alt.lang.asm
By Author

1871 messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ]

---

Starting: 07/31/04
Ending: 08/31/04

• 0x29A/'N
  • R: BIOS (08/10/04)
• Al Leitch
  • Re: ADK/HLA v2.0 Update (08/21/04)
• alex
  • Re: repe cmpsb instruction (08/31/04)
  • Re: repe cmpsb instruction (08/31/04)
  • Re: repe cmpsb instruction (08/30/04)
  • repe cmpsb instruction (08/30/04)
• Alex McDonald
  • Re: Helpful Practical Uses of Conditional Assembly (08/31/04)
  • Re: Conditional Assembly (Pre-Compilers) (08/31/04)
  • Re: Conditional Assembly (08/30/04)
  • Re: I think i finally got a definition of an Assembler! (08/30/04)
  • Re: Conditional Assembly (08/30/04)
  • Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler" (08/27/04)
  • Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler" (08/27/04)
  • Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler" (08/27/04)
  • Re: I've seen the future...and it works! (was: my view on this assembler is blah) (08/27/04)
  • Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler" (08/27/04)
  • Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler" (08/26/04)
  • Re: Unions in Assembly Language (08/26/04)
  • Re: order of operands in HLA (08/25/04)
  • Re: Structures in Assembly Language (08/23/04)
  • Re: Structures in Assembly Language (08/23/04)
  • Re: Structures in Assembly Language (08/21/04)
  • Re: Structures in Assembly Language (08/21/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/20/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/20/04)
  • Re: Structures in Assembly Language (08/19/04)
  • Re: Structures in Assembly Language (08/19/04)
  • Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler" (08/18/04)
  • Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler" (08/17/04)
  • Re: a common belief or a wrong C[++] compiler? (08/17/04)
  • Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler" (08/16/04)
  • Re: =, += -=, loop, etc (08/11/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/09/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/09/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/09/04)
  • Re: Tenacity should be rewarded (08/08/04)
  • Re: =, += -=, loop, etc (08/08/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/08/04)
  • Re: Will HLA2.0 Support rosasm? (08/06/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/06/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/05/04)
  • Re: Will HLA2.0 Support rosasm? (08/05/04)
  • Re: Will HLA2.0 Support rosasm? (08/05/04)
  • Re: HLA is a text converter (text to object code) (08/04/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/04/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/03/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/03/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/03/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/02/04)
• Andrew Kennedy
  • Re: We should close down alt.lang.asm. (08/12/04)
• Annie
  • Re: Helpful Practical Uses of Conditional Assembly (08/31/04)
  • Re: RosAsm is a compiler, not an assembler (08/30/04)
  • Re: Using Structures to write Readable and Maintainable Assembly (08/25/04)
  • Re: Using Structures to write Readable and Maintainable Assembly (08/22/04)
  • Re: ChASM (08/22/04)
  • Re: High Level Assemblers and High Level Assembly Languages do exist. (08/22/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/20/04)
  • Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler" (08/17/04)
  • Re: Interesting Correspondence with the Manager (Pierre Vandevenne) of www.datarescu (08/14/04)
  • Re: Note to "The Wannabee" on religion (08/12/04)
  • Re: Note to "The Wannabee" on religion (08/12/04)
  • Re: Interesting Correspondence with the Manager (Pierre Vandevenne) of www.datarescu (08/11/04)
  • Re: Using processor cache (08/10/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/05/04)
• arargh407NOSPAM_at_NOW.AT.arargh.com
  • Re: I think i finally got a definition of an Assembler! (08/30/04)
  • Re: Namespaces in assembly language (08/30/04)
  • Re: Unions in Assembly Language (08/27/04)
  • Re: string (08/27/04)
  • Re: string (08/26/04)
  • Re: string (08/26/04)
  • Re: Ia32 (08/26/04)
  • Re: order of operands in HLA (08/25/04)
  • Re: order of operands in HLA (08/24/04)
  • Re: order of operands in HLA (08/24/04)
  • Re: All structures make "Ghost variables" (08/24/04)
  • Re: order of operands in HLA (08/24/04)
