flat assembler
Message board for the users of flat assembler.

Index > Main > flat assembler 1.69.36-38

Goto page Previous  1, 2
Author
Thread Post new topic Reply to topic
rugxulo



Joined: 09 Aug 2005
Posts: 2341
Location: Usono (aka, USA)
rugxulo
Tomasz, two silly questions, out of curiosity, if you don't mind:

1). Why Mach-O? Why bother? (Please nobody take this the wrong way.) I mean, I get it, Mac OS X is famous and beloved, but it just sounds like a hassle. I'm almost (barely) surprised Apple hasn't switched to ELF as they seem to be VERY quick to adopt or drop various things. Certainly people like GNU heavily focus on ELF these days, so it would seem to be easier if they jumped on the bandwagon, though I can somewhat sympathize with each point of view. (Also, if ObjConv works converting to/from Mach-O, and note that I've not tried and maybe it is buggy or unusable, the point is less urgent.)

2). Do you have any test suite that you test upcoming releases of FASM against? Or should the community help make one? I mean, I'm not really volunteering, just saying it would be a good idea to have a few big projects (Fresh, PROE, Menuet, whatever) so as to make sure major features (e.g. macros) don't break. I know assembling itself is a big deal, but obviously that's not enough for all features as you've (last I checked) explicitly avoided some higher-level stuff in your sources.
Post 16 Feb 2012, 19:31
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
DOS386



Joined: 08 Dec 2006
Posts: 1901
DOS386
http://board.flatassembler.net/topic.php?p=140977#140977

Code:
version 1.69.38 (Feb 19, 2012)

[-] Fixed a small bug that made relative offsets get invalid symbol type
    in some cases.

version 1.69.37 (Feb 13, 2012)

[+] Added "relativeto" testing operator.

[-] Couple of small bugfixes.

version 1.69.36 (Feb 11, 2012)

[+] Added "assert" directive.

[+] Macroinstruction argument now can have default value, defined with "="
    symbol followed by value after the argument name in definition.

[-] Fixed a bug which disallowed combining unary "+" with other unary
    operators.
    
Post 19 Feb 2012, 08:41
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Display posts from previous:
Post new topic Reply to topic

Jump to:  
Goto page Previous  1, 2

< 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


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

Website powered by rwasa.