"We Never Use Assembly Language"
in [ASM]
|
From: o//annabee on 15 Mar 2006 22:19 P? Wed, 15 Mar 2006 21:37:45 +0100, skrev randyhyde(a)earthlink.net <randyhyde(a)earthlink.net>: > > o//annabee wrote: >> So, backwards compabilty is not a design parameter of HLA ? Users may >> expect it to break. > > But as I said, if I can make the language signficantly better, I don't > have a problem breaking existing code. That means USERs code. Breaking Users code. > After all, that is the purpose > of a prototype -- to get the rough edges out before commiting to a > version in which legacy support is important. Seem irresponsable to me. > And you better believe that when HLA v2.0 comes out, a lot of code will > break. :))) I have a real hard time beliving that.......... :))) > Will this matter? Hardly at all. Because you only have one users. And this is yourself. > People who feel it's too much work to > translate their existing source code can continue to compile under HLA > v1.x. That is only you. So no problem. > Cheers, > Randy Hyde >
From: o//annabee on 15 Mar 2006 22:43 P? Wed, 15 Mar 2006 23:15:14 +0100, skrev Betov <betov(a)free.fr>: > > I know of a better one: "Unexpected error encounted". > > The subtil grace of "SEH". > > :)) :) Funny. In XP a few of the SEH are catched and the app manages to recover. It was quite nice the day it happend for a SEH I had not known about. I could repeat the process leading to the SEH. But it didnt work the same in NT. And it didn work for all of them. Someday I will get it to work. >> Sorry if I sound grumpy. I havent gotten any coffie yet. > > You did not slept long enough: Go back to bed. :)) - Yes Master Betov. > ;) > > Betov. > > < http://rosasm.org >
From: o//annabee on 15 Mar 2006 23:17 P? Thu, 16 Mar 2006 01:06:05 +0100, skrev Frank Kotler <fbkotler(a)comcast.net>: >> Sorry if I sound grumpy. I havent gotten any coffie yet. > > Understood. We gotta get "retoxified for the day", according to our > preferences :) Yep! > I was gonna clean this up a bit - maybe add a couple more examples... > but since you're impatient, here 'tis, as-is. > > http://home.comcast.net/~fbkotler/winreboot.zip Thanks a lot Frank. This is all that I needed. Now, I will have the examples I need, and can add to this, by somehow having a direction when I look up the nasm docs. > This one *is* "-f bin". "nasm -f bin -o reboot.exe" (still called > "shutdown" from the way Numit_or had it, but now it reboots. Most useful > Windows program I know of! :) ;))) The really horrible thing is, that it worked!! But many thanks. If you feel up to it. Can you explain this macro? ; - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - %macro Call 1-* %define %%_j %1 %rep %0-1 %rotate -1 %ifstr %1 PushStr %1 %elifidni %1, eax push eax %elifidni %1, ebx push ebx %elifidni %1, ecx push ecx %elifidni %1, edx push edx %elifidni %1, esi push esi %elifidni %1, edi push edi %elifidni %1, ebp push ebp %elifidni %1, esp push esp %elifid %1 %ifnum %1 %if %1<040h push byte %1 %else pushd %1 %endif %else pushd %1 %endif %elifnum %1 %if %1<254 push byte %1 %else pushd %1 %endif %else pushd %1 %endif %endrep %ifdef PEFILE apicall %%_j %else call %%_j %endifs %endmacro ; - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - > > Best, > Frank
From: sevagK on 16 Mar 2006 01:05 o//annabee wrote: > > If you feel up to it. Can you explain this macro? > >[snip] ; - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Scans the macro arguments: pushes all the arguments after the 1st and then calls the 1st. NASM has a somewhat horrid macro syntax, though it is quiet capable. -sevag.k www.geocities.com/kahlinor
From: Betov on 16 Mar 2006 03:56
o//annabee <fack(a)szmyggenpv.com> ?crivait news:op.s6g95polce7g4q(a)bonus: > ah.... I got it. each "if" increment the counter, and each "end_if" > decrements it. So when it have unfolded the inner IF / END_IF the > counter must be '0' (its initial value) or some unpairing has > occured. Okey now I understand the purpose if the ".If" / ".End_If" > It surrounds the multilevel ifs in a boxed security that will prevent > errors developing. Exactly. It could be done several other ways. For example we could put some "Source_End" Macro, that would, at once test if all Constructs Variables are zeroed and send messages like "Unpaired If" // unpaired "Do" // and all, but, in that case, it could not point to the proper location, in the user source. > It look nice _now_, when I understand it. Even if I think it could be > put to better use elsewhere. Multilevels if as RARE Not, it is not. The problem is the other way round: We always tend to organize our Source, _while_ we are writting. So, along the devs, it is quite common to have more and more nesting inflation. This was why, in the actual default set, i have limited it to 4 levels, as long as, above four, we are evidently not writing something well organized. Quite frankely, in the new version, enabling 10 levels, is done that way, because it is the natural limit of Local Label (could easiy be extended by using several...), but 10 is already a "poisonned gift". Betov. < http://rosasm.org > |