Re: Why There are no Asm Apps
From: Randall Hyde (randyhyde_at_earthlink.net)
Date: 06/17/04
- Next message: Beth: "Re: Why There are no Asm Apps"
- Previous message: Beth: "Re: Why There are no Asm Apps"
- In reply to: The Wannabee: "Re: Why There are no Asm Apps"
- Next in thread: The Wannabee: "Re: Why There are no Asm Apps"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 03:26:01 GMT
"The Wannabee" <faq@.@.@.@.@SZMyggenPV.Com> wrote in message
news:opr9o4mhnvv9uht2@news.fasthost.no...
> På Wed, 16 Jun 2004 01:23:05 GMT, skrev Randall Hyde
<randyhyde@earthlink.net>:
>
> >
> > "The Wannabee" <faq@.@.@.@.@SZMyggenPV.Com> wrote in message
> > For example, Windows (at last count) was something like 50 million
> > lines of code. I'm sorry,
>
> Blah blah blah. And when did those 50 million come in ONE file. And when
did we ever need more than one percentage of it ?
I'm afraid your perception of how software is developed has been
terminally skewed by your experience with RosAsm. Of course this
is not one file (indeed, back in the days when I had access to
Windows NT 4.0 source code, there was something like 30,000
different files).
The fact that a *system* is spread across multiple files is generally
necessary if you're going to have 100s of developers working on the
project.
BTW, just so you don't get the wrong impression, those 50,000,000
lines of code are *not* just the kernel - they are the Windows *system*
and that includes all the utilities that ship with Windows.
>
> > Last time I check, RosAsm couldn't even assemble the equates list
> > that Eric created for it as a separate file (rather than as a
specialized
> > file that the RosAsm editor preloads into the symbol table).
>
> We allready know your inability to check anything properly. RosAsm is
close to 3 megabytes, of asm sourcecode, it is considered a HUGE project
indeed. If MS created that much functionality, be sure, it would fill up
half of you harddrive, run like shit, be allways in your way, and be
generally annoying. M$ is the world biggest software company. They are made
to look like fools, by one single man. RosAsm starts like fire crackers even
with my cache disabled. Compared to ALL other simple HLL apps, at my
machine.
>
Uh, sorry to point this out, but RosAsm is *not* a HUGE project.
Even considering the high density of instructions to lines of code (because
Rene
makes the faux pas of placing multiple statements per line), RosAsm is
considered
a *small* project in software engineering terms. In may seem large to
someone
who is used to creating projects in the "hundreds of lines of code" range,
but
in real-world terms, it is a small project.
In the meantime, Microsoft has produced an assembler that is much smaller
than RosAsm, yet the assembly language has an order of magnitude more
features. Granted, it doesn't have an editor, disassembler, ASCII chart,
etc.,
all built into the *assembler*, but in the area of things that are important
to
assembly language programmers, there is no comparison between MASM and
RosAsm. Make all the disparaging remarks you like about Microsoft and their
"evil empire", but the fact remains that their assembler is far better, far
more
powerful, and far more popular than RosAsm is (and probably ever will be).
> > The "rebirth" is already coming about. With tools, like MASM, that
> > support large project development. But the rebirth is not taking place
> > on the back of huge projects.
>
> I know nothing of MASM.
Obviously. Otherwise you'd not have quite as high an opinion of RosAsm :-)
You know nothing of MASM, so how are you in a position to have an opinion on
it?
Indeed, how many other assemblers *do* you know in order to be able to claim
any kind of authority with respect to knocking other assemblers (as you
often do)?
> But its M$ so its bound to be idiotic to NO END. M$ has never been able to
make a single application, in later times, thats makes any sense at all.
Hmmm.... That's why they're one of the biggest companies in the world.
No one can make sense of their applications.
> The redmond people are suffering from the spoiled child syndrome.
Not really. Microsoft (and Gates) worked hard to get where they are today.
Their position in the world wasn't handed to them on a silver plate, they
didn't
inherit it. Perhaps they've abused the power they've obtained, but that
would
mean they're suffering from the "Robber Baron" syndrome, not the spoiled
child syndrome.
> Only quality software, comming from there, is created by other third
parties, and once it gets inhouse at M$ it usually turns into second rate
shit, whitin a short time.
I suppose you're going to argue that RosAsm is higher quality than
Microsoft's products.
At least MASM can assemble the win32 equates file without crashing. :-)
> Given free competition and a level laying field M$ would be since long
time, a dead word, and people would just smile at mentioning their name. M$
has nothing up their sleves but bad tricks, and dirty, inhumane polices.
They need to be killed.
And before them it was IBM. And before that, Tandy/Radio Shack. And before
that,
well, IBM (again). And before that....
