how to realize this ideas?..

Index > Macroinstructions > how to realize this ideas?..

Author

Thread

KIRK

Joined: 05 Dec 2007
Posts: 20
Location: Russia

KIRK 05 Dec 2007, 08:47

idea #1:

instead

Code:

section '.idata' import data readable writeable

   library kernel,'KERNEL32.DLL',\
           user,'USER32.DLL'

  import kernel,\
     GetModuleHandle,'GetModuleHandleA',\
     ExitProcess,'ExitProcess'

  import user,\
     DialogBoxParam,'DialogBoxParamA',\
     CheckRadioButton,'CheckRadioButton',\
     GetDlgItemText,'GetDlgItemTextA',\
     IsDlgButtonChecked,'IsDlgButtonChecked',\
     MessageBox,'MessageBoxA',\
     EndDialog,'EndDialog'

i wish to write

Code:

section '.idata' import data readable writeable
   kernel32.dll GetModuleHandleA GetModuleHandle,ExitProcess
   user32.dll DialogBoxParamA DialogBoxParam,GetDlgItemTextA GetDlgItemText,IsDlgButtonChecked,MessageBoxA MessageBox,EndDialog

syntax:

Code:

section '.idata' import data readable writeable
  any_dll_file_name.dll Function1 [Function1Alias1] [Function1Alias2], Function2 [Function2Alias1] [Function2Alias2]...
  dll 'any dll file name.AndExtention' Function1 [Function1Alias1] [Function1Alias2]..., Function2 [Function2Alias1] [Function2Alias2]...

idea #2:

instead

Code:

include 'win32ax.inc'
.code
   start:
   invoke MessageBox,HWND_DESKTOP,"Hi! I'm the example program!","Win32 Assembly",MB_OK
   invoke ExitProcess,0
.end start

i wish to write

Code:

include 'win32ax.inc'
smartcode
.code
   start:
   MessageBox HWND_DESKTOP,"Hi! I'm the example program!","Win32 Assembly",MB_OK
   ExitProcess 0
.end start

idea #3

Code:

;... any code ...
@: ;label 0
;... any code ...
@@: ;label 1
;... any code ...
jmp @b-1 ;jumps to label 0
jmp @b0 ;jumps to label 1
jmp @b ;jumps to label 1 too
jmp @b1 ;jumps to label 2
jmp @f0 ;jumps to label 5
jmp @f ;jumps to label 5 too
jmp @f-1 ;jumps to label 4
jmp @f-2 ;jumps to label 3
;... any code ...
@: ;label 2
;... any code ...
@: ;label 3
;... any code ...
@: ;label 4
;... any code ...
@@: ;label 5

05 Dec 2007, 08:47

edfed

Joined: 20 Feb 2006
Posts: 4350
Location: Now

edfed 05 Dec 2007, 09:06

simply by coding in a real high level language. Wink

i'm joking!

if the problem is the number of word to write, then ctrl+c and ctrl+v will act as you need.

for the problem of @@:
it will be unreadable to have so many crossing @@: and jmp @fx

there is also topic about a macro to make @@: and @@@:
look at this!

05 Dec 2007, 09:06

KIRK

Joined: 05 Dec 2007
Posts: 20
Location: Russia

KIRK 05 Dec 2007, 09:24

edfed wrote:

simply by coding in a real high level language. i'm joking!

if the problem is the number of word to write, then ctrl+c and ctrl+v will act as you need.

for the problem of @@:
it will be unreadable to have so many crossing @@: and jmp @fx

there is also topic about a macro to make @@: and @@@:
look at this!

problem is not to write, problem is to view big and littered code
about @@ - if you think, you will not get confused
named labels confuse more strongly...
@@@ is far from necessary for me Sad

Last edited by KIRK on 05 Dec 2007, 09:26; edited 1 time in total

05 Dec 2007, 09:24

shoorick

Joined: 25 Feb 2005
Posts: 1614
Location: Ukraine

shoorick 05 Dec 2007, 09:24

1.i'm using this tool and do not ever look at import section.
2.
it seems

Code:

   start: 
   MessageBox HWND_DESKTOP,..

already was relized
with this way we can approach to usage of "goto" instead of "jmp" Wink

05 Dec 2007, 09:24

MHajduk

Joined: 30 Mar 2006
Posts: 6113
Location: Poland

MHajduk 05 Dec 2007, 10:01

KIRK,

Ad. your idea #2:
you could use FASM fix directive to resolve this problem:

Code:

MessageBox fix invoke MessageBox,

ExitProcess fix invoke ExitProcess,

; and so on for all procedures, which you want to use...

