flat assembler
Message board for the users of flat assembler.

Index > Main > flat assembler 1.53

Author
Thread Post new topic Reply to topic
Tomasz Grysztar



Joined: 16 Jun 2003
Posts: 8351
Location: Kraków, Poland
Tomasz Grysztar 23 Jun 2004, 15:33
The official release of fasm 1.53 is now available in the Download section.

There are no new features added that were not present in 1.52 version - this is mainly a bug-fix release.


Last edited by Tomasz Grysztar on 30 Jul 2004, 16:05; edited 1 time in total
Post 23 Jun 2004, 15:33
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
Tommy



Joined: 17 Jun 2003
Posts: 489
Location: Norway
Tommy 24 Jun 2004, 08:17
Seems good! Wink

What about an online version of the "To-Do" and "What's new" list?
Post 24 Jun 2004, 08:17
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
vid
Verbosity in development


Joined: 05 Sep 2003
Posts: 7105
Location: Slovakia
vid 24 Jun 2004, 10:52
good idea
Post 24 Jun 2004, 10:52
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website AIM Address MSN Messenger ICQ Number Reply with quote
Jaques



Joined: 07 Jun 2004
Posts: 79
Location: Everywhere
Jaques 24 Jun 2004, 15:03
i would be helpful
Post 24 Jun 2004, 15:03
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Quant



Joined: 15 Nov 2003
Posts: 13
Location: Turkey
Quant 25 Jun 2004, 07:38
I have downloaded your fasm v1.53 packeges. the linux package contains different size/time of source codes.

example:
linux package - parser.inc: 17,298 bytes
console package - parser.inc: 18,302 bytes

regards...

_________________
Regards...
Post 25 Jun 2004, 07:38
View user's profile Send private message MSN Messenger ICQ Number Reply with quote
Rookie



Joined: 21 Aug 2003
Posts: 44
Location: Planet Romania
Rookie 25 Jun 2004, 20:34
That's because Windoze uses Carriage Return-Line Feed (0Dh,0Ah) to designate a new line (that is 2 bytes), while Linux uses just the LF (0Ah) (just one byte). And as asm has a lot of short lines (which leads to a lot of new line sequences), 1+1+1+... leads to 18,302-17,298 bytes difference between the two files.

_________________
This is who I choose to be.
Post 25 Jun 2004, 20:34
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
comrade



Joined: 16 Jun 2003
Posts: 1150
Location: Russian Federation
comrade 26 Jun 2004, 02:20
if that is the case, parser.inc should have 1004 lines

_________________
comrade (comrade64@live.com; http://comrade.ownz.com/)
Post 26 Jun 2004, 02:20
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger ICQ Number Reply with quote
jekyll



Joined: 25 May 2004
Posts: 14
jekyll 26 Jun 2004, 03:09
1005 lines
Post 26 Jun 2004, 03:09
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Quant



Joined: 15 Nov 2003
Posts: 13
Location: Turkey
Quant 26 Jun 2004, 08:26
Ok, I understand, thanks for your descriptions...

_________________
Regards...
Post 26 Jun 2004, 08:26
View user's profile Send private message MSN Messenger ICQ Number Reply with quote
scientica
Retired moderator


Joined: 16 Jun 2003
Posts: 689
Location: Linköping, Sweden
scientica 28 Jun 2004, 18:29
Just for the fun of it (and to learn how to make patches), I made a patch for 1.52 to 1.53 (linux version).
I created the patch like this:
Code:
diff --unified --recursive --new-file fasm-1.52/* fasm-1.53/ > patch-fasm-1.53    


To apply the patch do this:
Code:
cd your/fasm-old-verion/dir
cat path/to/patch-fasm-1.53 | patch -p1
# now you'll need to recompile fasm, as it's not pached
fasm source/Linux/fasm.asm fasm
#now just copy the file to the "bin-dir" where you got the fasm binary, or update the symlink Smile    


I'm gonna try to patch the libc version of fasm, I think it'll be a smooth update Smile

btw, the code base for Linux is 18 565 lines (cat *.inc Linux/* | wc -l), Win32 is 18 738 (cat *.inc Win32/* | wc -l) and the DOS is 19 310 (cat *.inc DOS/* | wc -l). Very Happy
(with out comment lines and empty lines:
18 387 for Linux (cat *.inc Linux/* | grep -E ^\[^\;\] | grep -E ^\[^\n\] | wc -l)
18 549 for Win32 (cat *.inc Win32/* | grep -E ^\[^\;\] | grep -E ^\[^\n\] | wc -l)
19 084 for DOS (cat *.inc DOS/* | grep -E ^\[^\;\] | grep -E ^\[^\n\] | wc -l)
)

btw, parser.inc has 1004 lines (cat parser.inc | wc -l)


