Index
> Main > fasm why not update?Goto page 1, 2 Next |
| Author |
|
|
lovefasm 28 Jul 2007, 16:23
请问 flat assembler 为什么这么长时间都没有更新了？还是3月份的 1.67.21
|
|||
28 Jul 2007, 16:23 |
|
|
vid 29 Jul 2007, 10:02
please post only in english on this board
|
|||
|
29 Jul 2007, 10:02 |
|
|
Niels 29 Jul 2007, 16:20
Is Tomasz fighting an ASM-abacadabra-flowline point?
 |
|||
|
29 Jul 2007, 16:20 |
|
|
LocoDelAssembly 29 Jul 2007, 16:31
|
|||
|
29 Jul 2007, 16:31 |
|
|
kohlrak 30 Jul 2007, 00:00
lovefasm wrote: 请问 flat assembler 为什么这么长时间都没有更新了？还是3月份的 1.67.21 Speak any english or do you use a translator? 日本語を話せますか。 |
|||
|
30 Jul 2007, 00:00 |
|
|
Niels 30 Jul 2007, 15:07
shoorick,
I agree with those words. To say something about "what problem do you have with the current last version", I was hoping Tomasz or someone else is keeping a 'todo'-record, this could also be explaining why it is not a bug, if the confusion is great among the users. Niels ps. This might be an issue but I agree other (Tomasz-)things can be more important than this: http://board.flatassembler.net/topic.php?t=7376 |
|||
|
30 Jul 2007, 15:07 |
|
|
f0dder 31 Jul 2007, 00:26
shoorick wrote:
Spot on the sugar, baby! Way too many people suffer from upgradoritis, versionities, call it what you want. As I see it, there's three thing that could warrant an update to the current fasm line... New processor instructions to be added, discovery (and fix  ) of some bug, or some speed/memory optimization (though it runs pretty well as-is).
There's other stuff I certainly wouldn't mind see, but those items would probably be for a "fasm v2"... and those features have already been discussed in other threads (EXITM, debug info, conditional assembly. Not all of them are something Tomasz seem to like btw ). |
|||
|
31 Jul 2007, 00:26 |
|
|
LocoDelAssembly 31 Jul 2007, 00:37
Quote:
Don't we have that already? |
|||
|
31 Jul 2007, 00:37 |
|
|
ManOfSteel 01 Aug 2007, 08:10
Quote: conditional assembly ex: Code: FLAG equ 1 match = 1,FLAG { do something } Couldn't that be considered conditional assembly? |
|||
|
01 Aug 2007, 08:10 |
|
|
vid 01 Aug 2007, 08:59
If you was reacting to my post, yes, that IS conditional assembly. But it' kinda uneasy to use for some types of things:
Code: #ifdef FLAG #ifdef FLAG2 #else #endif #else #endif Code: else equ 1 match =1, FLAG { else2 equ 1 match =1, FLAG2 \{ else2 equ 0 \} match =1, else2 \{ \} else equ 0 } match =1, else { } another problem is that preprocessor commands in inner parts must be escaped. That requires you to always know how many "conditional blocks" are above you. |
|||
|
01 Aug 2007, 08:59 |
|
|
f0dder 01 Aug 2007, 09:31
AND, to be really useful, conditional assembly need the ability to set conditions from the assembler commandline... ie., "fasm -DDEBUG=1 stuff.asm". I know that goes against Tomasz' "one source one output" philosophy, but it's immensely useful.
|
|||
|
01 Aug 2007, 09:31 |
|
|
vid 01 Aug 2007, 10:27
Quote: I know that goes against Tomasz' "one source one output" philosophy, but it's immensely useful. As long as you use FASM in the way tomasz does, it's not needed. That is, use FASM for entire project to compile directly into executable. Unfortunately, if you want to use multiple object files and linker (lot of reasons to do this), then this is really a must-have |
|||
|
01 Aug 2007, 10:27 |
|
|
LocoDelAssembly 01 Aug 2007, 14:03
I think you want conditional preprocessing then, conditional assembly exists since long time ago.
|
|||
|
01 Aug 2007, 14:03 |
|
|
Tomasz Grysztar 01 Aug 2007, 14:20
There's going to a be an update in a few days, thank you for your patience.
|
|||
|
01 Aug 2007, 14:20 |
|
|
LocoDelAssembly 01 Aug 2007, 14:38
Good to see you again Tomasz
|
|||
|
01 Aug 2007, 14:38 |
|
|
vid 01 Aug 2007, 18:19
offtopic "Niels" posts moved here
|
|||
|
01 Aug 2007, 18:19 |
|
|
DOS386 01 Aug 2007, 19:01
Tomasz wrote:
> There's going to a be an update in a few days, thank you for your patience. Good to know that you are still alive ... and thanks for your work put into FASM, this forum and some of my questions in the past ...
There are a few things that could be improved on FASM http://board.flatassembler.net/topic.php?t=7407 OTOH no need to hurry ... and no need the double the number of "features" every 2 months ... turning a project into a bloat ... or even a crap finally 
PS: FASM is already usable  |
|||
|
01 Aug 2007, 19:01 |
|
|
MichaelH 01 Aug 2007, 22:27
vid wrote:
Lots of reason not to do that as well. I still have trouble understanding how Tomasz, only a teenager at the beginning of the fasm project, had the amazing vision of seeing the pitfalls of all the complex nonsense that is hll languages of today and sticking to the belief of simple is best..... he must have starting programming at a very young age. |
|||
|
01 Aug 2007, 22:27 |
|
|
vid 01 Aug 2007, 23:14
Yes, i love simplicity and straightforwardness of FASM really much, as long as it doesn't limit me. But when somethings starts limiting me, i rather learn something new (objects, linking) and overcome limitation. For example if i want to mix compilers, or use static library written in another language (virtually all libraries are in C), etc... Then, i rather use slightly more complicated way than nothing at all.
I say, that FASM is doing extremely good job at what it is aimed for: FASM-only projects. It is not good as part of toolchain, because it simply isn't designed to be used so (sad but true). |
|||
|
01 Aug 2007, 23:14 |
|
| Goto page 1, 2 Next < Last Thread | Next Thread > |
Forum Rules:
|