Significant Pure Assembler Application In MASM ?
in [ASM]
|
Prev: aeBIOS Test Request
Next: CMOVcc vs. Jcc
From: Betov on 5 Oct 2007 17:45 bontanu <bontanu(a)gmail.com> �crivait news:1191618628.729236.177200 @o3g2000hsb.googlegroups.com: > Hi all, > I have to answer this error in Betov's post. > HE does not contain data or "sprites in a special code driven manner" > > As you can check from the HE demo all sprites are loaded as data (not > code) from the hard disk. > There are 2 or 3 small routines that draw them on the screen and that > is all about sprites. Hi, Bodgan. If so, why did you told me the reverse, several years ago, when your game was around 3 Megas? At that time, i had no ADSL for downloading such a quantity, and this was exactly what you explained to me. If these things have changed, which is the actual size, not considering the Bitmaps and Sprites? [Note: Anyway, you perfectly know that you are a counter-example, about the usability of MASM, as long as nobody ever wrote such a big App in Assembly, anyway - the reason why i noticed it as a particular exceptional case -, and that MASM would fall on its knees at compiling such a monster App.] Hope you went well, since that times. Betov. < http://rosasm.org >
From: Charles Crayne on 5 Oct 2007 23:46 On Fri, 05 Oct 2007 09:56:28 -0700 "rhyde(a)cs.ucr.edu" <rhyde(a)cs.ucr.edu> wrote: > Yes, ashes to ashes, dust to dust. Someday we *will* switch to non-x86 > processors and *everything* the x86 fans in this newsgroup do will be > lost and worthless. In fact, merely switching to X86_64 goes a long way toward fulfilling this prophecy. -- Chuck
From: Betov on 6 Oct 2007 03:39 "sevag.krikorian" <sevag.krikorian(a)gmail.com> �crivait news:1191633672.674499.20270(a)19g2000hsx.googlegroups.com: > On Oct 5, 5:38 am, Betov <be...(a)free.fr> wrote: >> There *must* be a valid reason. In the beginning, this was because >> there was nothing else, mainly. But nowadays, they have FASM, RosAsm, >> GoAsm, NASM... So what? >> >> They use it *because* it is *MicroSoft*. Nothing else. > > > Another retarded statement brought to you by Betov. > > How about: > -one of the most powerful assemblers available What does "powerful" mean? evidently nothing about the targeted OSes, evidently nothing about the obsolete and faultive Syntax, evidently nothing about the compilation Speed, evidently nothing about the capacity, nor about the ease of use of the Macro Engine... so what do this mean? > -the biggest and most helpful assembly community period Right. Like in "Right-Wing community". > -a vast pedagogy resource This point was probably true in the good old DOS time, but you will have to provide some actual link to something comparable, in size to AoA bullshits, or comparable, in quality, to the Twelve Assembly Lessons, or comparable, in simplicity and accuracy, to the Paul Carter Tutorial for NASM,... > -a varied choice of tools with which to integrate Sure. Most often great examples of failure. > -a large library of tutorials and example code Libraries, sure. Tutorials, no, unless you would be talking of the pioneers Tutorials for Win32 Assembly. Example code, how could it be different after having been the leading Compiler since that much years? > -a large library of linked functions I hope so. This is what it was written for. > When it comes to a choice between Rotty and MASM, it's clear why more > people choose MASM and it has nothing to do with who manufactures the > assembler. People who have no ethical considerations when choosing a Tool, are right-wing, by definition. And they get what they deserve: The most faultive obsolete Compiler around, not conforming to the basics of the actual Syntax, as hopefully re-defined by NASM. Notice also, that the existence of a "close to perfect" clone of MASM, right aside MASM itself, will never attract the MASM users in any way. The guy could as well produce a really 100% perfect clone of MASM, 100% free and/or Open Sources, without some of its defects, and better on any possible point, the MASM users would still never switch: Why they use it is because it is *MicroSoft". Betov. < http://rosasm.org >
From: Betov on 6 Oct 2007 03:48 Charles Crayne <ccrayne(a)crayne.org> �crivait news:20071005204627.7197e2de(a)thor.crayne.org: > On Fri, 05 Oct 2007 09:56:28 -0700 > "rhyde(a)cs.ucr.edu" <rhyde(a)cs.ucr.edu> wrote: > >> Yes, ashes to ashes, dust to dust. Someday we *will* switch to non-x86 >> processors and *everything* the x86 fans in this newsgroup do will be >> lost and worthless. > > In fact, merely switching to X86_64 goes a long way toward fulfilling > this prophecy. With your background (about how history goes), what do you think, in the future, about the Processors architectures? Considering the various actual ones, is there some probability for having, later, a Processor emulating, by default, any other Processor as supported by the main OSes, say, on a PC and a embeeded Phone? (So that porting from here to there would no more exist). Betov. < http://rosasm.org >
From: japheth on 6 Oct 2007 04:25
On Oct 5, 7:59 pm, Betov <be...(a)free.fr> wrote: > japheth <m...(a)japheth.de> écrivait news:1191595957.592329.303700 > @w3g2000hsg.googlegroups.com: > > > I guess now, after you have disclosed that it is a simple registry > > info collector with some "bells and wistles", which could have been > > written with a real assembler in a month or so with about 50 kB size, > > it is absolutely clear that it is NOT an application. Am I right? > > No. I would count it as a significative Application. Which does not > answer to any question: > > * Why on earth have you choosen MASM instead of an actual Assembler? > > * Which IDE do you use for compiling this? > > * If this is not a registry infos collector, what is it? [Saying that > you have a Drag&Drop of some specific files, is not what i am asking > for]. > > * If some infos are taken from somewhere else than from the Registry, > where are they taken from? > > * Reading your .hlp does not explain, in any way, the reason why your > application would be that big and would have taken that much years > to write. OK, taking 10 more times than needed because of MASM is > natural, but 6 years?!... > > Also, some other questions, like: > > * What of the vTables? I did not saw any, and without them, how do you > point them out, when wanting to program something, at a practical > point of view? > > * Are you sure all of the COM and GUIDs are recovered? (the ones we have > in the RosAsm package do not seem to be there. This is something that > i do not masterise at all, but are not GUIDs and COM objects bound > together?). > > Betov. > > <http://rosasm.org> Sorry, but I'm not interested in smalltalk. serious questions about comview can be addressed to Antonis' COM subforum at http://www.winasm.net/forum/index.php?showforum=7 However, questions such as why comview has the size it actually has will be ignored. There is the binary, there is the source, there are books about COM available. Find it out on your own or continue to make wild guesses. |