hla set up for the art of assembly
in [ASM]
|
From: santosh on 16 Jun 2008 10:05 Herbert Kleebauer wrote: > ronaldsorrell2005(a)yahoo.com wrote: >> On Jun 14, 4:23 pm, Herbert Kleebauer <k...(a)unibwm.de> wrote: >> > ronaldsorrell2...(a)yahoo.com wrote: > >> > > the answer is ______42_________________________________ >> > >> > 42 in words: >> > >> > Don't use HLA, use an assembler. There are plenty assemblers >> > available so there is really no reason to use HLA. If you >> > want to use a HL language instead of an assembler, use C >> > and not HLA. >> >> No must use HLA to learn assembly langauge. > > Funny, that's like "No must use Java to learn C language". It seems that HLA has gathered considerable momentum in US based academic institutions for teaching assembly language. Most courses here are still based on MASM and DOS (for some reason, in nearly all assembler courses I have examined, the environment has invariably been MS DOS - an OS that's one foot from the grave as far as the average computer user is concerned. There is no reasonable reason I can think of for starting with DOS/MASM instead of, say, Linux/NASM, but that's how it is nearly everywhere.) So Herbert, you're swimming against the tide. Instead of chastising the people who post here in ala, why not email your views and your rationale to the concerned instructor of the institutions that are currently using HLA in their assembly language courses?
From: Herbert Kleebauer on 16 Jun 2008 11:34 santosh wrote: > Herbert Kleebauer wrote: > > Funny, that's like "No must use Java to learn C language". > > It seems that HLA has gathered considerable momentum in US based > academic institutions for teaching assembly language. That's a contradiction in itself. But I suppose there are quite a few instructors who dislike assembly programming as much as the students. And therefore it's not surprising that "HLA has gathered considerable momentum". It's a real clever marketing trick to use the word "assembler" in HLA. This way the instructor and the students can claim the have done assembly programming because otherwise there wouldn't be the word "assembler" in "High Level Assembler". > Most courses here > are still based on MASM and DOS (for some reason, in nearly all > assembler courses I have examined, the environment has invariably been > MS DOS - an OS that's one foot from the grave as far as the average > computer user is concerned. There is no reasonable reason I can think > of for starting with DOS/MASM instead of, say, Linux/NASM, but that's > how it is nearly everywhere.) There is a big reason to use DOS and not Windows/LINUX for learning assembly programming. Assembly programming means to use the CPU and not the OS to solve a problem. You not only have to understand that there is (normally) no HL support from the CPU (like IF, ELSE, FOR, WHILE...) but also no CPU instruction like OPEN, CLOSE, PRINTF or DRAWLINE. So the best way would be to start with system without any software: burn your program in an eprom and insert it instead of the BIOS ROM. Now, this isn't practicable for a PC system, but for a few Cents you can by a micro controller with CPU, RAM, FLASH and IO hardware on a single chip. For a PC you need at least a minimal system which supports keyboard input and screen output and a simple file system. And that's exactly what DOS does. The problem is, that there are no DOS PC's available anymore (neither at the university nor at home). And the V86 virtual machine emulating DOS in Windows isn't a replacement (you can't even access the debug registers of CPU). > So Herbert, you're swimming against the tide. ??? "> Most courses here are still based on MASM and DOS" > Instead of chastising the chas�tise (chs-tz, chstz) 1. To punish, as by beating. See Synonyms at punish. 2. To criticize severely; rebuke. 3. Archaic To purify. Now you add: 4. To say the unloved truth. > people who post here in ala, why not email your views and your > rationale to the concerned instructor of the institutions that are > currently using HLA in their assembly language courses? It's ok to not learn assembly programming. You can't be forced to become an assembly program, either you like it or not. But it's not ok to teach HLA programming and then claim you have taught assembly programming.
From: Frank Kotler on 16 Jun 2008 13:08 santosh wrote: > Frank Kotler wrote: > > <snip> > > Now now. You're all making poor Betov feel useless! Feel? Seriously, haven't heard from Betov, or Wannabee, not even Wilhelm for quite a while. Hope they're okay, one and all. Maybe I should have mentioned that the OS/2 guys who are talking about porting HLA are also talking about porting RosAsm. Still not an open source OS... Best, Frank
From: Frank Kotler on 16 Jun 2008 13:14 Herbert Kleebauer wrote: > santosh wrote: >> Herbert Kleebauer wrote: > >>> Funny, that's like "No must use Java to learn C language". >> It seems that HLA has gathered considerable momentum in US based >> academic institutions for teaching assembly language. > > That's a contradiction in itself. No problem here in the US, where we regularly destroy our rights to save 'em! Best, Frank
From: santosh on 16 Jun 2008 14:01
Frank Kotler wrote: > santosh wrote: >> Frank Kotler wrote: >> >> <snip> >> >> Now now. You're all making poor Betov feel useless! > > Feel? > > Seriously, haven't heard from Betov, or Wannabee, not even Wilhelm for > quite a while. Hope they're okay, one and all. Yes. BTW are following RosAsm development over at it's board/s? Seems to have rather stalled in recent months. No new realease announcement from Betov in quite a while. > Maybe I should have mentioned that the OS/2 guys who are talking about > porting HLA are also talking about porting RosAsm. Still not an open > source OS... Nice to hear that but is OS/2 much used at all still? |