flat assembler
Message board for the users of flat assembler.

Index > Heap > Who here supports FASM in their OS?

Author
Thread Post new topic Reply to topic
rain_storm



Joined: 05 Apr 2007
Posts: 67
Location: Ireland
rain_storm
Just out of interest. I see this as a milestone in OS development. The ability to develop software from within your own OS means that your OS has become useful, I would not call such an OS a toy. The whole idea of TCCBoot got me thinking that if you can get tinyc to bootstrap itself then surely you can execute FASM from a modestly developed OS.
Post 01 Aug 2011, 20:58
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
typedef



Joined: 25 Jul 2010
Posts: 2913
Location: 0x77760000
typedef
Good point.

+5
Post 01 Aug 2011, 21:00
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
xleelz



Joined: 12 Mar 2011
Posts: 86
Location: In Google Code Server... waiting for someone to download me
xleelz
Then again... if you are good enough to develop a useful operating system couldn't you just as well create your own assembler for it?
Post 01 Aug 2011, 23:33
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Dex4u



Joined: 08 Feb 2005
Posts: 1601
Location: web
Dex4u
DexOS and dos2x and miniDos have fasm ports (plus other OS). The way FASM is code make it so easy to port.
Its took me 1hour to port it to my OS.
I also have a fasm port, that's fully self contained and will boot and run from any realmode OS, that can load a mz exe.
Post 02 Aug 2011, 01:13
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
edfed



Joined: 20 Feb 2006
Posts: 4240
Location: 2018
edfed
i would like a very light fasm version that can fit in less than 64000 bytes, and then, be loaded in any os as a .com.
Post 02 Aug 2011, 01:16
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
Enko



Joined: 03 Apr 2007
Posts: 678
Location: Mar del Plata
Enko
edfed wrote:
i would like a very light fasm version that can fit in less than 64000 bytes, and then, be loaded in any os as a .com.

If I remember well, the first version of fasm was a .com?
Post 02 Aug 2011, 02:33
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
DOS386



Joined: 08 Dec 2006
Posts: 1901
DOS386
edfed wrote:
i would like a very light fasm version that can fit in less than 64000 bytes, and then, be loaded in any os as a ".com".


Good point.

+18'446'744'073'709'551'615

I'd indeed like to see a reduced version of FASM too (no XXX64, MMX at most, no SSE/3DNever/AVX, only raw, MZ and PE formats).

Indeed any OS could load this reduced FASM as any OS can load existing version ... but you are WRONG apparently ASS'uming that any OS could execute your ".com" (do you mean DOS COM executable ???) Sad
Post 02 Aug 2011, 13:02
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
edfed



Joined: 20 Feb 2006
Posts: 4240
Location: 2018
edfed
when i say .com, i mean a single 64k code and data segment. dos or not. and as dos services can be recoded in any os, it means that any dos program can be run under any os that supports int 21h. and as there are many alternate int 21h sources codes, you can include any of them in your os project with a minimal amount of modifications.
Post 02 Aug 2011, 13:08
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
DOS386



Joined: 08 Dec 2006
Posts: 1901
DOS386
> a single 64k code and data segment. dos or not

Good luck running your ".com" (using UNREAL mode) in long mode Smile
Post 02 Aug 2011, 13:16
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
rain_storm



Joined: 05 Apr 2007
Posts: 67
Location: Ireland
rain_storm
Ah yes unreal mode, now we see the true problem. In that case it might require heavy modification to the FASM sources. but in many cases it would be a lot less work. Has FASM always required unreal mode? even the first release?
Post 02 Aug 2011, 13:50
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
edfed



Joined: 20 Feb 2006
Posts: 4240
Location: 2018
edfed
a real mode fasm would be enough, and then, can be just modified in order to run under any else mode. that is not the case of unreal mode apps that cannot be easy converted in real mode apps.

i don't care abut long mode since i don't have any cpu with it.
Post 02 Aug 2011, 15:03
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
revolution
When all else fails, read the source