The bottom line is that there is always this "grass roots" campaign in
progress to
knock down the biggest company around. Once they get knocked down (and they
always do), someone else takes their place as the company everyone loves to
hate.
All you need to do is get big, and then everyone will hate you, too.
Look at Red Hat. All the "free software" people *loved* them when they
first
started supporting Linux. But now they've gotten a bit too big and all the
former admirers are turning against them. Too bad Sun flamed out; they could
have become the company everyone loves to hate. Fortunately, Apple imploded
before they became the company everyone hates.
> In order for it to be possible software must become free. GPL maybe able
to, at least Linux have made them shake. The monster is starting to hear the
sound of thunder underground, and full of fear, it spends billions on
anti-linux campains. It will not even give a small piece of its marked
shares, as it knows, if the competition gets any
> stonghold whatsoever, the beast will loose all its advantaged, and be
squished like a bug. With the frighting strength of a long inprisoned
animal. But its all inevitable in any case. M$ allready have lost. They have
too much enemies now. And they will be inevitably put to rest. After which
programming can again be what it was conceived to be, a benefit to people,
not a way to control and destroy freedom.
How is it that Microsoft is controlling and destroying freedom by selling
their software?
You *always* have the option of not using it. Long before Linux came along
there
were alternatives. Indeed, no one says you *have* to use computers at all. I
fail to
see how Microsoft's monopoly on OS software is strangling your freedom.
>
> If this is true, about education, Educate them in use of RosAsm. RosAsm is
perfect for both beginners and more experienced programmers. RosAsm has a
future. RosAsm is a union between good old, and good new.
That would be *your* job. *My* job is to educate them in the use of HLA
(which, arguably,
I can claim I've been doing). Don't expect others to do your work for you.
Rene's approach
of just tossing out the code and expecting people to learn it on their own
is a non-starter.
>
> I have thought about it. You cant scare away a determined programmer.
This, coming from a die-hard, Rene-worshipping, RosAsmite. :-)
> He doesnt give up that easily. These people will come back when they see
what HLLs are doing to them. If they dont, nothing is lost. The really good
programmers will come back.
Ah... The escape clause. When they don't show up, it's because they weren't
good programmers to begin with. I see.
Personally, I prefer to take those "not so good" programmers and turn them
into really good programmers.
> You talk about creating Great software. Create that Great software in asm,
and make the source an inspiration to others, with a high value on
readability. Only be original when it serves an evident purpose. But you are
doing this now arent you ? You _are_ writing HLA 2.0 in asm? Thats a much
stronger statement in favor of asm, than writing it in some other HLL tools,
that few people can relate to, and then speak of asm. Like you did with HLA
1.X Noone will bother with HLA in any case, but they may draw inspiration
from the source code.
Hopefully they'll draw more inspiration from the HLA v2.0 source code, as it
is
actually written in assembly language :-).
>
> But the campfight between assemblers is not nessesarily a problem. Writing
software for free, having some diffrences can be a source of determination
to SHOW the other people that they are wrong. Maybe, dont know, but that
could perhaps be _fruitful_ in the end. We need to compete and maybe learn
from each other. And the fight is one way to inspire willingness to fight.
And its VERY important to fight.
The RosAsm crowd seems to feel it's important to fight over assemblers.
To this day I cannot understand why Rene feels it's so important to knock
other assemblers rather than bringing his own up to feature parity with
them.
I guess he figures he is so far behind on the curve he will never catch up
so
the only way to gain acceptance for his product is to gripe about those
products that he feels are the biggest threat to him (e.g., MASM and HLA).
What a waste of his time and everyone else's time.
Then again, I do owe him a bushel of thanks for all the criticism he has
heaped on HLA (and *you*, too). You keep HLA at the forefront.
Rene's marketing of HLA is second only to mine. :-) If he really had
wanted HLA to fail, he would have kept his mouth shut many years ago.
Instead, he's made such an annoyance of himself that people have started
thinking "gee, this guy is psycho; whatever he says we should avoid is
something to look into..."
> I dont know if you got the message, but M$ is actually about to turn
programming and PC usage into history, if they get their will. They actually
wants programming to die, and that everyone program using THEIR demented
.NET and that all other OS'es, not only die, but are strangled even in their
birth. They want to monopolize both programming, and OS'es development. This
is pure evil, and this _is_ a fight, a very very important one. Maybe the
most important fight in our lifetime.
Well, the best way to fight is to not support Microsoft products.
Could you please tell me how *you're* doing this by using an assembler
that runs under Windows and produces code that runs only under Windows?
Don't feed me this noise about ReactOS. That's just a smoke screen. Even
if ReactOS does become real someday, your code will still be supporting
a Microsoft OS. Hardly a good way to fight the enemy, eh?
