flat assembler
Message board for the users of flat assembler.
![]() |
Author |
|
asmcoder 15 Nov 2008, 15:42
[content deleted]
Last edited by asmcoder on 14 Aug 2009, 14:55; edited 1 time in total |
|||
![]() |
|
LocoDelAssembly 15 Nov 2008, 16:09
Tomasz, I'm uploading without optimal fill so the tables look good even outside FASMW.
|
|||||||||||
![]() |
|
Tomasz Grysztar 15 Nov 2008, 16:10
They look good in Windows Notepad too, I don't know what you're talking about.
![]() |
|||
![]() |
|
windwakr 15 Nov 2008, 16:19
Neat, gives alot of info.
|
|||
![]() |
|
Mac2004 15 Nov 2008, 19:15
Glad to here that Fasm is evolving....
![]() regards, Mac2004 |
|||
![]() |
|
Tomasz Grysztar 16 Nov 2008, 21:44
The only thing left to do tu fullfill my plan for 1.67.x development line is finishing the SSE4 support - then I'm going to release the 1.68 milestone. I will now give you some time for testing, though.
![]() BTW, I managed to still keep the fasm's code under the 64k limit, so the unREAL version for DOS should still work correctly in these releases. |
|||
![]() |
|
asmfan 17 Nov 2008, 09:54
Is it possible to make datatypes as numeric constants in some cases? when not define some data they represent the size in bytes of itself, e.g. byte=1, word=2, etc. also tchar=1|2 depending
![]() i know it is done for masm-like "datatype PTR [X]" but it's not for masm-like "datatype1 PTR [X+datatype2]" |
|||
![]() |
|
DOS386 04 Dec 2008, 07:42
asmcoder wrote:
> why is this so important? > debugging? if i debug a file that mean its protected > somehow, and definitly i dont have source. > if i have source... why debug ? Your code is always bugfree ? Shame on me and Tomasz then ![]() Tomasz wrote: > The only thing left to do tu Besides warring on trolls ![]() > then I'm going to release the 1.68 milestone. ![]() ![]() > generate some more useful things - like listing, symbols map or debug info. > I will now give you some time for testing, though OK, some tests: + It works ![]() + Fixed an old "legacy fault" of FASM There is some space for improvements, still: - "tools" are source only (I got them compiled ...) - No info about, nor progress indicator for saving the (huge) debug file - Doesn't default to a useful filename, IMHO Code:
FASM BLAH.ASM -s
should brew BLAH.EXE (or whatever the format directive requests) plus BLAH.FDB . - TFM not updated ... actually the -D switch hasn't been added either. So we have M P S D for now ![]() - Listings are not very well formatted, width cca 200 chars - don't see anything on the screen with 80 width ! Solution: - - Don't default to 64-bit, pick default from use directive - - Add an "override size" switch to tools (8 16 24 32 40 48 56 64 bits) - format numbers beyond range as "????" - - Add an "encoding length limit" switch overriding the default 15 (?) bytes, postpone to next line what's too much |
|||
![]() |
|
Tomasz Grysztar 04 Dec 2008, 08:59
DOS386 wrote: - "tools" are source only (I got them compiled ...) Since those tools are only useful for you when you've got fasm already working, it's natural assumption you shouldn't have any trouble getting them compiled - and this keeps the package smaller. ![]() DOS386 wrote: - No info about, nor progress indicator for saving the (huge) debug file Just like with the assembly itself. Or do you mean I should add information about how many bytes were written into debug file? That's an easy addition. DOS386 wrote: - Doesn't default to a useful filename, IMHO I may think about it, but I don't feel it's really that important. DOS386 wrote: - TFM not updated ... actually the -D switch hasn't been added either. So we have M P S D for now Look here: http://board.flatassembler.net/topic.php?p=85223#85223 The -D may never actually get documented. ![]() DOS386 wrote: - - Don't default to 64-bit, pick default from use directive The "use" directive has not much to do with this, as fasm's addresses are always 64-bit DOS386 wrote: - - Add an "encoding length limit" switch overriding the default 15 (?) bytes, postpone to next line what's too much There is a switch for this in the listing tool. Have you overlooked it? ![]() |
|||
![]() |
|
DOS386 04 Dec 2008, 09:28