[edit]It seems it's fine to patch the libc version, however, you'll need to remove afew lines from the patch-fasm-1.53.asm patch, as it contains all files, not just the source files (which is the only files that comes with the libc version). I'm attaching the patch for the libc verison.
appl the libc patch like this:
Code:
cd somedir
tar xzvf fasmlibc.tgz
cat /path/to/patch-fasm-1.53_libc_src | patch -p1
cd source/libc/
fasm fasm.asm fasm.o
gcc fasm.o -o fasm
strip fasm # (optional)    

[/edit]


Description: the *libc* patch, remove the ".asm"
Download
Filename: patch-fasm-1.53_libc_src.asm
Filesize: 3.74 KB
Downloaded: 399 Time(s)

Description: the patch, remove the ".asm"
Download
Filename: patch-fasm-1.53.asm
Filesize: 6.25 KB
Downloaded: 425 Time(s)


_________________
... a professor saying: "use this proprietary software to learn computer science" is the same as English professor handing you a copy of Shakespeare and saying: "use this book to learn Shakespeare without opening the book itself.
- Bradley Kuhn
Post 28 Jun 2004, 18:29
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
crc



Joined: 21 Jun 2003
Posts: 637
Location: Penndel, PA [USA]
crc 29 Jun 2004, 01:09
Quote:
I'm gonna try to patch the libc version of fasm, I think it'll be a smooth update


I'm almost done some updates to the libc version Smile. Once complete (probably tomorrow), it'll return the actual error code, rather than "0" after each run. Since I'm doing this mainly for the BeOS port, so it'll be posted to the forum there.
Post 29 Jun 2004, 01:09
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
scientica
Retired moderator


Joined: 16 Jun 2003
Posts: 689
Location: Linköping, Sweden
scientica 29 Jun 2004, 21:56
Will you make a patch? (I've begun to like patches Smile They're small, neat&cute Wink)

I think you should be able to apply the libc patch with out problems (as it only conaints the cnages in the cross platform code.

btw, it would be nice to see fasm with a CVS, and some neat CVS viewer like"FreeBSD-CVSweb".
Post 29 Jun 2004, 21:56
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
fasm9



Joined: 19 Jun 2003
Posts: 439
fasm9 29 Jun 2004, 22:04
Post 29 Jun 2004, 22:04
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
crc



Joined: 21 Jun 2003
Posts: 637
Location: Penndel, PA [USA]
crc 29 Jun 2004, 22:08
Yes, I will provide a patch as soon as I finish testing it Smile

CVS isn't essential for smaller projects like FASM. I tried the CVS route with RetroForth, and it was actually more painful than managing the codebase by hand! Recently I *did* write a simple version control system that runs under Linux & BeOS though. (I'll release it after I add support for generating+applying patches in it)
Post 29 Jun 2004, 22:08
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
scientica
Retired moderator


Joined: 16 Jun 2003
Posts: 689
Location: Linköping, Sweden
scientica 29 Jun 2004, 22:21
Well, once one gets used to CVS it rocks Cool
Cervisia is quite nice for viewing/handling cvs dirs. I might not use CVS as intended, it's sort of a backup/screw up tracker Laughing I use it to keep track of what beating I've done to the poor sources.
Post 29 Jun 2004, 22:21
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
crc



Joined: 21 Jun 2003
Posts: 637
Location: Penndel, PA [USA]
crc 29 Jun 2004, 22:29
My VCS provides simple versioning (per checkin), backups, producing release binaries, cleaning up temporary files, generation of diff's, and handling multiple projects easily. It's a BASH shell script (uses tar, gzip, cat, bash, retroforth, sed, diff, & patch). CVS (and most other VCS systems) are intended for multiple developers working on a single codebase. Small projects seldom have this, and all changes have to go through a common source (the project maintainer) anyway. I used CVS on and off for over three years before giving up on it. Sometimes simpler solutions are better Smile
Post 29 Jun 2004, 22:29
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website 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 cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


Copyright © 1999-2024, Tomasz Grysztar. Also on GitHub, YouTube.

Website powered by rwasa.