Index
> High Level Languages > Assemblers used by high language compilers - please completeGoto page 1, 2, 3 Next |
| Author |
|
|
DOS386 02 Feb 2007, 09:24
Please complete the list
(post edited 1'000'000'000 times, answers merged into list) QB (BASIC interpreter and compiler, Q-BASIC/QuickBASIC/QuackBASIC by M$, 16-bit RM only): No ASM output, no assembler involved in compilation, no inline ASM (?) supported, CALL ASM ??? ML1Compiler (Basic/VisualBasic-like (?), only 16-bit RM target): compiles via NASM Powerbasic ($$$) : latest DOS version is from 1993 (20 years old, still available and still costs 100$), latest version from ??? for Win32 costs 200$, original author now dead, company continues (???), inline ASM supported (DOS version only up to 80386?), can't brew ASM PureBASIC ($$$): compiles always via FASM Borland "Turbo" PASCAL/C/C++: inline ASM supported (built-in handling), "Turbo ASM" used only for separate ASM files, no ASM output VirtualPASCAL: ??? Note: compiler core written in ASM (MA$M ? TASM ?, closed source) TMT-FrameworkPASCAL: ??? FBC (FreeBASIC compiler): compiles always via GAS ("Intel" syntax) into COFF objects, links with LD. Inline ASM supported, "Intel" syntax (now optionally via GCC additionally) FPC (FreePASCAL Compiler) : compiles always via GAS (DOS version's AS.EXE from ASLDDOS.ZIP says "GNU assembler 2.15"), inline ASM supported, ??? syntax, uses LD linker, now built-in ASM processing (???) GCC/DGJPP/MinGW/Cygwin: compiles always via GAS, inline ASM supported, uses LD linker, supposed to support "MASM INTEL" for both inline and output but doesn't work (???) CC386 by LADSoft (C compiler, DOS(32bit) and Win32, no C++ (yet ?)): NASM, but an "inofficial" patched version: "NASM version 0.98.38ls3 compiled on Nov 30 2006 (OMF Virtual Extensions/LADSoft)" Inline ASM supported (NASM syntax) . Can compile both via ASM and directly into object (built-in handling of inline ASM then), links with VALX. Now deprecated and getting replaced with Orange C compiler by same author. http://ladsoft.tripod.com/cc386_compiler.html Orange C by LADSoft (C89, C99, C11, C++ compiler) derivative of CC386, uses OAsm (derivative of NASM), inline ASM supported http://ladsoft.tripod.com/orange_c_compiler.html [Open]-Watcom: WatcomASM, WASM http://www.openwatcom.org/index.php/Wasm (its own, written in C) Used only for separate ASM files, inline ASM somewhat "supported" with pragmas (!!!), uses WLINK linker TCC (Tiny C Compiler) --- none (built-in handling of GAS'eous inline ASM) !!! no linker either  compiles directly into executable
Simple C compiler --- FASM (last update 2005) http://freecode.com/projects/simplec SCC - http://si2.epfl.ch/~susu/Publications/SCC/index.html "ARM" -> DOS (???) -> http://retro.tunes.org/simplec Linux uses NASM -> DEXOS and uses FASM ??? Pelles C --- PoAsm, using MASM syntax, for separate ASM files, inline ASM "deprecated" uses NASM (!!!) syntax, present in 32-bit version only, no ASM output (???), uses POLINK Digital Mars C/C++/D --- Built In: http://www.digitalmars.com/ctg/ctgInlineAsm.html "Visual" C/C++ ($$$) : None or MA$M ??? Inline ASM supported ??? LCC - see http://board.flatassembler.net/topic.php?t=12706 " lcc-3.6 with fasm backend!!" Context/Win32 --- FASM Context/DOS --- ASM8086 (it's own personal assembler) HLA (??) --- MASM, TASM, FASM, GAS (according to Wikipedia) B0 -- FASM BlitzMax (??) --- FASM (YES !!! according to not only Wikipedia) IBasic Pro --- NASM Thistle (toy Win32 Basic compiler written in LibertyBasic) --- FASM Emergence Basic --- NASM Aurora --- NASM Ocean --- FASM LLVM / CLANG : ??? http://llvm.org/ wrote: "The LLVM Core libraries provide a modern source- and target-independent optimizer, along with code generation support for many popular CPUs (as well as some less common ones!)" Last edited by DOS386 on 10 Sep 2013, 09:28; edited 17 times in total |
|||
02 Feb 2007, 09:24 |
|
|
Vasilev Vjacheslav 02 Feb 2007, 18:53
visual c : masm
|
|||
|
02 Feb 2007, 18:53 |
|
|
f0dder 03 Feb 2007, 08:25
Are you asking which assembler is usually used with the compiler, or which assembler the compiler uses internally?
