Index
> Feedback > best syntax |
| Author |
|
|
coconut
agreed
|
|||
18 May 2005, 14:20 |
|
|
smiddy
I'll 3rd that!
|
|||
|
18 May 2005, 15:09 |
|
|
flaith
me too _________________ Je suis sur de 'rien', mais je ne suis pas sur du 'tout'. |
|||
|
18 May 2005, 15:19 |
|
|
uri
yes, fasm - rules!
|
|||
|
20 May 2005, 15:27 |
|
|
Another Stupid Coder
right, man ;D
|
|||
|
27 Jun 2005, 12:48 |
|
|
AsmER
First I chose MASM. Then I found FASM. Now I am in 'the big choose moment'. I love fasm's syntax but I am afraid that I can not be able to do some things in it (masm at the end have better includes and some features). In the other way, fasm is still under development, so maybe Tomasz G. would add 'few' lines to fasm or its .inc files, when it would be needed.
ANYWAY LONG LIFE FASM. I hope in nearest future it will be the best asm. ever.  |
|||
|
07 Apr 2006, 10:51 |
|
|
vid
what includes are you missing?
|
|||
|
07 Apr 2006, 12:40 |
|
|
pelaillo
Quote: fasm is still under development ...but generally for new features. Since a long time ago it is a mature and stable product. It would be helpful to know the cases in which Masm cannot be substituted for your habitual coding practice. Maybe the feature is there or maybe a slight change would permit you to use 100% Fasm. (I've done so since Fasm 1.30) Last edited by pelaillo on 07 Apr 2006, 15:31; edited 1 time in total |
|||
|
07 Apr 2006, 13:33 |
|
|
vid
one such case are inline macros
|
|||
|
07 Apr 2006, 14:52 |
|
|
RedGhost
way to bump a very old thread guys :p
|
|||
|
08 Apr 2006, 02:54 |
|
|
madmatt
AsmER wrote: First I chose MASM. Then I found FASM. Now I am in 'the big choose moment'. I love fasm's syntax but I am afraid that I can not be able to do some things in it (masm at the end have better includes and some features). In the other way, fasm is still under development, so maybe Tomasz G. would add 'few' lines to fasm or its .inc files, when it would be needed. You can download more robust includes on my website: http://users.egl.net/talktomatt/default.html and also examples that you can compile with the new includes. |
|||
|
14 Apr 2006, 01:29 |
|
|
AsmER
Quote: what includes are you missing? Hmm, I need everything what is connected with game programming: OpenGL and DirextX (Direct Input, Audio at least) Game programing is the last thing which satisfied me. In fact I can write my own notepad or calculator, but they already exist and some of them are better or worst but only games are uniqe (I started code games in c++, but they were so big and a bit to slow, assembly language is what i needed  ).
I will say it again: FASM syntax is the best for me, but I missing in it things like: @B, sending local variables to other procedures (yes-fasm should support complex data types, not by macros) and few more. In the other way it is only 751kb (fasm and includes) not 14MB (masm inc. & libs) and also have no limits about, for which OS's I can use it. Quote: fasm is still under development  |
|||
|
14 Apr 2006, 21:46 |
|
|
RedGhost
AsmER wrote:
@B isnt missing Code: @@: ;the next line jumps here jmp @b _________________ redghost.ca |
|||
|
15 Apr 2006, 08:35 |
|
|
AsmER
Ups,
I missed 'proceding' word in fasm help in sentence: "The @@ name means anonymous label, you can have defined many of them in the source. Symbol @b (or equivalent @r) references the nearest preceding anonymous label, symbol @f references the nearest following anonymous label. These special symbol are case–insensitive." Yeah, cool. |
|||
|
15 Apr 2006, 18:13 |
|
< Last Thread | Next Thread > |
Forum Rules:
|