MASM32 WTF IS THIS.......
Author
Hello people it happen so that i''ve downloaded the Microsoft''s ASM and when i opened a sample to see how it looks like i was stunned.This doesn''t look like an assembler....it looked like my own C++ code,with prototypes and every and functions and pointers and EVERYTHING.......what kind of assembler is this.Is there any point in using it?!Does it speed stuff up??!?!?!
"Tonight we strike,there is thunder in the sky,together we''ll fight,some of us will die,but they''ll always remember that we''ve made a stand and many will die by hand!" - ManOwaR
No, it''s Microsofts idiotic way to make assembly language "easier". I recommend you download a decent assembler like NASM. BTW, I''m not some Microsoft hater, I''ve tried many assemblers and so far, NASM is the best. Anyway, good luck with the ASM!
Author
Thanks pal i just knew it''s one of the MANY Microsoft bullshits.And if the .NET is not enought - CHEESH.Anyway here i come NASM!!!
"Tonight we strike,there is thunder in the sky,together we''ll fight,some of us will die,but they''ll always remember that we''ve made a stand and many will die by hand!" - ManOwaR
"Tonight we strike,there is thunder in the sky,together we''ll fight,some of us will die,but they''ll always remember that we''ve made a stand and many will die by hand!" - ManOwaR
Um.. you don''t have to code with macros..
MASM supports coding with push and call as it does with Invoke.
There is nothing wrong with coding with macros or extentions like Invoke. It doesn''t hurt anything. It just makes it easier to read.
Why must everyone make things harder on themselves for no reason or gain?
In actuality, NASM makes bigger exes in Windows than MASM does. Why would you want to do that?
MASM supports coding with push and call as it does with Invoke.
There is nothing wrong with coding with macros or extentions like Invoke. It doesn''t hurt anything. It just makes it easier to read.
Why must everyone make things harder on themselves for no reason or gain?
In actuality, NASM makes bigger exes in Windows than MASM does. Why would you want to do that?
Author
Why don''t u hide yourself somewhere?
"Tonight we strike,there is thunder in the sky,together we''ll fight,some of us will die,but they''ll always remember that we''ve made a stand and many will die by hand!" - ManOwaR
"Tonight we strike,there is thunder in the sky,together we''ll fight,some of us will die,but they''ll always remember that we''ve made a stand and many will die by hand!" - ManOwaR
Why don''t go read the lyrics and quote ManOwaR correctly instead of complain all the time?
The assembler I was using back on the C64 was a macro assembler... there''s nothing Microsoft specific or bad about macros. They save you from doing boring work n'' stuff. Or would you rather type in the raw binary by hand and do away with the assembler altogether? 
. Deliberately not using features of your tools doesn''t make you any more hardcore...
Actually I found MASM didn''t have *enough* in the way of decent macro support, or at least equivilents of the cool features that ASM-One had on the Amiga.
Something else you may be seeing is "intrinsics" which are similar to macros except the compiler or assembler will also resolve the register usage for you rather than simply doing a string replace of the %1 style parameters (i.e. it finds the most suitable unused register).
. Deliberately not using features of your tools doesn''t make you any more hardcore...Actually I found MASM didn''t have *enough* in the way of decent macro support, or at least equivilents of the cool features that ASM-One had on the Amiga.
Something else you may be seeing is "intrinsics" which are similar to macros except the compiler or assembler will also resolve the register usage for you rather than simply doing a string replace of the %1 style parameters (i.e. it finds the most suitable unused register).
''No, it''s Microsofts idiotic way to make assembly language "easier".''
AFAIK, other than the MASM prefix and syntax style, MASM32 has nothing to do with Microsoft. MASM32 is a project which is still being maintained and regularly updated. MASM on the other hand is a ''dirty little secret'' that sneaks out of Redmond hidden away in the Microsoft DDK. They are two different beasts.
''Thanks pal i just knew it''s one of the MANY Microsoft bullshits.''
Really? Too bad it isn''t the case at all.