Visual C++ doesn't use an assembler for code generation, and I don't think Watcom does, either. |
|||
|
03 Feb 2007, 08:25 |
|
|
DOS386 03 Feb 2007, 08:32
Quote: is usually used with the compiler NO. Quote: or which assembler the compiler uses internally? YES. _________________ Bug Nr.: 12345 Title: Hello World program compiles to 100 KB !!! Status: Closed: NOT a Bug |
|||
|
03 Feb 2007, 08:32 |
|
|
flaith 03 Feb 2007, 09:53
_________________ Je suis sur de 'rien', mais je ne suis pas sur du 'tout'. |
|||
|
03 Feb 2007, 09:53 |
|
|
Filter 03 Feb 2007, 16:25
Borland C++: Turbo ASM
Pelles C: PoASM Digital Mars C++: Built In http://www.digitalmars.com/ctg/ctgInlineAsm.html Open Watcom: WASM http://www.openwatcom.org/index.php/Wasm |
|||
|
03 Feb 2007, 16:25 |
|
|
f0dder 03 Feb 2007, 16:29
Filter: does BC++ require tasm? Iirc it generates it's .obj files directly without going through tasm. Same goes for Watcom.
|
|||
|
03 Feb 2007, 16:29 |
|
|
rugxulo 03 Feb 2007, 18:00
Yes, I think you're right. OpenWatcom 1.6 and Turbo C++ (1.01, for instance) only use the external assembler if inline assembly is required. (Supposedly, Turbo C++ 3.0 didn't need TASM, right??)
EDIT: CC386 actually requires NASM even without inline assembly, but it uses its own patched version. CC386 3.27's NASM.EXE reports the following: Quote:
|
|||
|
03 Feb 2007, 18:00 |
|
|
Filter 04 Feb 2007, 16:03
f0dder wrote: Filter: does BC++ require tasm? Iirc it generates it's .obj files directly without going through tasm. Same goes for Watcom. BC++ can generate assembly output that can then be compiled by TASM but it's not required. Also, Tasm32 can be used on it's own. It can even produce OBJ files that can still be linked by older 16-bit versions of the Borland Linker. Not sure about Watcom. The request was to see which assembler is used by the compilers but not required right? Or was it just compilers that produce assembly output that must be assembled? |
|||
|
04 Feb 2007, 16:03 |
|
|
DOS386 04 Feb 2007, 18:35
Quote: The request was to see 1. What compilers always produce ASM that must go through an assembler 2. What compilers can optionally produce ASM instead of EXE or link-files _________________ Bug Nr.: 12345 Title: Hello World program compiles to 100 KB !!! Status: Closed: NOT a Bug |
|||
|
04 Feb 2007, 18:35 |
|
|
Filter 04 Feb 2007, 20:26
NTOSKRNL_VXE wrote:
Then I guess I misunderstood but at least I have provided some helpful information.  |
|||
|
04 Feb 2007, 20:26 |
|
|
rugxulo 05 Feb 2007, 20:57
FreeBASIC 0.16 for DOS's AS.EXE reports "GNU assembler 2.16.1" (and 0.17 uses GNU AS 2.17).
FreeBASIC 0.16 for Win32's AS.EXE reports "GNU assembler 2.15.94 20050118" FYI, some C++ support is implemented in CC386 (not classes??), but I don't use it (dunno any C++, really). You'll have to get someone else to test it further. 
Code: // try this example named as either TEST.C or TEST.CPP // it prints different results, depending on how it's named/compiled // tested w/ CC386 3.27 (DOS version) on Win XP Home SP2 #include <stdio.h> int main() { printf("%d %d",sizeof(char),sizeof('a')); return 0; } Last edited by rugxulo on 29 May 2007, 12:48; edited 1 time in total |
|||
|
05 Feb 2007, 20:57 |
|
|
MikeHart 29 May 2007, 11:53
IBasic Pro -> NASM
Emergence Basic -> NASM Aurora -> NASM Ocean -> FASM |
|||
|
29 May 2007, 11:53 |
|
|
DOS386 22 Aug 2007, 07:52
Bump. Any better/newer info ?
- How inline ASM is handled (built-in or external) - Compiles directly or via ASM or both supported |
|||
|
22 Aug 2007, 07:52 |
|
|
vid 22 Aug 2007, 08:48
what is that "Ocean" thing?
|
|||
|
22 Aug 2007, 08:48 |
|
|
f0dder 22 Aug 2007, 10:06
vid wrote: what is that "Ocean" thing? Quick googling would suggest this. Why are everybody so hooked on BASIC? O_o _________________  - carpe noctem |
|||
|
22 Aug 2007, 10:06 |
|
|
DOS386 24 Aug 2007, 00:32
> Why are everybody so hooked on BASIC
NO. There are still many non-BASIC compilers with lacking (or wrong ?) info in the list  |
|||
|
24 Aug 2007, 00:32 |
|
|
Chewy509 24 Aug 2007, 01:41
f0dder wrote:
Because a lot of beginners start with BASIC, but fail to move onto more flexible/powerful tools/languages. Me personally, I may have started with BASIC (on the C64, then GWBASIC), but haven't touched it in years, preferring my own language 'b0' and AMD64/x64 assembly (fasm of course). |
|||
|
24 Aug 2007, 01:41 |
|
|
ManOfSteel 24 Aug 2007, 11:21
@Chewy509:
Quote: preferring my own language 'b0' Speaking of which, the site where you're hosting it seems to be down. |
|||
|
24 Aug 2007, 11:21 |
|
| Goto page 1, 2, 3 Next < Last Thread | Next Thread > |
Forum Rules:
|