Here you have improved code of 'HELLO.ASM' example (I use 'fasminc' environment variable to inform compiler about path to the 'FASM\INCLUDE' directory):

Code:

; example of simplified Win32 programming using complex macro features

include '%fasminc%\win32ax.inc'

MessageBox fix invoke MessageBox,

ExitProcess fix invoke ExitProcess,

.code

  start:
        ;invoke  MessageBox,HWND_DESKTOP,"Hi! I'm the example program!","Win32 Assembly",MB_OK
        MessageBox  HWND_DESKTOP,"Hi! I'm the example program!","Win32 Assembly",MB_OK

        ;invoke  ExitProcess,0
        ExitProcess 0

.end start

05 Dec 2007, 10:01

daluca

Joined: 05 Nov 2005
Posts: 86

daluca 12 Dec 2007, 07:51

I posted some macros that are related to some of your ideas:

http://board.flatassembler.net/topic.php?t=7379

12 Dec 2007, 07:51

KIRK

Joined: 05 Dec 2007
Posts: 20
Location: Russia

KIRK 13 Dec 2007, 09:46

daluca wrote:

I posted some macros that are related to some of your ideas:

http://board.flatassembler.net/topic.php?t=7379

yes, I see this...
but invoke is better than <>
and nothing is better than invoke

2MHajduk: fixes takes a lot of place

13 Dec 2007, 09:46

vid
Verbosity in development

Joined: 05 Sep 2003
Posts: 7103
Location: Slovakia

vid 13 Dec 2007, 10:04

KIRK: both are possibe, but this way wastes too much memory.

13 Dec 2007, 10:04

KIRK

Joined: 05 Dec 2007
Posts: 20
Location: Russia

KIRK 13 Dec 2007, 10:10

vid wrote:

KIRK: both are possibe, but this way wastes too much memory.

It happens with macroses, but can you rewrite source code of FASM?

13 Dec 2007, 10:10

vid
Verbosity in development

Joined: 05 Sep 2003
Posts: 7103
Location: Slovakia

vid 13 Dec 2007, 10:44

Why rewrite sources? this can be done easier with macros. rewriting FASM sources for this would be really stupid idea

Also, it's better to stick to standard, customizing everything isn't much helpful, especially with such silly differences as space vs. comma, etc.

13 Dec 2007, 10:44

KIRK

Joined: 05 Dec 2007
Posts: 20
Location: Russia

KIRK 13 Dec 2007, 11:58

believe me, these are simple changes, but it very necessary.
and tell, that you can't do it.

Last edited by KIRK on 13 Dec 2007, 12:23; edited 1 time in total

13 Dec 2007, 11:58

Madis731

Joined: 25 Sep 2003
Posts: 2138
Location: Estonia

Madis731 13 Dec 2007, 12:04

The problem why its an O(n) complexity is that what you have now is invoke and its parameters (n), but what you wish to do is implement all the (n) parameters as invokes so that it seems to relate more to an SQL query than some small assembly-written macro.

if you want to replace "invoke parmX" with "parmX" then its doable with macros, but the other way round you don't have the one and only token to hold on to.

Seems like a problem where you need to dig into some include files and 'match' / 'fix' your way through them...

13 Dec 2007, 12:04

vid
Verbosity in development

Joined: 05 Sep 2003
Posts: 7103
Location: Slovakia

vid 13 Dec 2007, 12:32

Quote:

believe me, these are simple changes, but it very necessary.

Nescessary for what? Can you give example where standard way wouldn't be enough?

Quote:

and tell, that you can't do it.

i can, but it is a complete waste of memory, unsystematic, messy, etc...

13 Dec 2007, 12:32

KIRK

Joined: 05 Dec 2007
Posts: 20
Location: Russia

KIRK 13 Dec 2007, 20:48

Possibilities is same, but advantage in convenience of reading and writing code.
I am assured in it, since I know some programming languages and I well understand psychology.

13 Dec 2007, 20:48

< 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 cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum