flat assembler
Message board for the users of flat assembler.

Index > Main > nasm compatibility

Author
Thread Post new topic Reply to topic
adefeo



Joined: 12 Jan 2004
Posts: 46
Location: Bellmore, Long Island, New York
adefeo
is FASM NASM compatible?
Post 12 Jan 2004, 20:20
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website AIM Address Reply with quote
adefeo



Joined: 12 Jan 2004
Posts: 46
Location: Bellmore, Long Island, New York
adefeo
fine if nobody wants to answer i'll take my business elsewhere (like back to NASM) Evil or Very Mad
Post 12 Jan 2004, 20:41
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website AIM Address Reply with quote
Tomasz Grysztar



Joined: 16 Jun 2003
Posts: 7756
Location: Kraków, Poland
Tomasz Grysztar
You haven't given us too much time to answer (I really don't dedicate all my time to browse this board).
Fasm is not really NASM-compatible, but many simple sources that don't use any specialized directives can be compiled in the same form with both assemblers (though there are also some differences related to fasm's code optimization, and fasm doesn't force you to use size operator when size of data is already determined by label type).
As for the specialized directives, I can't answer with details, as I don't know NASM that much.
Post 12 Jan 2004, 20:54
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
decard



Joined: 11 Sep 2003
Posts: 1092
Location: Poland
decard
heya... people need sometime to answer Razz
Well, both assemblers have similar syntax (based on TASM's ideal mode) but they differ in some solutions, for example in NASM you write something like this:
Code:
[BITS 16]
[org 0x100]    
while in FASM:
Code:
use16
org 0x100    

but anyway porting your code to FASM should be rather easy... For details, check FASM examples, and manual Smile
Post 12 Jan 2004, 20:57
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
adefeo



Joined: 12 Jan 2004
Posts: 46
Location: Bellmore, Long Island, New York
adefeo
thanks.....and sorry for rushing you guys.
Post 12 Jan 2004, 21:16
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website AIM Address Reply with quote
fasm9



Joined: 19 Jun 2003
Posts: 439
fasm9
adefeo wrote:
fine if nobody wants to answer i'll take my business elsewhere (like back to NASM)


Hi, Excuse my interrupting you, i have a question.

Do you feel NASM lack something?
if yes, please come here, try to learn FASM..

--
PS: imo, study electronics rather than each-assembler-syntax.
truth is unchangeable. and common sense.


Last edited by fasm9 on 17 Jan 2004, 04:15; edited 1 time in total
Post 12 Jan 2004, 21:39
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
stevedperkins



Joined: 16 Jan 2004
Posts: 1
stevedperkins
Quote:
fine if nobody wants to answer i'll take my business elsewhere (like back to NASM)

LOL... your orgininal question and this "follow-up" are only 20 minutes apart! You DO realize that this isn't IRC, right? I don't know exactly how much "business" you can provide to free/open-source assemblers... but maybe it would be best if you did look somewhere else.
Post 16 Jan 2004, 21:07
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Display posts from previous:
Post new topic Reply to topic

Jump to:  


< Last Thread | Next Thread >
Forum Rules:
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


Copyright © 1999-2020, Tomasz Grysztar. Also on YouTube, Twitter.

Website powered by rwasa.