HI, Glad, nice to meet you all,

Does fasm support IDEAL mode?

--
http://mujweb.atlas.cz/www/komsbomb/
http://www.rarlab.com/far_manager.htm
winkey
http://www.pcworld.com/downloads/file_description/0,fid,5506,00.asp

Do you mean TASM's Ideal mode? FASM's syntax was based on it, but in some aspects is more similar to NASM's one.

Hi, long time, no see

Yes, tasm IDEAL mode, Thanks, i see.

--
Btw, recently, i found this in c++, i think it's cool.

cin.getline(a,b).get() or
(cin >> year).get()

another silly question, fasm can do this? i.e., "()", "."

No.

Sorry my rudeness.

but why not oop/template/STL in fasm?
About my feeling on this, i am searching for something new, beyond oop/c++/c#! more great power and simplicity that even can't compare with any exist programming languages.

i like low level ability, it give us the size-simplicity.
but if it doesn't come to my mind, i can't expand the simplicity to large size-software.

i don't like this
A: mov a b
B: ...
C: ...

i want something like this

C(B(A)) ---> just one line for one-complete-action!! presumption on asm OR
C.B.A --->same oneline OR
[?] --->anyway something new!!! BUT it doesn't mean lost asm-ego, imho.

--

Define your own syntax, rules and examples and then do a parser that feeds human-readable fasm source code and you will have the best of both worlds.

And if your syntax is clear and advantageous, other people will be interested in using it.

The only oop model I have seen are in masm and they are mainly based on using marcos. Anyway I would not be helpful on this topic, because I do not see the virtue of using oop in assembly. In my personally opinion, if oop is that much needed, why not code in C++?

AFAIK, tasm also has some oop constructs (in ideal mode) but using them is quite complicated, and IMO is not worth coding...
I think oop can be very useful method of programming, especially in some big projects - the reasons were discused in many books. It can be useful even in assembly, as you can use asm in big projects...