Significant Pure Assembler Application In MASM ?
in [ASM]
|
Prev: aeBIOS Test Request
Next: CMOVcc vs. Jcc
From: Betov on 5 Oct 2007 02:58 "rhyde(a)cs.ucr.edu" <rhyde(a)cs.ucr.edu> �crivait news:1191533334.510343.160720(a)y42g2000hsy.googlegroups.com: > MASM, HLA, or TASM Find the alien, and you will know the reason why Master Pdf hardly needs to twist any definition. :) Betov. < http://rosasm.org >
From: JDavison on 5 Oct 2007 03:05 But you have no ground to stand on at all, if these are indeed your words: "I don't like standard English definitions, so I make up my own words and definitions for existing words." Shining a light in the darkness, --Joel Davison
From: Herbert Kleebauer on 5 Oct 2007 04:05 hutch-- wrote: > > I already know this. But I would like to know why. Maybe you have a > > real good reason which can convert all the open source people to > > closed source people. > > As a matter of fact no I have not So there is no reason why you make your code closed source. And when you are asked to show us the source you refuse to do so even when you don't have any reason for this. Sorry, why are you posting at all here. Isn't the purpose of news groups to discuss and help each other. And all you say is: I don't have any reason to not help you (show you the source so you can learn something) but I don't do it. > as I simply could not care less as I > owe nothing to the open sauce movement. In the last post I didn't ask you for the source, but for the reason why you don't show us the source. And if you would give us a logical reason, then this wouldn't be an argument for but against the open source movement. So, if you don't like the the "open sauce movement", give us your argument.
From: japheth on 5 Oct 2007 04:21 > It seesm so, but for me, it is a real hell to follow. > What i was searching for does not exist. After all, it's 50.000 lines, sparsely commented. Do you expect to understand what's going on inside within 5 minutes? > For what i know, these infos > should be found in the Registry Yes > ... because i fail to imagine how reading regkeys > could achieve into such a big source You sound a bit like emperor Joseph II in the movie "Mozart", who complains about "Don Giovanni" having "too many notes" (no offense). I surely won't go so far to claim that there is no single line superfluous in comview, but I can assure you that the size of the source is justified. comview is slighly more than just a "COM" object lister. This is inevitably going to be some "advertisement", but comview also has a full activex container implemented. An example: if you own MS Excel, just drag&drop an excel sheel (a .XLS file) to the comview window. The sheet will be displayed inside comview, and you can (by selecting the "options/properties" menu) "walk" through the object tree exposed by Excel and execute any methods or change properties. However, there are no eye candies implemented, after all it is an application for developers and if you don't know COM, most of the features implemented won't say you too much. > of work, even if done with such a irrational toy as MASM. MASM is not a toy, but it has its flaws. After all, it is 25 years old. Btw, I've learned now that *you* are (one of?) the writers of RosAsm, so please excuse my ignorance when I asked what RosAsm is. I thought it was an assembler, and then was slightly confused when you were telling it has been used to disassemble comview. Now I know that it far more than just an assembler.
From: //o//annabee on 5 Oct 2007 04:49
On Fri, 05 Oct 2007 10:21:44 +0200, japheth <mail(a)japheth.de> wrote: >> It seesm so, but for me, it is a real hell to follow. >> What i was searching for does not exist. > > After all, it's 50.000 lines, sparsely commented. Do you expect to > understand what's going on inside within 5 minutes? > >> For what i know, these infos >> should be found in the Registry > > Yes > >> ... because i fail to imagine how reading regkeys >> could achieve into such a big source > > You sound a bit like emperor Joseph II in the movie "Mozart", who > complains about "Don Giovanni" having "too many notes" (no offense). I > surely won't go so far to claim that there is no single line > superfluous in comview, but I can assure you that the size of the > source is justified. > > comview is slighly more than just a "COM" object lister. This is > inevitably going to be some "advertisement", but comview also has a > full activex container implemented. An example: if you own MS Excel, > just drag&drop an excel sheel (a .XLS file) to the comview window. The > sheet will be displayed inside comview, and you can (by selecting the > "options/properties" menu) "walk" through the object tree exposed by > Excel and execute any methods or change properties. However, there are > no eye candies implemented, after all it is an application for > developers and if you don't know COM, most of the features implemented > won't say you too much. > >> of work, even if done with such a irrational toy as MASM. > > MASM is not a toy, but it has its flaws. After all, it is 25 years > old. > > Btw, I've learned now that *you* are (one of?) the writers of RosAsm, > so please excuse my ignorance when I asked what RosAsm is. I thought > it was an assembler, and then was slightly confused when you were > telling it has been used to disassemble comview. Now I know that it > far more than just an assembler. Yes. RosAsm is what asm needed 20 years ago. If it had been available then, probably C, and C## and other HLLs would never had such a success as it currently holds. In my relativly inexperienced view, RosAsm is the most productive assembler ever made. Even more, if the programmer are willing to put in some effort at the beginning, it is potentially the more productive _programming_ tool available for win32 programming today. Since I started coding with it in early 2004, it has, depite a few bugs here and there, _astonished_ me, again and again. If you try it out, I call you to not be discouraged if it sometimes crashes on you. Know that I have used the INCINCLUDER with success, despite it has a few bounderycases, that makes it fail. At no time have I lost any work. But sometimes the INCINCLUDER fails if the TITLE allready in the source is somehow misformated. I found by trial and error, that an F8 line at the beginning and end of a TITLE, and a TITLE that is at least a little more than a Page long, will help. The biggest problems comes out when including new source in very old sources. If you have the stumack for circumventing the bugs, (which I belive you must have after the mountain of asm code you just posted) you will have the time of your life using an assembler like this. For verification that large projects are indeed possible with RosAsm, take a look at its sourcecode. (Source is by default included in the EXE, a feature you will come to absolutly love and adore). Use SourceKiller for cutting the source if you dont want it in when releasing. For a second verification, see the code here: < http://www.szmyggenpv.com/downloads/MonsterMediaEx.Zip > (updated less then 5 hours ago - contain _much_ code not used It is used as kind of "Library" source for me that I share between apps) It is nowhere near as neat as your code, and very beginnerish, so it may be overwhelming. But if you look at the other demos written with RosAsm, you will see that this is because of me, and not a property of RosAsm itself. (for your information) |