Index
> Main > Redefining the syntax (flat assembler 1.61)Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 Next |
| Do you like the proposed changes (read below)? | ||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
| Total Votes : 25 |
| Author |
|
|
Tomasz Grysztar 09 Jun 2005, 20:31
Read carefully everything that was posted so far (including the referenced threads) - I think all the explanations are already there.
What have I done is actually fixing the FIX directive to work exactly as it was defined in the manual. Breaking backward compatibility is acceptable when it is a bugfix, isn't it?  |
|||
09 Jun 2005, 20:31 |
|
|
Aster!x 10 Jun 2005, 00:15
Privalov wrote: .if eax = 4 Why not == ? |
|||
|
10 Jun 2005, 00:15 |
|
|
Chewy509 10 Jun 2005, 03:29
Privalov wrote: Breaking backward compatibility is acceptable when it is a bugfix, isn't it? Of course it is.  |
|||
|
10 Jun 2005, 03:29 |
|
|
Tomasz Grysztar 10 Jun 2005, 12:57
With 1.61.12 another tiny new features come, extending the possible applications of STRUC directive. First is the new RESTRUC directive which exactly the same what PURGE, but for the structure macroinstructions.
The second new feature is that inside the structure macroinstruction the symbol consisting of single dot gets now replaced with the name of structure instance, and if preprocessor detects that this feature was used somewhere inside the structure, it doesn't generate the main label for structure automatically, allowing to do this definition in customized way. As an example, the structure macro from the manual improved with this new feature: Code: struc db [data] { common . db data .size = $ - . } So with such structure macro defined, this code: Code: msg db 'Hello!',13,10 will define the "msg.size" constant in addition to defining byte-labelled data in usual way. And also "sizeof.#. = $ - ." could be used to define constant like "sizeof.msg". |
|||
|
10 Jun 2005, 12:57 |
|
|
IronFelix 10 Jun 2005, 13:11
Is it posiible to have 'Args' got all parameters in next code:
macro try [arg] { match Name : Args , arg \{ show Name show Args \} } macro show [text] { forward display `text,13,10 } try AnyName : SubName1,SubName2 Code:
It takes only 'SubName1' value.
Regards. _________________ Flat Assembler is the best! |
|||
|
10 Jun 2005, 13:11 |
|
|
Tomasz Grysztar 10 Jun 2005, 13:15
You forgot the "common" keyword. Macro by default works as if it had "forward" in the beginning, so the match is peformed for each of the arguments separately, and only the first one actually matches.
|
|||
|
10 Jun 2005, 13:15 |
|
|
IronFelix 10 Jun 2005, 13:25
Thanks a lot. Stupid mistake.
Regards. |
|||
|
10 Jun 2005, 13:25 |
|
|
vid 10 Jun 2005, 20:33
just great work! I have been missing struc's "." feature for a long time. Also i thought you will make big mess with new features but it looks clear now.
