Linux / Windows GUI application with assembly
in [ASM]
|
Prev: TMA Assembler?
Next: pshufb
From: KiLVaiDeN on 6 Nov 2006 11:30 > rhyde(a)cs.ucr.edu wrote: > > Actually, there were books in the early 1990s, before Rene's "pioneers" > came along, that were demonstrating how to do this. Check out Tom > Swan's stuff, for example. 1 Chapter dedicated to the Win32 API on his TASM book, is not what I'd call "a complete reference".. It's good that he made it of course, and we can give him the credit for sure, but the real advance was when people started to BELIEVE in Win32 asm. > In 1995, as Microsoft was preparing to release Windows 95 and the MS > hype machine was in full swing, I decided it was time to abandon DOS > completely. That's when I began the "UCR Standard Library for 80x86 > Assembly Language Programmers" which quickly lead to the development of > HLA. Uh, well nothing wrong with that. It was just plain dead good sense to switch to Windows anyways, since DOS was not fitting the protected mode.. > No. I was busy implementing HLA from early 1996 to Sept 1999, when HLA > v1.0 was released. You don't write 150,000 lines of code overnight, you > know? My first "Win32 app" (a trivial window thing) was written in > late summer 1999, as a proof of concept. I personally didn't write a > win32 "app" until 2000. So, even if you coded your first app in 1999, you being such involved in assembly and in windows, don't you think the assumption of Rene saying that Assembly under windows wasn't really possible in the 90s ?? > What assumption was that? Again, check out Tom Swan's books. Read above. > > As we can see, there is no way for coding GUI assembly application with > > Linux. > > "We" do not see that. Nothing related to using Xlib with FASM for example can be found.. The FASM doc, to give that one as an example, makes use of the Win32 API, but not of Xlib.. > > Yes, you can do it with GTK, but it's not what I'd call a "real" > > way of doing it; > > Why? Because, being thinking about Assembly, is thinking low level, and calling GTK functions, is not what I'd call "low level", since you call a very high level library which in turn calls lower level ones, how is that compatible with assembly programming ? > > Using a 3rd party library is different than using the > > base windowing system, as it's possible under Win32. > > Why? Read above.. > > When we'll be able > > to use Xlib from Assembly, we'd have made a great advance in Assembly > > programming under Linux for GUI applications; > > If you can call it from C, you can call it from assembly. That much > should be obvious. Uuuuh I yet failed to see any information on how to interface an assembly program with Xlib.. Maybe you have references ? > > Not yet. So Rene was > > right, once again, about his assumption. > > :-) O_o > Cheers, > Randy Hyde Cheers K
From: KiLVaiDeN on 6 Nov 2006 11:58 > Herbert Kleebauer wrote: > > Xlib also is nothing but a "3rd party library". But you can directly > connect to the Xserver without using Xlib. A few weeks ago Linux > assembly code was posted here to open a Window. Now you can be the pioneer > and find out the rest (output text and graphics, get mouse and keyboard events). How can you say that, it's totally non-sense to directly connect to the X Server without using the Xlib which is part of the X11 distribution. I mean, heck ok what you implie is creating your "own Xlib" to interface to the X server ? Damn man ! You don't want to make me a pioneer, but a slave !! Joke apart, Xlib is NOT a third party library as I see it, since it's directly interfacing to the X Server; It's a wrapper, ok, but a very low level one... Just like the Win32 API is. Cheers K
From: KiLVaiDeN on 6 Nov 2006 12:06 > Dunny wrote: > > I was under the impression that HLA2 would *be* the assembler - HLA1.x was > basically a prototype that relied on other assemblers to actually produce > binaries, while the specifics of the language were finalised. HLA2 won't > need any other assemblers to produce applications. > > D. My bad, you are totally right about that one, sorry Randall. Cheers K
From: Herbert Kleebauer on 6 Nov 2006 12:14 KiLVaiDeN wrote: > > Herbert Kleebauer wrote: > > Xlib also is nothing but a "3rd party library". But you can directly > > connect to the Xserver without using Xlib. A few weeks ago Linux > > assembly code was posted here to open a Window. Now you can be the pioneer > > and find out the rest (output text and graphics, get mouse and keyboard events). > > How can you say that, it's totally non-sense to directly connect to the > X Server without using the Xlib which is part of the X11 distribution. If you want to program at a low level, then you only have to use OS calls (int, syscall) and no user mode libraries. Why do you think, X (and xlib) is installed on the Linux system where you program is running? You can connect to a X server on a different computer over TCP. > I mean, heck ok what you implie is creating your "own Xlib" to > interface to the X server ? > > Damn man ! You don't want to make me a pioneer, but a slave !! Assembler is only good for learning and understanding but not for programming applications. > Joke apart, Xlib is NOT a third party library as I see it, since it's > directly interfacing to the X Server; It's a wrapper, ok, but a very > low level one... Just like the Win32 API is. The same is true for any HL graphics library.
From: Betov on 6 Nov 2006 12:17
"KiLVaiDeN" <kilvaiden(a)gmail.com> ?crivait news:1162825499.997810.318250 @m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com: > I would like to ask you a question Rene, considering you are a fervent > defender of GPL, how come your choice for a system didn't include > producing code for the GPLed OS of choice, aka Linux ? Whaooo!!! A long story! To make it short: 1) When Windows first came out, and so forth, that Assembly Programming became impossible, i stopped any programming activity. 2) When Linux came out, as long as i am an "international terrorist" :)) i was very anthousiast with it. I bought many Distros, compatible gear and never got any feeling but deception. I can say that i have sent about 20 times more money for Linux than what i ever did for Windows. 3) Then, ReactOS came also into the game, and as soon as i saw that, i started to develop the Ancestor of RosAsm. It was ten years ago. The first pionners of Win32 Assembly had already done several Demos works, and there was even a small (uncompleted, at that time) description of the PEs main Structures, which helped me a lot. I think you know of the later stuff... not considering the insane propagandist around, who would love people to forget all of the hard jobs done by these pioneers, at a time when nobody ever heard of any "Ramble Hide", other than as an "Assembly teacher" nicely sleeping on his DOS times laurels. But to get back to the Linux topic, would i re-start it all, nowadays, i would still not consider developping anything under this OS, for several reasons: * C. * Critical lack of serious documentation. * "Linux" does not exist. What exist are "Linuxes". * Consequence of point 3, .. what to develop for?... * C is, typically, a C developpers' OS. This is to say, a "Programmers OS". If i would like to develop for an OS with no real users (Joes), i would do it for something like Menuet OS. And, finaly, to get back to ReactOS, there are only two solutions: Either it will win, or the market will. If the market wins on this front line as on the other ones, the culture and humanity state will go to the hell they deserve, and as, anyway, it will not be mine, i will be an "happy dead looser"... resting under GMO fields... ;) Betov. < http://rosasm.org > |