If you were really honest about what your intentions are, you'd be
developing software for Linux, BSD, or some other OS. You wouldn't
be writing software for a Microsoft OS that furthers the use of and MS OS.
> And you, Hutch and Donkey seems to be siding with M$. Thats why I throw
ugly words at you. Because then
> you are really evil too.
Yes, throwing ugly words is not evil.
Writing software and books so people can learn assembly language *is* evil.
Providing example programs that people can use to create free assembly
applications is evil. Makes perfect sense to me.
>
> Bad words means nothing, but M$ destroying freedom and expression art as
programming, is VERY VERY significant.
You've failed to show how Microsoft is "destroying freedom and expression
art as programming."
For heaven's sake, they've written an OS, some programming languages, and
some applications.
None of what they've done affects my freedoms at all. Perhaps I can not
succeed commercially
if I try to compete with them, but freedom and expression don't guarantee
that I'll succeed, only
that I can try to succeed if I want to. Nothing Microsoft has ever done
prevents me from doing
whatever I want. For example, I've ported HLA to Linux. HLA v2.0 will run
on several OSes.
Microsoft probably doesn't like that, but they don't have any ability to
stop me from doing this
if I really want to. Maybe they could buy me out with lots of money, but I'm
free to make the
choice of whether to accept their money or not. Maybe they could convince
me to stick
strictly with Microsoft by providing good tools, APIs, support,
cross-marketing, etc. But I'm
always free to choose whether I want to accept that or not. It's really not
a whole lot different
than the GPL which forces me to accept certain conditions (i.e., give up
certain rights to my
code) when I use GPL code in my own project. I have the freedom to "just say
no" to
GPL, just like I have the freedom to say no to Microsoft.
> Its so significant, that to win the fight, we must be willing to do out
best to write useful software that can replace M$ apps, and be just as
useful and much better than theirs, and we must be willing to do it for
free, cause if we fail, one day, we may no longer be able to develop
anything at all.
This is complete and utter nonsense.
There is nothing Microsoft can do to prevent us from developing software
independently
of them.
> We be stuck with old hardware, _or_ having to be forced to program with
.NETSHIT tools, and let M$ slowly kill every free expression of the
programming Art, forcing us to pay high fees to develop any code at all, and
even having the option to remotly KILL your code. You codefiles will have to
be validated each time the machine goes online ? The TCPA, the whole shit.
Dont you think all thats significant?
No, I don't.
First of all, we have several alternatives today: Linux, FreeBSD, netBSD,
Mach, Mac OS,
QNX, Solaris, and on and on and on. Someday, we might actually have GNU
Hurd and
maybe even ReactOS. Seems to me that as time passes we have *more* options,
not fewer.
Quite frankly, the *free* software community has done more to eliminate
Microsoft's
competitors than Microsoft has. Outfits like Watcom didn't stand a chance
when having
to compete against folks like FSF. And Borland would have been long-gone if
Microsoft
hadn't invested a lot of money in the company to prop them up so there would
be at least
a facade of competition in the programming language arena.
>From an assembly language point of view, Microsoft is the *only* big company
left
that even supports an assembler. But since TASM disappeared from the
competition,
we've seen at least a half-dozen serious freeware assemblers appear. Though
MASM
is still the undisputed champ of assemblers in terms of popularity, the
death of Microsoft's
competition has not caused assembler tools to go away.
>
> This IS a fight. And everytime someone fights for M$ they are fighting
against freedom and free expression.And then they must also accept to pay
the price. 1984.....its comming closer. Some might say its allready here.
But theres still some sand left in the glass.
It is a foolish fight. Sorta like Rene's "Jihad" against MASM and HLA.
Microsoft will fade in their own good time and be replaced by someone just
as "evil".
And then that company will fade and be replaced by someone just as "evil".
And then that company....
>
> Enough of talk. Get back to writing software.
Good idea.
>
> PS: Maybe you Randy would be the perfect man to write a asm version of MS
word. Its only challanging in terms of time consumption, and we know
quantity doesnt scare _you_, so how about it. You could for example replace
VB scriptlanguage in that product with HLA 2.0 ???
My primary goal for the past 15 years has been to teach and promote
assembly language. It will continue to be my goal for many years to come.
Writing Word, or whatever, is something I'll leave to those who take up
the banner of assembly. After all, a person is capable of writing only so
much code per year, and I've got my hands full dealing with HLA v2.0.
Cheers,
Randy Hyde
- Next message: Beth: "Re: Why There are no Asm Apps"
- Previous message: Beth: "Re: Why There are no Asm Apps"
- In reply to: The Wannabee: "Re: Why There are no Asm Apps"
- Next in thread: The Wannabee: "Re: Why There are no Asm Apps"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