  • Re: Structures in Assembly Language (08/19/04)
  • Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler" (08/16/04)
  • Re: US Election Special Update News Report Special (08/14/04)
  • Re: Interesting Correspondence with the Manager (Pierre Vandevenne) of www.datarescue.com (08/13/04)
  • Re: What is an Assembler (08/13/04)
• Auric__
  • Re: m68000 (08/31/04)
  • Re: m68000 (08/31/04)
  • Re: m68000 (08/31/04)
  • Re: The Assembly "Rebirth" has Begun (08/10/04)
• Baerett Shippam
  • Hi (08/23/04)
• Benjamin David Lunt
  • Re: ChASM (08/22/04)
• Benjamin Kalytta
  • Re: Interesting Correspondence with the Manager (Pierre Vandevenne) of www.datarescu (08/25/04)
  • Re: Interesting Correspondence with the Manager (Pierre Vandevenne) of www.datarescue.com (08/14/04)
  • Re: Interesting Correspondence with the Manager (Pierre Vandevenne) of www.datarescue.com (08/13/04)
  • Re: Interesting Correspondence with the Manager (Pierre Vandevenne) of www.datarescue.com (08/11/04)
  • Re: Interesting Correspondence with the Manager (Pierre Vandevenne) of www.datarescue.com (08/11/04)
  • Re: Interesting Correspondence with the Manager (Pierre Vandevenne) of www.datarescue.com (08/10/04)
  • Re: Interesting Correspondence with the Manager (Pierre Vandevenne) of www.datarescue.com (08/10/04)
  • Interesting Correspondence with the Manager (Pierre Vandevenne) of www.datarescue.com (08/10/04)
• Benjamin Valentin
  • Re: Random number question? (08/23/04)
  • Re: Random number question? (08/18/04)
• beta
  • Re: a common belief or a wrong C[++] compiler? (08/31/04)
  • Re: a common belief or a wrong C[++] compiler? (08/31/04)
  • Re: a common belief or a wrong C[++] compiler? (08/30/04)
  • Re: a common belief or a wrong C[++] compiler? (08/28/04)
  • Re: a common belief or a wrong C[++] compiler? (08/28/04)
  • Re: a common belief or a wrong C[++] compiler? (08/27/04)
  • Re: a common belief or a wrong C[++] compiler? (08/26/04)
  • Re: a common belief or a wrong C[++] compiler? (08/25/04)
  • Re: a common belief or a wrong C[++] compiler? (08/24/04)
  • Re: a common belief or a wrong C[++] compiler? (08/23/04)
  • Re: a common belief or a wrong C[++] compiler? (08/23/04)
  • Re: a common belief or a wrong C[++] compiler? (08/22/04)
  • Re: a common belief or a wrong C[++] compiler? (08/22/04)
  • Re: a common belief or a wrong C[++] compiler? (08/21/04)
  • Re: a common belief or a wrong C[++] compiler? (08/21/04)
  • Re: a common belief or a wrong C[++] compiler? (08/21/04)
  • Re: a common belief or a wrong C[++] compiler? (08/20/04)
  • Re: a common belief or a wrong C[++] compiler? (08/20/04)
  • Re: a common belief or a wrong C[++] compiler? (08/20/04)
  • Re: a common belief or a wrong C[++] compiler? (08/19/04)
  • Re: a common belief or a wrong C[++] compiler? (08/19/04)
  • Re: a common belief or a wrong C[++] compiler? (08/18/04)
  • Re: a common belief or a wrong C[++] compiler? (08/18/04)
  • Re: a common belief or a wrong C[++] compiler? (08/18/04)
  • Re: a common belief or a wrong C[++] compiler? (08/18/04)
  • Re: a common belief or a wrong C[++] compiler? (08/18/04)
  • Re: a common belief or a wrong C[++] compiler? (08/18/04)
  • Re: a common belief or a wrong C[++] compiler? (08/14/04)
  • multiplication and division (08/14/04)
  • Re: a common belief or a wrong C[++] compiler? (08/14/04)
  • a common belief or a wrong C[++] compiler? (08/13/04)
  • Re: =, += -=, loop, etc (08/13/04)
  • Re: =, += -=, loop, etc (08/13/04)
  • Re: =, += -=, loop, etc (08/11/04)
  • Re: US Election Special Update News Report Special (08/11/04)
  • Re: We should close down alt.lang.asm. (08/10/04)
  • Re: =, += -=, loop, etc (08/10/04)
  • a .bat file (08/09/04)
  • Re: Windows Version (08/09/04)
  • Re: =, += -=, loop, etc (08/09/04)
  • Re: =, += -=, loop, etc (08/09/04)
  • Re: =, += -=, loop, etc (08/09/04)
  • Re: =, += -=, loop, etc (08/09/04)
  • Re: =, += -=, loop, etc (08/09/04)
  • Re: =, += -=, loop, etc (08/09/04)
  • Re: =, += -=, loop, etc (08/08/04)
  • Re: =, += -=, loop, etc (08/08/04)
  • Re: =, += -=, loop, etc (08/08/04)
  • Re: shift and failure to exceed compiler in speed (08/07/04)
  • =, += -=, loop, etc (08/07/04)
  • Re: <=> (08/02/04)
  • Re: <=> (08/02/04)
  • Re: <=> (08/02/04)
  • Re: shift and failure to exceed compiler in speed (08/02/04)
  • Re: shift and failure to exceed compiler in speed (08/02/04)
  • Re: <=> (08/01/04)