BTW, what is "fix" good for now? (except altering macrosyntax to other keywords) BTW2: I don't understand why the Include*Global in IncludeAllGlobals needs to be fixed (eg. why can't you use directly __Include*Global) |
|||
|
10 Jun 2005, 20:33 |
|
|
Tomasz Grysztar 10 Jun 2005, 22:01
Quote: what is "fix" good for now? (except altering macrosyntax to other keywords) Actually only for altering macrosyntax now. |
|||
|
10 Jun 2005, 22:01 |
|
|
Tomasz Grysztar 11 Jun 2005, 09:07
My first try to simulate MASM syntax with the new macro features allows to assemble such code:
Code: RECT struct left dd ? top dd ? right dd ? bottom dd ? RECT ends Demo proc a:BYTE, b:DWORD local c:WORD,d:RECT movzx eax,[a] mov [d.left],eax ret Demo endp Demo2 proc local d:DWORD mov eax,[d] Demo2 endp Here are the macros: Code: macro struct name { fields@struct equ name struc db val \{ fields@struct equ fields@struct,.,db,val \} struc dw val \{ fields@struct equ fields@struct,.,dw,val \} struc du val \{ fields@struct equ fields@struct,.,du,val \} struc dp val \{ fields@struct equ fields@struct,.,dp,val \} struc df val \{ fields@struct equ fields@struct,.,df,val \} struc dd val \{ fields@struct equ fields@struct,.,dd,val \} struc dq val \{ fields@struct equ fields@struct,.,dq,val \} struc dt val \{ fields@struct equ fields@struct,.,dt,val \} } macro define@struct name,[field,type,default] { common struc name field \{ match any, fields@struct \\{ fields@struct equ fields@struct,.,name,<field> \\} match , fields@struct \\{ label . forward match any, field \\\{ .#field type field \\\} match , field \\\{ .#field type default \\\} common \\} \} virtual at 0 name name sizeof.#name = $ - name end virtual } macro ends { restruc db,dw,du,dp,df,dd,dq,dt match fields,fields@struct \{ fields@struct equ define@struct fields \} } struc struct { struct . name@struct equ . } struc ends { match =.,name@struct \{ ends \} } fields@struct equ macro proc [params] { common match name arg,params \{ if used name name: defargs@proc arg \} match =all@args, all@args \{ if used params params: all@args equ \} local ..current,..size all@vars equ ..current = 0 if ..ret | ..size push ebp mov ebp,esp if ..size sub esp,..size end if end if macro local [var] \{ virtual at ebp-..size+..current match varname:vartype,var \\{ macro label . \\\{ deflocal@proc .,: \\\} struc db val \\\{ deflocal@proc .,db val \\\} struc dw val \\\{ deflocal@proc .,dw val \\\} struc dp val \\\{ deflocal@proc .,dp val \\\} struc df val \\\{ deflocal@proc .,df val \\\} struc dd val \\\{ deflocal@proc .,dd val \\\} struc dt val \\\{ deflocal@proc .,dt val \\\} struc dq val \\\{ deflocal@proc .,dq val \\\} varname vartype purge label restruc db,dw,dp,df,dd,dt,dq \\} ..current = $-(ebp-..size) end virtual \} macro ret \{ ..size = (((..current-1) shr 2)+1) shl 2 if ..ret | defined ..size leave end if if ..ret retn ..ret else retn end if \} } macro defargs@proc [arg] { common virtual at ebp+8 if ~ arg eq forward local ..arg,current@arg match argname:type, arg \{ current@arg equ argname label ..arg type argname equ ..arg if ( type in <pword,qword> ) dq ? else dd ? end if \} match =current@arg,current@arg \{ current@arg equ arg arg equ ..arg ..arg dd ? \} common all@args equ current@arg forward restore current@arg common end if ..ret = $ - (ebp+8) end virtual } macro deflocal@proc name,def { match any, all@vars \{ all@vars equ all@vars,name \} match ,all@vars \{ all@vars equ name \} local ..var name equ ..var ..var def } struc byte { common . db ? } struc word { common . dw ? } struc dword { common . dd ? } struc pword { common . dp ? } struc qword { common . dq ? } struc tword { common . dt ? } struc dqword { common label . dqword dq ?,? } macro endp { purge return purge enter match all,all@args \{ restore all \} restore all@args match all,all@vars \{ restore all \} end if } struc proc [params] { common proc . params name@proc equ . } struc endp { match =.,name@proc \{ endp \} } BYTE fix byte WORD fix word DWORD fix dword PWORD fix pword QWORD fix qword TWORD fix tword DQWORD fix dqword Last edited by Tomasz Grysztar on 11 Jun 2005, 14:23; edited 2 times in total |
|||
|
11 Jun 2005, 09:07 |
|
|
Reverend 11 Jun 2005, 12:40
Wow, great work. I see that latest changes introduced lots of new possibilities and power to compiler.
But I got confused with all this new stuff, and can't understand how does it all work. Maybe someone who got it, would write some article, when the syntax would be finally redefined for 100% ?? And is it possible to change above macroses so that they would allow defining structure values in compile time? Eg.: Code: rect RECT 100, 200, 300, 400 point POINT 100, 200  |
|||
|
11 Jun 2005, 12:40 |
|
|
Tomasz Grysztar 11 Jun 2005, 12:52
They already are.
