flat assembler 1.67.27

Index > Main > flat assembler 1.67.27

Goto page 1, 2 Next

Author

Thread

Tomasz Grysztar

Joined: 16 Jun 2003
Posts: 7750
Location: Kraków, Poland

Tomasz Grysztar

I have just released the new version - only bugfixes this time.

12 Jul 2008, 18:16

revolution
When all else fails, read the source

Joined: 24 Aug 2004
Posts: 17450
Location: In your JS exploiting you and your system

revolution

It is nice to see some progress again. Glad you are back in the mood for updates.

12 Jul 2008, 19:03

Picnic

Joined: 05 May 2007
Posts: 1288
Location: behind the arc

Picnic

Very nice Tomasz. Windows version says 1.67.28

12 Jul 2008, 19:44

Everhest

Joined: 26 Jun 2008
Posts: 84
Location: Russia

Everhest

Thank you for innovation.

12 Jul 2008, 23:58

revolution
When all else fails, read the source

Joined: 24 Aug 2004
Posts: 17450
Location: In your JS exploiting you and your system

revolution

The new version displays itself as version 1.67.28

13 Jul 2008, 06:37

ManOfSteel

Joined: 02 Feb 2005
Posts: 1154

ManOfSteel

Thank you Tomasz!

@revolution: http://board.flatassembler.net/topic.php?p=79160#79160

13 Jul 2008, 07:28

madmatt

Joined: 07 Oct 2003
Posts: 1045
Location: Michigan, USA

madmatt

Thank you! Very Happy

for your continued dedication and commitment to the FASM project. Cool

I'd like to ask for a single feature request, I'd like to be able to include multiple instructions on a single line:

Code:

fld1 ! fldpi ! fdivp ! fstp [onedividedbypi]

Or, is this possible aready?

14 Jul 2008, 11:49

Tomasz Grysztar

Joined: 16 Jun 2003
Posts: 7750
Location: Kraków, Poland

Tomasz Grysztar

madmatt wrote:

Thank you! for your continued dedication and commitment to the FASM project. I'd like to ask for a single feature request, I'd like to be able to include multiple instructions on a single line:
Code:
fld1 ! fldpi ! fdivp ! fstp [onedividedbypi]    
Or, is this possible aready?

See http://board.flatassembler.net/topic.php?t=1938

14 Jul 2008, 11:56

zhak

Joined: 12 Apr 2005
Posts: 490
Location: Belarus

zhak

It seems that API includes were not updated since 2006. fasm package contains only some basic imports and even they are not complete. Maybe someone already created new or updated older files in INCLUDE/API and INCLUDE/EQUATES directories? If not, then it should be done, for sure. If Tomasz has no enough time for this, then one member of our community could be chosen to do this job. What do you think of it?

my excuses. I've just read http://board.flatassembler.net/topic.php?t=7882 thread. there goes the discussion of the subj.

14 Jul 2008, 12:25

madmatt

Joined: 07 Oct 2003
Posts: 1045
Location: Michigan, USA

madmatt

Tomasz Grysztar wrote:

madmatt wrote:
Thank you! for your continued dedication and commitment to the FASM project. I'd like to ask for a single feature request, I'd like to be able to include multiple instructions on a single line:
Code:
fld1 ! fldpi ! fdivp ! fstp [onedividedbypi]    
Or, is this possible aready?
See http://board.flatassembler.net/topic.php?t=1938

Thanks, This would be a temporary help, but this would be better:

Joshua wrote:

PS i hope this tweak (and the preproccor part) can make it in the official version, although i still think a specific character for allowing this would be better

A special Character would be ideal.

_________________
Gimme a sledge hammer! I'LL FIX IT!

14 Jul 2008, 17:24

AlexP

Joined: 14 Nov 2007
Posts: 561
Location: Out the window. Yes, that one.

AlexP

Quote:

PS i hope this tweak (and the preproccor part) can make it in the official version, although i still think a specific character for allowing this would be better

I really don't see how multiple instructions on one line would make anything better except for maybe smaller-named ones in rare cases. If anything, I think that it would make the code more confusing.

For compatibility reasons, I say don't allow it.

14 Jul 2008, 22:03

LocoDelAssembly
Your code has a bug

Joined: 06 May 2005
Posts: 4633
Location: Argentina

LocoDelAssembly

It could be a problem for debugging if it will be sometime implemented in FASMW, however many HLLs allows you to put several sentences in the same line (which again makes harder to follow an step-by-step debugging).

Maybe is not a bad idea, but again, debugging can be harder to follow and even implement it.

