From: Betov on
"sevagK" <kahlinor(a)> ?crivait news:1142301695.148972.226240

> But "if" and ".if" are macros that do the same thing, but
> 2 are needed because Rosasm can't figure out which form you need on
> it's own. And then there is "..if" and it gets wackier from there.

The RosAsm Macros System is _WAY_ powerful enough, for
assuming identical "If / End_If", at all level of nestings.
These form of Macros _DO_ exist, by the way.

And the fact that you fail to understand how and why keeping
the control on the JMPs sizes is of major interrest, doesn't
show anything but your own level of stupidity, troll.


< >

From: Betov on
"sevagK" <kahlinor(a)> ?crivait news:1142301695.148972.226240

> Rosasm macros have been shown to produce *less* quality assembly code.

???!!!... By who? When? Where? How could User Defined
Macros output anything but what is written by the


< >

From: Betov on
"sevagK" <kahlinor(a)> ?crivait news:1142301695.148972.226240

> Rosasm = IDE for converting written assembly to executable/dll
> HIDE = IDE for converting written assembly to executable/dll/library
> Rosasm: can call up debugger, resource editor, help file, etc.
> HIDE can call up debugger, resource editor, help file, etc.
> Both get the same job done.

If so, where are the Links to the Applications written
by the HLA victims, Pathetic idiot?


< >

From: Betov on
Frank Kotler <fbkotler(a)> ?crivait

> Betov wrote:
> [not buying MShit]
>> Good position, but you miss the point that i begun writing
>> RosAsm the first day i heard of ReactOS:
>> < >
>> [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?

There is a volunteer who is used to test this. The first time
RosAsm was successfully compiled under ReactOS was last year,
but this does not mean that all functions are assumed correctly.

The Debugger will probably be the main problem, as it is actualy
under WINE...

For the other assumed Applications, there are lists and news
here and there.

I will not give it a try by myself before Version 0.3, because
this is some work to install and to test, and i have no time
to invest at each partial release... I was in hope of having
V.0.3 around the third month of this year, but because of the
actual delay for the Audit, i suppose it will likely be in

> 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?

You know, in most GPL Project of some importance, it seems the
guys prefer having the Political, Ethical and personal issue
kept silent. This is an attitude that i strongly disaprove,and
that fully explains the whole story, but that also has the evident
advantage of attracting _more_ contributors, with such "accidents",
of course. Normal.

Why WINE doesn't have to is quite simple. But i cannot explain
this point publicly.

> Do we know what part of the code is a problem?

Yes. Everything written by "Mr. X"... :]]]]]

> 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!

You want them to kill me? :]]]]]

Seriously, my competency level in OS Programming is, so
to say, the same as Randall Hyde competency in matter of
Assembly Programming: Negative.


> When you first told me about ReactOS, it was nothing but plans. I
> thought it was going to be permanent vaporware.

The very first day i heard of it, in September 1998, i started


> 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
> point! ...

It is _NOT_ "hunged". The devs go on in parallel.

>and when they get it 100% "clean", M$'ll bury 'em in lawyers
> anyway... :(

This will not happend, dispiting Randall Hyde sweet dreams.
If it could happend, they would already have sued WINE, and
the main reason why they can't do this, is that it would be
a massive counter publicity for them. They have plenty of
resources, - technical and commercial -, for assuming the
competition, without much problems.


< >

From: on

o//annabee wrote:
> To bad for them. If they gave it a real run, they would be flabbergasted,

You are quite correct. What you don't realize is that "flabbergasted"
isn't necessarily a very positive term when used in this manner. :-)

> and they would be equally excited as I am.

Except the people who really are trying it aren't walking away too

> RosAsm compared to ordinary
> assemblers are a complete change of mindset.

Yes it does. A frontal lobotomy helps, too. :-)

> Its much about the WAY you
> tend to end up working with RosAsm.

Yep. More work. Because you have to make up for the features that
RosAsm lacks.

> You are here there and everywhere in
> the code at the speed of your thinking.

IOW, it's hacking.

> Because it so fast to get around
> in a huge source,

Mainly because you *have* to work with huge sources, unlike other
assemblers that allow you to break up the code into meaningful modules
and work on them using standard accepted programming practices.

> you never get theese interruptions that occurs all the
> time in other languages that takes you out of "the zone".

Ooooh. Zen has got to work it's way in here sooner or later.

> So you stay in
> your most productive mindset for much longer periods.

Funny, most other people don't believe a word you've said. I wonder why
that is?
Randy Hyde