flat assembler
Message board for the users of flat assembler.
 Home   FAQ   Search   Register 
 Profile   Log in to check your private messages   Log in 
flat assembler > Feedback > Suggestion to the author of fasm

Author
Thread Post new topic Reply to topic
nmake



Joined: 13 Sep 2012
Posts: 193
Suggestion to the author of fasm
Idea 1: Put up an MD5 hash of the download file on the download site.

Idea 2: If you struggle with too much workload, consider using AutoHotKey to automate repeated tasks that you may have in the development of fasm.

When I build one of my asm projects I click one icon and it will:

1: Build project automatically
2: test files automatically
3: encrypt files automatically
4: Add proper date stamps automatically
5: Auto update comment section of the rar file
6: Automatically upload the project to 3 sites
7: Create a new torrent and automatically seed the new build there

All this, happens just with a single mouse click. So consider using AutoHotKey if you struggle with too little time. There is nothing more fun than to click the compile button and then click a single icon to do all the repeated annoying little tasks automatically. Seriously rethink over what your repeated tasks are, and if they can be automated, even the smallest task, put everything in an autohotkey, so that you can spend all of your time where it matters. Very Happy
Post 10 Feb 2013, 13:19
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ASM-Man



Joined: 11 Jan 2013
Posts: 65
What? workload? autokey? encrypt and test files? we are talking a small(in terms of source code size) assembler or a biggest operating system? And I still don't understand why he need to do any of them
Post 10 Feb 2013, 20:46
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
nmake



Joined: 13 Sep 2012
Posts: 193
He doesn't need to do it. Read the topic, read the forum-name, read the post, get a dictionary book too, then put on your glasses, after that get an IQ book.

Never disagree with a man you can't get laughing. Dorks always disagree, and there can never be enough dorks on the web. The reason you don't understand anything of what I wrote is because you are plain simply an idiot, you are flat-headed, like we say here in our town. I hope it will not become a habit of yours to disagree with me, dorks have a habit of continue to disagree about many things. I hope I don't have to deal with that, because whatever your disagreement is, it is most likely a delusion that needs to be corrected.
Post 10 Feb 2013, 21:29
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
HaHaAnonymous



Joined: 02 Dec 2012
Posts: 1173
Location: Unknown
Stupid post removed.


Last edited by HaHaAnonymous on 28 Feb 2015, 21:35; edited 1 time in total
Post 10 Feb 2013, 22:33
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
DOS386



Joined: 08 Dec 2006
Posts: 1907
Re: Suggestion to the author of fasm

nmake wrote:
Idea 1: Put up an MD5 hash of the download file on the download site.



good +1

> Idea 2: If you struggle with too much workload, consider using AutoHotKey to
> automate repeated tasks that you may have in the development of fasm
> 3: encrypt files automatically

You forgot one: fix all my BUG's automatically
Post 11 Feb 2013, 04:59
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Tomasz Grysztar
Assembly Artist


Joined: 16 Jun 2003
Posts: 6355
Location: Kraków, Poland
Re: Suggestion to the author of fasm

nmake wrote:
So consider using AutoHotKey if you struggle with too little time.

Is this a product placement? I can understand if the purpose of this thread is hidden advertisement, otherwise it is strange. Do you really think it is a new idea for a programmer to have tasks automated? Wink


nmake wrote:
Never disagree with a man you can't get laughing. Dorks always disagree, and there can never be enough dorks on the web. The reason you don't understand anything of what I wrote is because you are plain simply an idiot, you are flat-headed, like we say here in our town. I hope it will not become a habit of yours to disagree with me, dorks have a habit of continue to disagree about many things. I hope I don't have to deal with that, because whatever your disagreement is, it is most likely a delusion that needs to be corrected.