  • Re: <=> (08/01/04)
  • <=> (08/01/04)
  • Re: shift and failure to exceed compiler in speed (08/01/04)
  • Re: shift and failure to exceed compiler in speed (08/01/04)
• Beth
  • Re: Conditional Assembly (08/31/04)
  • Re: I think i finally got a definition of an Assembler! (08/31/04)
  • Re: I think i finally got a definition of an Assembler! (08/31/04)
  • Re: Ia32 (08/30/04)
  • Re: RosAsm is a compiler, not an assembler (08/30/04)
  • Re: RosAsm is a compiler, not an assembler (08/30/04)
  • Re: I think i finally got a definition of an Assembler! (08/30/04)
  • Re: Argue about this (08/30/04)
  • Re: Argue about this (08/30/04)
  • Re: Argue about this (08/30/04)
  • Re: Argue about this (08/30/04)
  • Re: Argue about this (08/30/04)
  • Re: Get HLA Training (08/30/04)
  • Re: RosAsm is a compiler, not an assembler (08/30/04)
  • Re: RosAsm is a compiler, not an assembler (08/30/04)
  • Re: RosAsm is a compiler, not an assembler (08/30/04)
  • Re: I've seen the future...and it works! (was: my view on this assembler is blah) (08/30/04)
  • Re: I've seen the future...and it works! (was: my view on this assembler is blah) (08/28/04)
  • Re: I've seen the future...and it works! (was: my view on this assembler is blah) (08/28/04)
  • Re: I've seen the future...and it works! (was: my view on this assembler is blah) (08/28/04)
  • Re: I've seen the future...and it works! (was: my view on this assembler is blah) (08/27/04)
  • Re: I've seen the future...and it works! (was: my view on this assembler is blah) (08/27/04)
  • Re: I've seen the future...and it works! (was: my view on this assembler is blah) (08/27/04)
  • Re: Argue about this (08/27/04)
  • Re: I've seen the future...and it works! (was: my view on this assembler is blah) (08/27/04)
  • I've seen the future...and it works! (was: my view on this assembler is blah) (08/27/04)
  • Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler" (08/26/04)
  • Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler" (08/26/04)
  • Re: order of operands in HLA (08/26/04)
  • Re: order of operands in HLA (08/25/04)
  • Re: HLA v1.69 crashes over this source! (08/25/04)
  • Re: Argue about this (08/25/04)
  • Re: Ia32 (08/25/04)
  • Re: Argue about this (08/25/04)
  • Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler" (08/24/04)
  • Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler" (08/24/04)
  • Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler" (08/24/04)
  • Re: Interesting Correspondence with the Manager (Pierre Vandevenne) of www.datarescu (08/24/04)
  • Re: ADK/HLA v2.0 Update (08/24/04)
  • Re: RosAsm still isn't marketed right. (08/24/04)
  • Re: Argue about this (08/24/04)
  • Re: Argue about this (08/24/04)
  • Re: Get HLA Training (08/24/04)
  • Re: Argue about this (08/24/04)
  • Re: For Newbies: What is Scientology? (8/14/04) (08/21/04)
  • Re: Is it possible to get the caller's name ? (08/21/04)
  • Re: Get HLA Training (08/21/04)
  • Re: order of operands in HLA (08/21/04)
  • Re: order of operands in HLA (08/21/04)
  • Re: order of operands in HLA (08/21/04)
  • Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler" (08/15/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/12/04)
  • Re: RosAsm V.1.28a released (08/12/04)
  • Re: RosAsm V.1.28a released (08/12/04)
  • Re: Note to "The Wannabee" on religion (08/12/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/10/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/05/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/04/04)
  • Re: Will HLA2.0 Support rosasm? (08/04/04)
  • Re: f0dder's fabulous folly. (08/04/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/04/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/04/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/03/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/03/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/03/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/03/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/03/04)
• Betov
  • Re: RosAsm is a compiler, not an assembler (08/31/04)
  • Re: Helpful Practical Uses of Conditional Assembly (08/31/04)
  • Re: Helpful Practical Uses of Conditional Assembly (08/31/04)
  • Re: Helpful Practical Uses of Conditional Assembly (08/31/04)
  • Re: repe cmpsb instruction (08/30/04)
  • Re: RosAsm is a compiler, not an assembler (08/30/04)
  • Re: RosAsm is a compiler, not an assembler (08/30/04)