Edit: I have corrected them to handle nesting better, like: Code: POINT struct x dd ? y dd ? POINT ends RECT struct left dd ? top dd ? right dd ? bottom dd ? RECT ends WINDOWPLACEMENT struct length dd ? flags dd ? showCmd dd ? ptMinPosition POINT ptMaxPosition POINT rcNormalPosition RECT 0,0,100,100 ; default values may be specified aswell WINDOWPLACEMENT ends some WINDOWPLACEMENT sizeof.WINDOWPLACEMENT,0,0,<0,0>,<100,100>,<10,10,50,50> Last edited by Tomasz Grysztar on 11 Jun 2005, 14:02; edited 2 times in total |
|||
|
11 Jun 2005, 12:52 |
|
|
Reverend 11 Jun 2005, 13:15
Oh, sorry I made a mistake because I copied only macro definitions then added my rect RECT 100, 200, 300, 400 and the compiler displayed "Illegal instruction". Sorry for abusing you with such stupid thing and thanks for reply
I guess the best way to understand new syntax is to practice so I'll try it and learn it (I hope ) |
|||
|
11 Jun 2005, 13:15 |
|
|
Tomasz Grysztar 11 Jun 2005, 16:14
As for writing the article, I'm working on the extended manual sections not only about the new features, but also about their interactions with the existing ones and generally about mixing many features to solve particular problem.
But since the syntax change has been established there will be one more important thing to do - update all the old threads that contains solutions that either have to be done differently or can be done much simpler now, so people searching the board won't get any obsolete stuff. It would be greated if someone could help me with doing this (at least with finding the threads that should get some updated info). |
|||
|
11 Jun 2005, 16:14 |
|
|
vid 11 Jun 2005, 17:32
privalov, i think you should develop new system to hold such information, not this forum. Maybe some HOW-TO-DO area on FASM site, wher you will have it all in form question-solution(s). Threads have many disadvantages, it's hard to find them, hard to maintain them, lot of unneeded posts, posts become irrelevant after edits etc.
|
|||
|
11 Jun 2005, 17:32 |
|
|
Tomasz Grysztar 11 Jun 2005, 17:36
But those threads are there and I think we should do something with them, no matter whether some better resources are made - just so they won't confuse people. The simplest solution is just to remove all that gone obsolete, and I will do it eventually.
Also there are also ones listed in the "Macroinstruction FAQ", which is also a kind of how-to-do reference you mentioned. |
|||
|
11 Jun 2005, 17:36 |
|
|
vid 11 Jun 2005, 18:16
but very few of them. by the way, when you recheck old threads then please note all important of them somewhere so we have more complete list, thanks.
Maybe i'll help when i get back to school (dial-up 's dial-up) |
|||
|
11 Jun 2005, 18:16 |
|
|
decard 13 Jun 2005, 19:25
Privalov,
Sorry for bothering you again  But it is next time I have problems with changed preprocessor - new iglobal and uglobal macros can't handle new structures proprely... is there any way to fix it? |
|||
|
13 Jun 2005, 19:25 |
|
|
Tomasz Grysztar 13 Jun 2005, 19:48
I've cleaned them up, try it:
Code: macro iglobal { IGlobals equ IGlobals, macro __IGlobalBlock { } macro uglobal { UGlobals equ UGlobals, macro __UGlobalBlock { } endg fix } macro IncludeIGlobals { macro IGlobals dummy,[n] \{ __IGlobalBlock purge __IGlobalBlock \} match I, IGlobals \{ I \} } macro IncludeUGlobals { macro UGlobals dummy,[n] \{ \common \local begin, size begin = $ virtual at $ \forward __UGlobalBlock purge __UGlobalBlock \common size = $ - begin end virtual rb size \} match U, UGlobals \{ U \} } macro IncludeAllGlobals { IncludeIGlobals IncludeUGlobals } Last edited by Tomasz Grysztar on 14 Jun 2005, 14:12; edited 2 times in total |
|||
|
13 Jun 2005, 19:48 |
|
| Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 Next < Last Thread | Next Thread > |
Forum Rules:
|