Well, it appears that you are not to discuss anything anyway, so perhaps I am wrong to even bother to answer in this thread. I am leaving your post intact so that others can see what your attitude is.
Post 11 Feb 2013, 07:20
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
Tomasz Grysztar
Assembly Artist


Joined: 16 Jun 2003
Posts: 6355
Location: Kraków, Poland
Re: Suggestion to the author of fasm

DOS386 wrote:

nmake wrote:
Idea 1: Put up an MD5 hash of the download file on the download site.



good +1

This would a be good thing if a hash could be uploaded independently to some other secure server. I never did care, though (it was never a frequent request).
Post 11 Feb 2013, 07:21
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
dmitriy566



Joined: 19 Jun 2012
Posts: 27
Location: Saint-Petersburg, Russia
Hello!
I have only one suggestion. It will be good to make a rpm package for Linux(and maybe Windows).
This is usefull to add fasm into Linux repository.
Post 11 Feb 2013, 09:32
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
HaHaAnonymous



Joined: 02 Dec 2012
Posts: 1173
Location: Unknown
Stupid post removed.


Last edited by HaHaAnonymous on 28 Feb 2015, 21:34; edited 1 time in total
Post 11 Feb 2013, 15:46
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
f0dder



Joined: 19 Feb 2004
Posts: 3175
Location: Denmark

Tomasz Grysztar wrote:

DOS386 wrote:

nmake wrote:
Idea 1: Put up an MD5 hash of the download file on the download site.


good +1

This would a be good thing if a hash could be uploaded independently to some other secure server. I never did care, though (it was never a frequent request).


I don't really see the point in this either, for FASM. As Tomasz (indirectly Smile) says, if you want verification that a zip hasn't been tampered with, the hash would need to be on a separate (and secure) server. For security purposes, a simple hash is stupid anyway, you'd want to GPG/PGP-sign the release.

Apart from security issues, a hash could be used to check whether the downloaded file is corrupt or not - but again, in FASMs case, this is pretty pointless; the files are relative small, and the .zip files can be checked for consistency anwyay... we're not dealing with huge ISOs without built-in verification Smile


dmitriy566 wrote:
Hello!
I have only one suggestion. It will be good to make a rpm package for Linux(and maybe Windows).
This is usefull to add fasm into Linux repository.


A .deb (or .rpm or ...) by itself IMHO isn't worth much - FASM is small & easy to install. It would only provide value if it could be added into official Linux distros, but that kinda requires a person who's willing to keep the packages updated. And even given that, is that a guarantee that the package would be accepted? For Debian, for instance, you'd need to find a "sponsor" that's willing to check & accept your package.

It seems like a fair amount of work - both the initial work, and the effort in maintaining the package after that. How many people need/want a Linux-packaged fasm?

_________________
Image - carpe noctem
Post 11 Feb 2013, 16:32
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
Bob++



Joined: 12 Feb 2013
Posts: 92

dmitriy566 wrote:
Hello!
I have only one suggestion. It will be good to make a rpm package for Linux(and maybe Windows).
This is usefull to add fasm into Linux repository.



I still prefer download source code and compile myself. I just love how simple are TCC and FASM. Or even the Windows binaries. The .rpm/.dev sucks because dependences. Time goes and when you try to install it "missing dependences", "you need version X of this library to compile". It turn me crazy!
Post 12 Feb 2013, 05:41
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
DOS386



Joined: 08 Dec 2006
Posts: 1907
> but again, in FASMs case, this is pretty pointless; the files are relative small

fortunately

> hash could be uploaded independently to some other secure server

if you are super-paranoid, then not only a separate super-secure server, but also super-secure hasch SHA256 would be needed. In all other cases, just adding MD5 on the download page is sufficient Smile
Post 12 Feb 2013, 07:44
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ManOfSteel



Joined: 02 Feb 2005
Posts: 1124
Welcome to the forums Bob++



Bob++ wrote:
I just love how simple are TCC and FASM. Or even the Windows binaries. The .rpm/.dev sucks because dependences. Time goes and when you try to install it "missing dependences", "you need version X of this library to compile". It turn me crazy!


You're practically saying you love "small programs with few or no dependencies". I'm quite sure we all do.

FASM packages on GNU/Linux and BSD systems have zero dependencies, so there would never be any problem.

Ever heard of "Microsoft Visual C++ XYZ Redistributable Package" or "Microsoft .NET Framework XYZ Redistributable Package"? Well, they are the exact same thing, but for Windows. They come in different versions, have upgrades and service packs, some of which are in-place updates while others are upgrades. An application may require one version while another application may require another version.
Another thing is that Windows applications often come with all dependencies (DLL) embedded resulting in huge setup files and a lot of redundancy on the system. PC-BSD does that with PBI packages for instance.

