ASM]
|
From: randyhyde@earthlink.net on 20 Nov 2005 10:29 Betov wrote: > > Annie is used to post tons of interresting and > original Code. Where is yours, Troll? > Well, if you count a dozen incarnations of a DOS floppy disk boot loader code... But yes, her signal to noise ratio, despite not being very high, is *way* above your's. Cheers, Randy Hyde
From: randyhyde@earthlink.net on 20 Nov 2005 10:58 Betov wrote: > :) > > 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. You've written a very low-end assembler, only slightly above the level of the toys that several hackers have set out to create when they decided they were going to write an assembler. You *have* put a lot of effort (seven years!) into ancillary products such as editors, debuggers, disassemblers, and the like. But your assembler is pretty weak as far as assemblers go. If you were so aware of how all the other products work, I wonder why you've not bothered to bring your assembler up to their level. > > For each of us (me, Thomasz, Jeremy, mainly) the devs > time for a decent Assembler was, at least 2 years, In your case, it's been seven years. My, what an amazing product you have to show for seven years' work. Your macros are better than those in GoAsm. In almost every other category, every mainstream assembler I've seen beats your's, hands down. > not considering the "around components" (Macros and > Equates Engines, and so on...). :-) > > Given the complete lack of knowledge of Master Pdf > about what an Assembler could be about, :-) > and given > his impressive level of stupidity - ouside the self- > selling propaganda art -, admitting he would start > any serious work, for a real HLL, you can multiply > this time by ten, which is the exact reason why he > did not yet satisfy your sweet whishes-dreams, and > still prefers debating and trying patheticaly to > prove that his HLL Pre-Parser is an Assembler. Poor Rene. This is the best you can do to cover up the amazing lack of features in your assembler after all these years of development? "Why, it's got more features than mine! It must be a HLL!" Sad. Cheers, Randy Hyde
From: randyhyde@earthlink.net on 20 Nov 2005 11:03 Betov wrote: > > As for RosAsm being a "broken" Assembler, it is at the > appreciation of its users And how many of those would there be? Wait! I've not been to the RosAsm board in several months. What's the number of users up do? My God! 87 members! You've probably added a whopping 4 members in the past couple of months. Amazing progress! You're going to take over the world! > but, given their productivity, Yes. With cut and paste, RosAsm users can crank out "megas" of code in six months. I wonder why other assembler users can't do this? > i am afraid they all must be extreemely talentuous for > writing so much with a wrong tool, and the only amaizing > point could be that talentuous people could choose a so > broken toy. Wannabee claimed that out of two million programmers, 2,000 think like him. Based on what I see on the RosAsm board, the number is closer to something between two and twenty. My, aren't you delluding yourself here. Cheers, Randy Hyde
From: randyhyde@earthlink.net on 20 Nov 2005 11:04 Isn't it telling that almost all of the remarks in this thread (from the usual crowd) have turned into personal attacks against HLA or myself? Not a single technical rebuttal to the article itself. That pretty much says it all. Cheers, Randy Hyde
From: Betov on 20 Nov 2005 11:05
"randyhyde(a)earthlink.net" <randyhyde(a)earthlink.net> ?crivait news:1132500440.344236.243990(a)g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com: > Of course, HLA v2.0 will have replaceable object code generation > modules that take an intermediate form and convert them to various > object file formats; but if you think that lambda calculus and software > engineering won't impress them, what makes you think a back-end that > I've written will do so? Indeed, *already* Rene is starting to hedge > his posts by claiming that "even when you do write an encoder..." > Bottom line is that it would be a complete waste of time to write *any* > code in an attempt to satisfy anyone around here. Guess why nobody will be much surprised, when reading this, Master Pdf? :))))) Betov. < http://rosasm.org > |