  • Re: RosAsm is a compiler, not an assembler (08/30/04)
  • Re: Namespaces in assembly language (08/30/04)
  • Re: Namespaces in assembly language (08/29/04)
  • Re: Namespaces in assembly language (08/29/04)
  • Re: I've seen the future...and it works! (was: my view on this assembler is blah) (08/29/04)
  • Re: Namespaces in assembly language (08/29/04)
  • Re: Namespaces in assembly language (08/29/04)
  • Re: I've seen the future...and it works! (was: my view on this assembler is blah) (08/29/04)
  • Re: Namespaces in assembly language (08/29/04)
  • Re: RosAsm is a compiler, not an assembler (08/29/04)
  • Re: I've seen the future...and it works! (was: my view on this assembler is blah) (08/29/04)
  • Re: RosAsm is a compiler, not an assembler (08/29/04)
  • Re: RosAsm is a compiler, not an assembler (08/29/04)
  • Re: Namespaces in assembly language (08/28/04)
  • Re: Namespaces in assembly language (08/28/04)
  • Re: Namespaces in assembly language (08/28/04)
  • Re: Namespaces in assembly language (08/27/04)
  • Re: I've seen the future...and it works! (was: my view on this assembler is blah) (08/27/04)
  • Re: I've seen the future...and it works! (was: my view on this assembler is blah) (08/27/04)
  • Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler" (08/27/04)
  • Re: I've seen the future...and it works! (was: my view on this assembler is blah) (08/27/04)
  • Re: I've seen the future...and it works! (was: my view on this assembler is blah) (08/27/04)
  • Re: I've seen the future...and it works! (was: my view on this assembler is blah) (08/27/04)
  • Re: I've seen the future...and it works! (was: my view on this assembler is blah) (08/27/04)
  • Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler" (08/27/04)
  • Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler" (08/26/04)
  • Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler" (08/26/04)
  • Re: ADK/HLA v2.0 Update (08/25/04)
  • Re: ADK/HLA v2.0 Update (08/25/04)
  • Re: ADK/HLA v2.0 Update (08/25/04)
  • Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler" (08/25/04)
  • Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler" (08/24/04)
  • Re: ADK/HLA v2.0 Update (08/24/04)
  • Re: ADK/HLA v2.0 Update (08/24/04)
  • Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler" (08/24/04)
  • Re: Interesting Correspondence with the Manager (Pierre Vandevenne) of www.datarescu (08/24/04)
  • Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler" (08/24/04)
  • Re: Hi (08/24/04)
  • Re: Argue about this (08/24/04)
  • Re: All structures make "Ghost variables" (08/24/04)
  • Re: All structures make "Ghost variables" (08/24/04)
  • Re: Hi (08/24/04)
  • Re: Hi (08/24/04)
  • Re: Hi (08/23/04)
  • Re: Hi (08/23/04)
  • Re: Argue about this (08/23/04)
  • Re: Hi (08/23/04)
  • Re: Structures in Assembly Language (08/23/04)
  • Re: Structures in Assembly Language (08/23/04)
  • Re: Using Structures to write Readable and Maintainable Assembly (08/23/04)
  • Re: Using Structures to write Readable and Maintainable Assembly (08/23/04)
  • Re: New HIDE (HLA IDE) version is available (08/23/04)
  • Re: Structures in Assembly Language (08/23/04)
  • Re: order of operands in HLA (08/22/04)
  • Re: Structures in Assembly Language (08/22/04)
  • Re: Using Structures to write Readable and Maintainable Assembly (08/22/04)
  • Re: Structures in Assembly Language (08/22/04)
  • Re: order of operands in HLA (08/22/04)
  • Re: Structures in Assembly Language (08/22/04)
  • Re: High Level Assemblers and High Level Assembly Languages do exist. (08/22/04)
  • Re: order of operands in HLA (08/21/04)
  • Re: ADK/HLA v2.0 Update (08/21/04)
  • Re: order of operands in HLA (08/21/04)
  • Re: order of operands in HLA (08/21/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/20/04)
  • Re: order of operands in HLA (08/20/04)
  • Re: ADK/HLA v2.0 Update (08/20/04)
  • Re: ADK/HLA v2.0 Update (08/20/04)
  • Re: order of operands in HLA (08/20/04)
  • Re: Structures in Assembly Language (08/20/04)
  • Re: order of operands in HLA (08/20/04)
  • Re: Structures in Assembly Language (08/20/04)
  • Re: Structures in Assembly Language (08/20/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/20/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/20/04)
  • Re: Structures in Assembly Language (08/20/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/19/04)
  • Re: Structures in Assembly Language (08/19/04)