Granted some GNU/Linux distributions can be over the top PITAs, but what you're really criticizing is the very concept of a "big application with many libraries".
Post 12 Feb 2013, 11:45
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
nmake



Joined: 13 Sep 2012
Posts: 193
Re: Suggestion to the author of fasm

Tomasz Grysztar wrote:
Do you really think it is a new idea for a programmer to have tasks automated? Wink


I don't think it is a new concept, I just noticed you skip error checking in many of your code samples, which to me reveals some of your habits.

..and there are no hash on the download site (which is almost always part of some automation) i figured that you don't focus much on automation, which gives reason to remind you of automation, not to teach you about it.

Take it or leave it.

Very Happy

My job is not to teach new concepts, but to remind of old ones. Everything discussed in programming forums is an old idea, nothing is new, neither is this.
Post 12 Feb 2013, 21:00
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
AsmGuru62



Joined: 28 Jan 2004
Posts: 1383
Location: Toronto, Canada
I also skip error checking in samples -- they are not a production code.
Nothing wrong with writing less code to prove some algorithm or concept.
Post 12 Feb 2013, 23:12
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Reply with quote
f0dder



Joined: 19 Feb 2004
Posts: 3175
Location: Denmark
Re: Suggestion to the author of fasm

nmake wrote:
..and there are no hash on the download site (which is almost always part of some automation) i figured that you don't focus much on automation,


Pray do tell, what use would hashes be?

_________________
Image - carpe noctem
Post 12 Feb 2013, 23:24
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
nmake



Joined: 13 Sep 2012
Posts: 193

AsmGuru62 wrote:
I also skip error checking in samples -- they are not a production code.
Nothing wrong with writing less code to prove some algorithm or concept.



There is nothing wrong with it, but it reveals your habit.
Post 13 Feb 2013, 01:41
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Bob++



Joined: 12 Feb 2013
Posts: 92

ManOfSteel wrote:
Welcome to the forums Bob++



Bob++ wrote:
I just love how simple are TCC and FASM. Or even the Windows binaries. The .rpm/.dev sucks because dependences. Time goes and when you try to install it "missing dependences", "you need version X of this library to compile". It turn me crazy!


You're practically saying you love "small programs with few or no dependencies". I'm quite sure we all do.

FASM packages on GNU/Linux and BSD systems have zero dependencies, so there would never be any problem.

Ever heard of "Microsoft Visual C++ XYZ Redistributable Package" or "Microsoft .NET Framework XYZ Redistributable Package"? Well, they are the exact same thing, but for Windows. They come in different versions, have upgrades and service packs, some of which are in-place updates while others are upgrades. An application may require one version while another application may require another version.
Another thing is that Windows applications often come with all dependencies (DLL) embedded resulting in huge setup files and a lot of redundancy on the system. PC-BSD does that with PBI packages for instance.

Granted some GNU/Linux distributions can be over the top PITAs, but what you're really criticizing is the very concept of a "big application with many libraries".



Thanks. Very Happy

Well,not exactly "small program" but with too few dependences or if it still avaliable to download or even if a new program is released the libraries are (even) in old repositories(the problem!!!) what I think so so bad is the repositories. Nobody solve it: but even a old program,indepent-version,I can get the libraries from there. Not really matter if the repositories that are stored in a configuration file on my linux system peform some mirror to get new links to download new libraries and so given for me. I only want to be able to install such version from same repository. Maybe do it static or just like a domain. I do not know. Only want to get from there 1,2,3 or 4 years using my system. The apt-get/zypper update never is enough to be able to install new libraries.

I have this problems when I developing C under Linux systems. The last experience was compile the last version of Gtk library. I did it because I really compile a program that need of it. When I was to compile gtk,missing library pango,when I was to compile pango,missing new glib,when I was to compile new glib,missing another library that I don't remember(the missing libraries necessarily in this order) A caos.