''Anyway here i come NASM!!!''
So, to get this straight, due to the fact that ''This doesn''t look like an assembler....it looked like my own C++ code,with prototypes and every and functions and pointers and EVERYTHING'', which would seem to indicate that you could probably be productive with it fairly quickly and incorporate the ''raw'' assembly as you felt comfortable to, your choice is ''here i come NASM''. Not that there''s anything wrong with NASM, but it seems like you''re needlessly taking the harder path just because you don''t like Microsoft (or any application which makes coding easier on a developer).
''what kind of assembler is this.''
A very flexible and reliable assembler that allows you program using the tried and true procedural style or a more object oriented approach.
''Does it speed stuff up??!?!?!''
No, good coding does that. A good VB/Delphi/C++/PHP/etc programmer can write code that will be magnitudes faster than code produced by a asm programmer with average skill.
Maybe you should listen to Maega instead of blowing him off so quickly.
AFAIK, other than the MASM prefix and syntax style, MASM32 has nothing to do with Microsoft. MASM32 is a project which is still being maintained and regularly updated. MASM on the other hand is a ''dirty little secret'' that sneaks out of Redmond hidden away in the Microsoft DDK.
They are two different beasts.''Thanks pal i just knew it''s one of the MANY Microsoft bullshits.''
Really? Too bad it isn''t the case at all.
''Anyway here i come NASM!!!''
So, to get this straight, due to the fact that ''This doesn''t look like an assembler....it looked like my own C++ code,with prototypes and every and functions and pointers and EVERYTHING'', which would seem to indicate that you could probably be productive with it fairly quickly and incorporate the ''raw'' assembly as you felt comfortable to, your choice is ''here i come NASM''. Not that there''s anything wrong with NASM, but it seems like you''re needlessly taking the harder path just because you don''t like Microsoft (or any application which makes coding easier on a developer).
''what kind of assembler is this.''
A very flexible and reliable assembler that allows you program using the tried and true procedural style or a more object oriented approach.
''Does it speed stuff up??!?!?!''
No, good coding does that. A good VB/Delphi/C++/PHP/etc programmer can write code that will be magnitudes faster than code produced by a asm programmer with average skill.
Maybe you should listen to Maega instead of blowing him off so quickly.
Well, it doesn''t do much good to confuse the Microsoft MASM and the public domain MASM32 project. As has been pointed out, they are two entirely different things.
I have been writing assembler for more years than I care to mention and, if a tool comes along that makes what I write easier to understand and faster to code, then I''d be silly to ignore it.
The purist might argue we should write every single line, dot and comma to be a true assembler programmer, but I will merely point out that, if using INVOKE means I don''t have to write half a dozen standard instructions, then, that''s what I''ll use.
Nothing is forcing you to use the new features, all the old stuff is still there if you want to use it.
"Is there any point using it?"
Cannot speak for you of course, but for me, yes.
Stevie
Don''t follow me, I''m lost.
I have been writing assembler for more years than I care to mention and, if a tool comes along that makes what I write easier to understand and faster to code, then I''d be silly to ignore it.
The purist might argue we should write every single line, dot and comma to be a true assembler programmer, but I will merely point out that, if using INVOKE means I don''t have to write half a dozen standard instructions, then, that''s what I''ll use.
Nothing is forcing you to use the new features, all the old stuff is still there if you want to use it.
"Is there any point using it?"
Cannot speak for you of course, but for me, yes.
Stevie
Don''t follow me, I''m lost.
They aren''t as different as you make it out to be 
MASM32 is just a package with the headers of the platform SDK already converted over to ASM syntax. It has a few extra tools and libraries here and there.
However, the core of the package is still the microsoft assembler and linker.
MASM32 is just a package with the headers of the platform SDK already converted over to ASM syntax. It has a few extra tools and libraries here and there.
However, the core of the package is still the microsoft assembler and linker.
This topic is closed to new replies.
Advertisement
Popular Topics
Advertisement
