flat assembler
Message board for the users of flat assembler.
Index
> Main > flat assembler 1.54 Goto page Previous 1, 2 |
Author |
|
crc 31 Jul 2004, 20:33
Quote: why don't people use VIM under linux? Not all of us like a modal editor. I'm one of those who hate VIM. Give me Nano, Pico, or TE |
|||
31 Jul 2004, 20:33 |
|
scientica 31 Jul 2004, 21:11
*cough* *cough* *cough* emacs *cough* *cough* *cough* a real editor
|
|||
31 Jul 2004, 21:11 |
|
scientica 01 Aug 2004, 10:59
"emacs -nw file" is a bit faster than "emacs file". Besides, the only thing thats realy bothering me with emacs is that I've managed to break the tab function - doens't behave like I want it to - but that's my own fault
|
|||
01 Aug 2004, 10:59 |
|
pelaillo 01 Aug 2004, 16:21
I've found nothing to really substitute RadAsm in Linux. I use mc's internal editor and sometimes Kwrite (former Kate).
I will give TE a try... |
|||
01 Aug 2004, 16:21 |
|
crc 01 Aug 2004, 17:48
The latest version of TE is at http://retro.tunes.org/sten.tar.gz; it's in C, but the code is pretty clean. I helped with its development, and continue to work on it. I'll release the latest source after I finish the FASM bindings (probably a day or two...)
|
|||
01 Aug 2004, 17:48 |
|
fasm9 02 Aug 2004, 02:24
i looked in sten.c,
it should be CTRL instead of ALT For example, to exit, CTRL+x not ALT+x -- PS: of course we can change 'CTRL' to 'ALT'. |
|||
02 Aug 2004, 02:24 |
|
fasm9 02 Aug 2004, 04:19
pelaillo wrote: I've found nothing to really substitute RadAsm in Linux. Is there Really Radasm linux native version exist? Doesn't you mean wine version? |
|||
02 Aug 2004, 04:19 |
|
pelaillo 02 Aug 2004, 04:31
I mean nothing in linux to substitute RadAsm, because I didn't manage to run it in wine without flaws (there is some nasty fault)
|
|||
02 Aug 2004, 04:31 |
|
fasm9 02 Aug 2004, 05:16
i am not using wine, rather i would use reactos even if i have to use wine..
For windows user, there is radasm for FASM http://as.modshack.co.uk/prg/radfasm.zip -- |
|||
02 Aug 2004, 05:16 |
|
crc 02 Aug 2004, 07:59
Quote: i looked in sten.c, TE/STEN use CTRL for most key combinations, not ALT. Exiting is done by CTRL+X, CTRL+C, or CTRL+Q for instance. |
|||
02 Aug 2004, 07:59 |
|
fasm9 19 Aug 2004, 01:30
2004-08-18 FASM 1.54 released.
What's new in 1.54 reversion? -- |
|||
19 Aug 2004, 01:30 |
|
Tomasz Grysztar 19 Aug 2004, 07:28
One critical bug fix only - i would wait for the 1.55 if it was less important (because it's a bit late revision), but this bug was causing fasm to generate wrong code in some cases (where the previous releases were doing well), see http://board.flatassembler.net/topic.php?t=2073
|
|||
19 Aug 2004, 07:28 |
|
Kevin_Zheng 20 Aug 2004, 02:21
Hi Privalov:
Please see the link: http://board.flatassembler.net/topic.php?p=13913#13913 It described the two issues about the fasm macro define: 1.When programmer defined some sub procedures but it didn't invoked by program, the complier didn't check these codes even if it present some of bugs. I think that it will affect the program robust and quality. So I defined a constant: ..DEBUG_VERSION. In the development, you can set its vaule equal 1, so the complier will check all of codes. Of course, the final exe size will increase, but you can get an fully correct code. After you had decieded to release it, set it to 0. the no-use procedure code will not complied in your code. You can get the lowest size execute file. [code] ;doscall.inc ;============================================================================ ;Notice: ; In user program, you can override "..DEBUG_VERSION" constant behind the ;"include '%fasminc%\private\doscall.inc'" for debug or relase purpose. ;for example: ;include '%fasminc%\private\doscall.inc' ;..DEBUG_VERSION = 0 ;============================================================================ ..DEBUG_VERSION = 1 ;0--Relase version;the lowest code sizes;but the complier doesn't check no used codes. ;1--Debug version;fully code sizes;the complier will check all of codes. 2. The enter macro present a bug, please see the below code: [code] proc test_proc _NEAR test_para .test_local rw 1 enter 8,0 mov ax,[test_para] mov [.test_local],ax mov bx,[.test_local] return endp [/code] The complier will get the below code: [code] push bp mov bp,sp enter 8,0 [/code] I have modfied the enter macro, this issue has fixed. You can complied above code and will get the correct code. Please see the package example code: dos_seg.asm Thank you. Kevin Zheng |
|||
20 Aug 2004, 02:21 |
|
Tomasz Grysztar 20 Aug 2004, 06:58
Kevin_Zheng wrote: The complier will get the below code: And this is the correct code since "enter 8,0" is treated as an instruction, so it's the first instruction inside the procedure and the startup code is generated automatically as always when you don't specify "enter" macro (which have to be without arguments to be recognized as structural part of procedure declaration). You use your own "enter" inside the procedure to create a second frame after the one that is automatically generated for the procedure, if this is your intention, you should also use your own "leave" before the "return" macro and it will be OK. Otherwise you shouldn't be using "proc" macro at all, only simple label for a procedure. |
|||
20 Aug 2004, 06:58 |
|
vid 20 Aug 2004, 20:26
OK, I persnally am using FASMW (which is FASMEDIT) too for FASM coding, it is enough for eveything i have to do and i don't care about saving few seconds by typing/moving if I would have to learn using new program.
For typing, I use VIM, that one was worth of basic learning. |
|||
20 Aug 2004, 20:26 |
|
Goto page Previous 1, 2 < Last Thread | Next Thread > |
Forum Rules:
|
Copyright © 1999-2024, Tomasz Grysztar. Also on GitHub, YouTube.
Website powered by rwasa.