I'm always running from them,when I can. The thing on Microsoft Windows environment is very different. And usually easy to solve. No days around internet looking for libraries/programs in which some cases no more longer exists. 404 on links etc(web pages on Linux almost never is static. See e.g, http://www.linuxassembly.org/ no more exists try to download as86 documentation or even the as86 itself) this is two-of a lot of examples.
I like windows-way and its .dlls. The program may be greater (in terms of size) but will work. That's what really matter.
Also,linux is confuse. There is a lot of distros and packages formarts. No standad format. Debian use file package format,OpenSuse use other,fedora too uses different format and so on. Who will support all format to all Linux's distros really?
they only matters with most-used distros,currently: Ubuntu. Sometimes you see OpenSuse too. But very little. Who cares to non-Ubuntu or non-openSUSE users? they are linux users too! I missed opportunities to get some programs for this reason. No support for me,despite I'm on linux.
On windows,you only needs to worry the bit version: 32 or 64. Rarely you have problems. There is compatibility mode too. This helps a lot.
I enjoy as Tomasz are performing distributing fasm currently.

Don't get me wrong ManOfSteel. I want to be your friend,even with this bad english. This is only my frustration with linux and packages and why it can decrease under some circumstances the distribution of some programs. No fasm,it doesn't need a lot of libraries to compile.

(sorry for my english Smile)
Post 13 Feb 2013, 01:54
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Tomasz Grysztar
Assembly Artist


Joined: 16 Jun 2003
Posts: 6355
Location: Kraków, Poland

nmake wrote:

AsmGuru62 wrote:
I also skip error checking in samples -- they are not a production code.
Nothing wrong with writing less code to prove some algorithm or concept.



There is nothing wrong with it, but it reveals your habit.

The only "habit" that it may reveal is that someone perhaps cares about making samples as simple as possible, even at the price of leaving some things unsaid - this is important for didactic purposes. I usually leave the more detailed explanation for a later moment in the learning process.

And even when someone just writes quick and dirty code because he does not care, I don't see how you could jump to conclusion that this person wouldn't use the automated tasks, as you seem to imply. If one is just lazy, then I suspect he would want to have even more things automated, not less.


Tomasz Grysztar wrote:
..and there are no hash on the download site (which is almost always part of some automation) i figured that you don't focus much on automation

This appears to be a classic converse error in reasoning. If there was a hash on the website then it would mean that some kind of automation was used, but this implication does not work in the reverse direction.
Post 13 Feb 2013, 10:09
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
nmake



Joined: 13 Sep 2012
Posts: 193

Tomasz Grysztar wrote:
And even when someone just writes quick and dirty code because he does not care, I don't see how you could jump to conclusion that this person wouldn't use the automated tasks


It is merely a suggestion from my side, it is not a claim. This is your first mistake. (Read the topic of this thread)

The second mistake you make is to talk about "this person", because I'm talking about you, not a general person. (Read the first post)

The third mistake you make is that when people make it a habit to produce lazy code, then he usually have spent up his time elsewhere, which means "little or no automation being used". (Easy math, there is no such thing as being lazy, it's just an imbalance of how you split your day, too little here means too much over there)

The indication that I suggest (which is not a rule or a law) is this: 60% time spent on X, and so 40% spent on Y. Y is incomplete. There is nothing more to it. Smile (Reasonable suggestion from my side, not a statement, but reasonable suggestion)


Tomasz Grysztar wrote:
This appears to be a classic converse error in reasoning. If there was a hash on the website then it would mean that some kind of automation was used, but this implication does not work in the reverse direction.


The fifth mistake you make is to use the hash-argument single-handedly, and ignored my other arguments I used for my suggestion. You filtered it yourself, and created your own rule. Here is what I did, I provided two or more suggestive arguments for a reason, you take apart one of the arguments and blame me for using single arguments to describe a cause. I don't have to explain to you where your fault is here, hopefully. Thanks for chatting. (Seriously, thanks for chatting)
Post 13 Feb 2013, 15:23
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Display posts from previous:
Post new topic Reply to topic

Jump to:  


< Last Thread | Next Thread >

Forum Rules:
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You can attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001-2005 phpBB Group.

Main index   Download   Documentation   Examples   Message board
Copyright © 2004-2016, Tomasz Grysztar.