This would go to the fasm's "Did you know..." section if there was one.

One of the cases when fasm is actually able to solve a set of equations:

Thats indeed very impressive, could save some pressious cycles in certain situations. Any idea to the limits of the complexity of the function?

Thanks,
gunblade

wow :O

There are no limits to the complexity of function, but there are other limits: mainly that iterated searching for solution will actually fail in most cases of complex arithmetic equations - fasm's code resolving was designed to deal rather with code optimization than mathematic problems. The above is just a kind of curiosity.

i have used this for row/column pixel drawing in my hobby os in graphics mode

its alot easier than doing it in my head (i suck at math) and alot faster than letting it assemble with add, sub, div, and etc

i found this out by accident, and it just made me love fasm even more!

Are you all being sarcastic? or i am missing something. =S

when i try compiling all 3 samples it says "symbol 'y' out of scope"
?

ass0,

No wonder it gives you errors in latter two cases: it's all about the way fasm resolves dependencies.

fasm doesn't try to solve system of equations: it performs multiple passes, up to 100 or whichever value you've specified in -p option (or Passes value in [Compiler] section of FASMW.INI), and uses some hints from previous passes to get closer to (or farther from) the solution (one of many possible, perhaps).

Let's consider simple case: Pass 0: approx is neither defined yet, nor have predicted value, thus sqrt is assigned default value (0); then approx becomes 1.
Pass 1: approx still not defined yet, but it has predicted value of 1 (from previous pass), sqrt is set to 13; approx receives new value of 14.
Pass 2: sqrt = (25/14+14)/2 = 7; approx = 8.
Pass 3: sqrt = (25/8+8)/2 = 5; approx = 6.
Pass 4: sqrt = (25/6+6)/2 = 5; approx = 6. Solution is stable: there were no mispredictions during this pass, so it's final.

Now take a look at There is a solution for x = ((x+1)-2)*((x+1)+1)/3-2*(x+1) equation (x = 9; you can check it by replacing y = x+1 with y = 9+1), but it is unattainable using the steps explained above (iterations don't converge to solution, they simply miss it by 5 on fifth pass), and value of x after dozen passes overflows signed 64-bit integer.

Your next example exhibits another behavior: first pass finishes with (x, y) = (0, 1), second one with (-1, 0), next with (0, 1) and values oscillate so on, until compiler says it's tired.

Corollary: fasm can do amazing things it's not supposed to, but you must know enough of its inner workings to be sure that the result is correct/reachable.

----8<----
edemko,

Have you compiled exactly the code shown?

Cooooool! Yet is a little dangerous feature. =D

all three ass0's samples in same order

Then something is very wrong with your assembler. What version are you using? The Wink version?

i do

You have to do each as a separate file. You can't combine all three together like that unless you change the variable names.

revolution,

Not a completely new definition of "all 3 samples", but I'm shocked.

it is simply amazing how nature is...

just see it as a basic rule of a world (fasm directives resolution), and then, see how the simple rule for resolution can give complex results.
exactlly as particles, two particles of same charge will repulse.
then, put a lot of particles in vacumm, and lets play the nature, the sun appear, planets, humans, and computer with fasm "installed".

some 256 bytes demos uses only few instructions and will give really cool effects.

the rules are the engine of a game.

Simple rules can give complex results.

Anyone up for a game of Go?

revolution,

I'm up to, on FlyOrDie.

As for Go - I'm in. I'm not very strong but... well, I may take the goban with me - anyone for a little bit of tournament?

ender: I never played it "in real", and I would enjoy trying it out.