"We Never Use Assembly Language"
in [ASM]
|
From: Frank Kotler on 13 Mar 2006 19:48 Betov wrote: [not buying MShit] > Good position, but you miss the point that i begun writing > RosAsm the first day i heard of ReactOS: > > < http://www.reactos.org/xhtml/en/index.html > > > [Don't dream... not yet ready for everydays usage...] Ahhh, but it costs nothing to dream! :) Where are we at? RosAsm assembles itself under ReactOS, I understand, so it must stand on its own two feet that long... Do any/all apps run? They're undergoing "code review"... How come Wine doesn't have to do code review? Or do they? You hinted that it was that "Mr. X" I forget his name - guy who was on here "pissing in your ear" - was responsible. I suppose you'll tell me the story if you want to... Any reason why would-be users can't mess with it while this is going on? Do we know what part of the code is a problem? Something that can be rewritten in RosAsm? Inject a little "ReactOS86" into it? It'll jump-start the "rebirth" better if it's got a little asm in it! When you first told me about ReactOS, it was nothing but plans. I thought it was going to be permanent vaporware. But now they've got a "working" OS. Okay, nowhere near ready for the "flat users" - arguable whether Linux is ready for "flat users", and it's been around a while. But for the "determined users", frustrating to see it get "hung" at this point! ...and when they get it 100% "clean", M$'ll bury 'em in lawyers anyway... :( Best, Frank
From: Dragontamer on 13 Mar 2006 21:59 randyhyde(a)earthlink.net wrote: > Then again, it sure looks like all the big game manufacturers are > starting to line up behind the PPC. Still, you won't find anyone > writing game software (console or PC) in assembly. > > Then again, the whole concept of "portability" and console machines is > humorous. The hardware is so radically different on the machines that > even if they had the same CPU, portability just doesn't happen without > a tremendous amount of recoding. Wouldn't be a whole lot worse if they > *did* write it in assembly. At least they dont have to change 1+1 in C++ to whatever assembly-language the other platforms use. :-) And given the fact that they got Linux to run on GCube, PS2 and (ironically) best on XBox, the platforms can't be *that* different. Heck; SDL even works on all 3 systems when Linux is on them. http://www.linuxdevcenter.com/pub/a/linux/2004/04/01/warp_pipe.html Got some tid-bits on Linux GCube and Linux XBox. Sony endorced an official Linux for their PS2... no longer avaliable supposedly but the online sites are still there. http://playstation2-linux.com/ Just another testament in how portable C can be. --Dragontamer
From: o//annabee on 14 Mar 2006 02:18 P? Mon, 13 Mar 2006 15:23:18 +0100, skrev <penang(a)myrealbox.com>: > Thank you ! > > And by the way, the original stuff posted by Randy did bring up a point > - it's the question I wanted to ask for a long time - is there a place > for Assembly Language for GPU programming ? Seems like everyone is > using cg and all those stuffs. Even the sdk coming out from GPU/Physic > chip manufacturers is coded in very-very-high-level-languages. :)) I dont doubt it. The installer for my ATI graphics card :) ???? Because I did a clean install of windows, I ran windows in 640x480 vga when I ran it, and therefore I was unable to use the installer. I had to guess where the buttons for next, etc was. A graphics card producer unable to create a installer for the driver that was able to run correctly for the installation, because of a resolution problem :) > GPU programming is something really hot these days - with the new PCI-X > version 2 coming up, programmers get to play with them GPU with their > incredible parallel pipes, full force ! > > If only there's a way to turn the heat up even more with assembly > language. Any links?
From: Betov on 14 Mar 2006 08:02 "sevagK" <kahlinor(a)yahoo.com> ?crivait news:1142301695.148972.226240 @j52g2000cwj.googlegroups.com: > Rosasm has weak macros If RosAsm has a weak Macros Sysytem, Troll, show us the port of the RosAsm Proc Macros set to a couple of other Assemblers. Thanks in advance for the god laugh time. Betov. < http://rosasm.org >
From: Betov on 14 Mar 2006 08:06
"sevagK" <kahlinor(a)yahoo.com> ?crivait news:1142301695.148972.226240 @j52g2000cwj.googlegroups.com: > Using *any* macro defeats the rules of assmebly. Very good. So, if RosAsm Macros can do this and that, .... this is not Assembly, and if it cannot do this and that, this is a weak Assembler. Perfect! This recall me of the time when i still had illusions, when i implemented an "Alternate" Pre-Parser, to assume most of the other Assemblers formal Syntaxes: * Before, the song was: "I will not use it, because the Syntax is different". * After, it was: "If it is the same, then, what's the point of changing?!". :]]]]] Betov. < http://rosasm.org > |