Tomasz Grysztar wrote: only useful for you when you've got fasm already working, it's natural assumption you shouldn't have any trouble getting them compiled - and this keeps the package smaller. Good point ... still, they are not that bloated and there are other ways how to reduce size of the package ![]() Quote: Just like with the assembly itself. Except the debug file is cca 100 times bigger ![]() Quote: Or do you mean I should add information about how many bytes were written into debug file? That's an easy addition. Something like "Writing BLAH.FDB ..." and one additional dot per 64 KiB or so ![]() (default filename) Quote: think about it, but I don't feel it's really that important. ![]() Quote: The -D may never actually get documented. I see the point ... ![]() Quote: The "use" directive has not much to do with this, as fasm's addresses are always 64-bit Internally ... but there is no point to see stuff like 0000000000000123 in 16-bit code ![]() Quote: There is a switch for this in the listing tool. Have you overlooked it? oops |
|||
![]() |
|
Tomasz Grysztar 04 Dec 2008, 15:07
DOS386 wrote: Except the debug file is cca 100 times bigger Well, If you wish you can get the output that is 100 times bigger than debug info, too. ![]() In the past, there existed sources that took fasm about half an hour to assemble, and it was still silent. I'm not saying that progress indicator is a bad thing, I just mean that it wouldn't make much sense to make progress indicator for the debug info, while there would be no such indicator for the assembly itself. DOS386 wrote: Internally ... but there is no point to see stuff like 0000000000000123 in 16-bit code Still, it is possible with fasm to have 16-bit code generated with "org" set to something like 0x12345678ABCDEF. As I noted in the release announcement, I encourage people to make their own tools processing 'fas' format, those provided with package are not intended to be everything there is for this purpose. Thus I suggest you might want to make own variant of listing tool and release it. Though I think it's more important now to get some tools able to make some recognizable debug info format out of 'fas'. |
|||
![]() |
|
DOS386 06 Dec 2008, 07:29
> existed sources that took fasm about half an hour to assemble, and it was still silent.
Bad algo or slow CPU ? ![]() ![]() ![]() > possible with fasm to have 16-bit code generated with "org" set to something like 0x12345678ABCDEF. For the heck ![]() > you might want to make own variant of listing tool and release it. OK. ![]() ![]() > it's more important now to get some tools able to make some recognizable debug info format What is "recognizable" ? DWARF / STABS ? > out of 'fas'. COOL. so "fas" is the official name ? FDB would be better IMHO. Some people use things like .NAS .FAS .WAS .RAS for NASM / FASM / WASM / RossASM etc. > The -D may never actually get documented. Still, I have a different (better ?) idea. Now EXE documents it fully and manual not at all. ![]() ![]() |
|||
![]() |
|
Madis731 07 Dec 2008, 19:02
Yeei, SSE4
![]() Sorry, got carried away 'cuz I have an i7 to test it on: http://www.tud.ttu.ee/~t060429/Up/Showoff.png |
|||
![]() |
|
baldr 07 Dec 2008, 21:10
Tomasz Grysztar wrote: …16-bit code generated with "org" set to something like 0x12345678ABCDEF. ![]() I'm still trying to write .fas-to-.pdb converter, they're so orthogonal… DOS386, Even better: "For -D use the dark side of the power, Luke…" ![]() _________________ "Don't belong. Never join. Think for yourself. Peace." – Victor Stone. |
|||
![]() |
|
shoorick 08 Dec 2008, 05:46
DOS386 wrote: FDB would be better IMHO. Some people use things like .NAS .FAS .WAS .RAS for NASM / FASM / WASM / RossASM etc. it's quite hard to satisfy each one of "some people" at once. personally i use FDB as firebird database (and hope, i'm not alone) _________________ UNICODE forever! |
|||
![]() |
|
Tomasz Grysztar 08 Dec 2008, 09:24
On the other hand, I've seen .FSM used for fasm, .TSM for TASM, etc.
|
|||
![]() |
|
asmfans 12 Dec 2008, 00:32
I hope fasm1.68 will become a stable version.
|
|||
![]() |
|
< Last Thread | Next Thread > |
Forum Rules:
|
Copyright © 1999-2025, Tomasz Grysztar. Also on GitHub, YouTube.
Website powered by rwasa.