14 Jul 2008, 22:15

madmatt

Joined: 07 Oct 2003
Posts: 1045
Location: Michigan, USA

madmatt

For me, having more code on the screen at once would really help, especially for long winded algorithms. This would actually help in debugging. I agree it could be abused, just like over-using macro's, but just because a few would abuse this feature doesn't mean that It shouldn't be added.

15 Jul 2008, 00:47

bitRAKE

Joined: 21 Jul 2003
Posts: 2936
Location: vpcmipstrm

bitRAKE

For viewing more code lines a vertical split is better than multiple instructions on a single line, imho. Macros could facilitate multiple instructions per line: MAC <inst1 dest,src>, <inst2 dest,src>, ...

_________________
¯\(°_o)/¯ unlicense.org

15 Jul 2008, 06:14

comrade

Joined: 16 Jun 2003
Posts: 1137
Location: Russian Federation

comrade

madmatt wrote:

For me, having more code on the screen at once would really help, especially for long winded algorithms.

I usually rotate my monitor sideways whenever I can. At work I had a 22" wide-screen which I rotated vertically - fits a lot of code!

_________________
comrade (comrade64@live.com; http://comrade.ownz.com/)

15 Jul 2008, 15:09

madmatt

Joined: 07 Oct 2003
Posts: 1045
Location: Michigan, USA

madmatt

comrade wrote:

I usually rotate my monitor sideways whenever I can. At work I had a 22" wide-screen which I rotated vertically - fits a lot of code!

A 22-inch monitor would be nice. Very Happy

Unfortunately, I won't be able to afford that kind of upgrade for quite a while. Crying or Very sad

_________________
Gimme a sledge hammer! I'LL FIX IT!

16 Jul 2008, 07:08

iic2

Joined: 26 Jun 2008
Posts: 123

iic2

Tomasz Grysztar, you did a GREAT job. For the pass week I was trying to figure out (why my ALL version Win95 - XP 0,1,2 program that never had a problem since DEP that caused me to rebuild from scratch) would not run on XP Service Pack 3... ( Again ... )

I already had your new version of Fasm but did not fire it up until last night ... and Wow... Now all my crazy code is running better than ever before. This is a fact and only the new version of FASM got my program and test codes running again. Now I have a true, newly repaired or (bonus) assembler, and I am ready, to do battle, with VISTA!!!

It take double the time to assemble my code with the new FASM and it is very noticable.... but the final result is well worth wating for. Just look what it did for me OVER NIGHT... Just in time because I was about to crack. I swear.

I know you put your all and all in this like you did when you first invented it. Please don't ever stop. I seen the Light.

All i want to say is Thank You

I'll save my comments about sp3... xp no sp and sp2 did prove to be the best ever OS so far.

20 Jul 2008, 19:45

DOS386

Joined: 08 Dec 2006
Posts: 1901

DOS386

Tomasz wrote:

> I have just released the new version - only bugfixes this time.

Smile

revolution wrote:

The new version displays itself as version 1.67.28

Indeed ... in FASMD ... what will be the next version ? 1.67.29 ? 1.67.30 ? 1.68 ? 1.70 ? 2.0 ?

What's missing to be able to increase the "67" or the "1" ?

- Include listing support ?
- GDB compatible debug support (maybe some HL compilers would switch then ? ) ?
- USE128 ? Laughing

- Fix bugs in FASMD ?
- Built-in 100% correct 100% automatic 100% compatible MA$M2FASM tool ?

_________________
Bug Nr.: 12345

Title: Hello World program compiles to 100 KB !!!

Status: Closed: NOT a Bug

21 Jul 2008, 04:23

revolution
When all else fails, read the source

Joined: 24 Aug 2004
Posts: 17450
Location: In your JS exploiting you and your system

revolution

DOS386 wrote:

what will be the next version ? 1.67.29 ? 1.67.30 ? 1.68 ? 1.70 ? 2.0 ?

It doesn't matter. It is only an arbitrary number. Maybe it should 1.67.27.0.0.1

DOS386 wrote:

- Built-in 100% correct 100% automatic 100% compatible MA$M2FASM tool ?

Is such a thing even possible?

21 Jul 2008, 04:54

sinsi

Joined: 10 Aug 2007
Posts: 696
Location: Adelaide

sinsi

DOS386 wrote:

Built-in 100% correct 100% automatic 100% compatible MA$M2FASM tool ?

Why bother? Then we'll need a fasm2masm, fasm2c ...

21 Jul 2008, 05:10

Goto page 1, 2 Next

< 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