Re: Structures in Assembly Language

From: The Wannabee (Faq_at_.@.@.@szmyggenpv.com)
Date: 08/19/04 

Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 11:06:02 +0200

På 18 Aug 2004 18:07:58 -0700, skrev hutch-- <hutch@movsd.com>:

>> To beginners:
>
> This is claptrap, assemblers have had the capacity to write and
> manipulate structures since before 1990 and structures (C), UDTs
> (basic), records (pascal) are a normal part of programming. The
> difference is some assembler CAN handle structures and some CANNOT.

Completly wrong. All assembler can handle structures. You confuse what
structures are.

> When you have to write code for an operating system that commonly uses
> structures, you either use an assembler powerful enough to do it
> easily or get stuck with some dirty fudge to try and emulate something
> that is very simple.

RosAsm is times more powerful than you will ever understand then.

> A structure is in fact an ARRAY but with the difference that all
> members do not have to be the same size.

Correct.

> The great advantage of using
> structures is that you can address each member by name and you ALWAYS
> get the correct address by doing so.

LOL . Theres no advantage of using structures. ALL programm must use
stuctures. Its unavoidable. But you and Randy doesnt understand the nature
of structure, so you mis out on what they really are. They are nothing but
writing conventions, rules of how to interpret (FORMAT) a chunck of data.

> There is nothing clever about
> manually coding array offsets through multiple levels of indirection,
> just highly unreliable code that is nearly impossible to debug and
> fix.

Wrong. There are nothing clever about it thats true, but that they lead to
unreliable code, is untrue. Only writing unreliable leads to that.

> Its one of th worst kept secrets that Microsoft had technical problems
> with the design of early 32 bit Windows so they hired a pile of VAX
> mainframe programmers to design the PE file format used in 32 bit
> Windows. This is where the nested structures came from and without
> that capacity, coding Windows assembler is an unreliable unfixable pig
> that does not work properly.

Utterly wrong. Windows expects data, give it the correct data, using any
method of structure, and it will be fully possible to use it. And WAY
easier without the silly Record keyword that randy uses. And also using
RosAsm methods, much easier to learn.

> This much I will say to programmers who are learning both Windows and
> assembler coding, don't be mislead by bullsh*t coming out of Betov
> when he does not have the experience coding Windows software.

This is so funny. Betov understand way more then you do. When it comes to
the nature of stuctures, even _I_ understand more than you do.

> Without
> normal capacity like structures, you are left with simplistic capacity
> that cannot do the complicated stuff that Windows is made with.

LOL LOL LOL. Let me hear your powerscream !! :-))) You mistake structure
to mean an implementation, just like Randy. Programming without some kind
of structure is impossible.

>
> Regards,
>
> hutch at movsd dot com 

-- 
RosAsm now auto assembles on ReactOS.
http://www.reactos.com/
What is RosAsm ?
http://betov.free.fr/RosAsm.html
"HLA.EXE is not an assembler. Indeed, it's not even a compiler,
   pre-processor (or "preparser", whatever that is), though it
   *might* qualify as [a] 'text converter.'"
                                      - Randy Hyde, author of 'HLA,'
                                        in ALT.LANG.ASM newsgroup
                                        August 11, 2004

Relevant Pages

  • Re: win32 asm
    ... If you are stuck with capacity like GAS ... Structures, unions, stack automation, libraries, different calling ... a lot different to what many assume assembler is. ... own header files and your own libraries. ...
    (comp.lang.asm.x86)
  • Re: Structures in Assembly Language
    ... All assembler can handle structures. ... >> with the design of early 32 bit Windows so they hired a pile of VAX ... >> that capacity, coding Windows assembler is an unreliable unfixable pig ... >> when he does not have the experience coding Windows software. ...
    (alt.lang.asm)
  • Re: Structures in Assembly Language
    ... difference is some assembler CAN handle structures and some CANNOT. ... Windows code properly to boast of what their toys cannot do but if you ... that capacity, coding Windows assembler is an unreliable unfixable pig ... when he does not have the experience coding Windows software. ...
    (alt.lang.asm)
  • Re: HLA v2.x and / or LASM suggestion: Win32 Resources
    ... > If you have the capacity to assembler MASM format mnemonics and can ...
    (alt.lang.asm)
  • Re: Video Mode 13h in windows XP ... impossible?
    ... there is NO problem using mode 13h under XP...if you write a DOS ... terminates so does the "DOS box" and you return to the Windows desktop ... A dedicated assembler (most of which are completely free and available ... NASM, this is _certainty_ that it's okay for you to do so...the people ...
    (alt.lang.asm)