Joined: 24 Aug 2004
Posts: 17462
Location: In your JS exploiting you and your system
revolution
edfed wrote:
a real mode fasm would be enough ...
Oh those ugly segment registers. Unless you are assembling really really tiny source files then a 64k data segment ain't gonna be enough for anything but playing.
Post 02 Aug 2011, 15:18
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
cod3b453



Joined: 25 Aug 2004
Posts: 619
cod3b453
I'm hoping to port FASM as the back-end to my own front-end language as part of my OS but right now I'm focusing on the OS part (though I have started the grammar/parser code in a separate project)
Post 02 Aug 2011, 19:44
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Madis731



Joined: 25 Sep 2003
Posts: 2140
Location: Estonia
Madis731
@xleelz: new assembler is nearly always a bad idea. FASM is an exception to this rule.
http://xkcd.com/927/
Post 03 Aug 2011, 12:57
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger Reply with quote
edfed



Joined: 20 Feb 2006
Posts: 4240
Location: 2018
edfed
yep, because fasm is fasm, a standard.
and i will only use the genuine fasm compiler. that's a fact, even if i port fasm to my os, i will port it, not rewrite or reinvent it, then, only port it, and consider fasm syntax as a standard. that's why we need a more modular design in the engine, in order to comment parts of the source to invalidate and delete parts we don't need.
like sse, mmx, or any extension that we don't need on the target machine.
for example, i have a atom without 64 bits, a pmmx, a pIII, and two 386 compaq (that i never use)
means that i have tree version of fasm to compile.
one for each cpu, with complete 32 bits only, pIII, PMMX and 386 instruction sets. but always the same engine and syntax.
386 don't have fpu, then, need a fasm version without fpu.
Post 03 Aug 2011, 13:15
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
rain_storm



Joined: 05 Apr 2007
Posts: 67
Location: Ireland
rain_storm
I'm very happy with FASM. I'm nowhere near the stage of getting it to run in my own OS but I think this is definately one thing that I'm aiming for. In any case I don't wish to replace FASM with my own assembler.

edfed how much can you throw away and still have a useful program? When you drive a car you don't throw away the handbrake. If memory footprint is also considered then the symbol table could be streamed to and from disc. This could mean that all those data tables could also be kept on disc without needing to remove the functionality, at the cost of slower performance.
Post 03 Aug 2011, 19:38
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Artlav



Joined: 23 Dec 2004
Posts: 188
Location: Moscow, Russia
Artlav
I have FASM supported in my OS, and thus can compile some asm demos from inside it ( http://orbides.1gb.ru/aprom.php?mode=doc-apps ).

However, that does not magically make it capable of writing to USB disks or any other non-ancient place one need to store whatever he developed.

Neither does it make the text editor comfortable, nor does it makes a linker work, or c code compile.

Fasm is quite easy to port, but it alone won't make the OS self-hosting, so no milestones there.

And writing an assembler from scratch quickly gets boring - all these opcodes to fill in...
Post 03 Aug 2011, 20:10
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
xleelz



Joined: 12 Mar 2011
Posts: 86
Location: In Google Code Server... waiting for someone to download me
xleelz
Well how would it work out to include fasm in a commercial OS?
Post 03 Aug 2011, 21:15
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Madis731



Joined: 25 Sep 2003
Posts: 2140
Location: Estonia
Madis731
@Artlav: nice graphics. I like the narrow borders and the overall style.
@xleelz: MASM holds that spot right now and its almost as impossible as rooting out IE6.
http://www.ie6countdown.com/
Post 04 Aug 2011, 11:06
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger Reply with quote
DOS386



Joined: 08 Dec 2006
Posts: 1901
DOS386
Post 06 Aug 2011, 13:36
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


Copyright © 1999-2020, Tomasz Grysztar. Also on YouTube, Twitter.

Website powered by rwasa.