  • Re: Structures in Assembly Language (08/19/04)
  • Re: a common belief or a wrong C[++] compiler? (08/19/04)
  • Re: a common belief or a wrong C[++] compiler? (08/19/04)
  • Re: Structures in Assembly Language (08/19/04)
  • Re: a common belief or a wrong C[++] compiler? (08/18/04)
  • Re: Structures in Assembly Language (08/18/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/18/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/18/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/18/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/18/04)
  • Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler" (08/18/04)
  • Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler" (08/18/04)
  • Re: a common belief or a wrong C[++] compiler? (08/18/04)
  • Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler" (08/17/04)
  • Re: a common belief or a wrong C[++] compiler? (08/17/04)
  • Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler" (08/17/04)
  • Re: a common belief or a wrong C[++] compiler? (08/17/04)
  • Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler" (08/17/04)
  • Re: a common belief or a wrong C[++] compiler? (08/17/04)
  • Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler" (08/17/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/16/04)
  • Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler" (08/16/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/16/04)
  • Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler" (08/16/04)
  • Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler" (08/16/04)
  • Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler" (08/16/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/15/04)
  • Re: ADK/HLA v2.0 Update (08/15/04)
  • Re: ADK/HLA v2.0 Update (08/15/04)
  • Re: Note to "The Wannabee" on religion (08/14/04)
  • Re: a common belief or a wrong C[++] compiler? (08/14/04)
  • Re: a common belief or a wrong C[++] compiler? (08/14/04)
  • Re: We should close down alt.lang.asm. (08/14/04)
  • Re: Interesting Correspondence with the Manager (Pierre Vandevenne) of www.datarescue.com (08/13/04)
  • Re: Interesting Correspondence with the Manager (Pierre Vandevenne) of www.datarescue.com (08/13/04)
  • Re: What is an Assembler (08/13/04)
  • Re: ADK/HLA v2.0 Update (08/13/04)
  • Re: Interesting Correspondence with the Manager (Pierre Vandevenne) of www.datarescue.com (08/13/04)
  • Re: Note to "The Wannabee" on religion (08/13/04)
  • Re: Note to "The Wannabee" on religion (08/13/04)
  • Re: What is an Assembler (08/13/04)
  • Re: ADK/HLA v2.0 Update (08/13/04)
  • Re: What is an Assembler (08/12/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/12/04)
  • Re: =, += -=, loop, etc (08/12/04)
  • Re: Note to "The Wannabee" on religion (08/12/04)
  • Re: What is an Assembler (08/12/04)
  • Re: Note to "The Wannabee" on religion (08/12/04)
  • Re: RosAsm V.1.28a released (08/12/04)
  • Re: Note to "The Wannabee" on religion (08/12/04)
  • Re: We should close down alt.lang.asm. (08/12/04)
  • Re: Note to "The Wannabee" on religion (08/12/04)
  • Re: Will it be easy to write an HLA v2.0 back end? (08/12/04)
  • Re: What is an Assembler (08/12/04)
  • Re: Interesting Correspondence with the Manager (Pierre Vandevenne) of www.datarescue.com (08/12/04)
  • Re: Will HLA2.0 Support rosasm? (08/11/04)
  • Re: Note to "The Wannabee" on religion (08/11/04)
  • Re: RosAsm still isn't marketed right. (08/11/04)
  • Re: Note to "The Wannabee" on religion (08/11/04)
  • Re: Note to "The Wannabee" on religion (08/11/04)
  • Re: Note to "The Wannabee" on religion (08/11/04)
  • Re: Interesting Correspondence with the Manager (Pierre Vandevenne) of www.datarescue.com (08/11/04)
  • Re: Interesting Correspondence with the Manager (Pierre Vandevenne) of www.datarescue.com (08/11/04)
  • Re: Tenacity should be rewarded (08/11/04)
  • Re: Interesting Correspondence with the Manager (Pierre Vandevenne) of www.datarescue.com (08/11/04)
  • Re: Interesting Correspondence with the Manager (Pierre Vandevenne) of www.datarescue.com (08/10/04)
  • Re: RosAsm still isn't marketed right. (08/10/04)
  • Re: Interesting Correspondence with the Manager (Pierre Vandevenne) of www.datarescue.com (08/10/04)
  • Re: Interesting Correspondence with the Manager (Pierre Vandevenne) of www.datarescue.com (08/10/04)
  • Re: HLA is a text converter (text to object code) (08/10/04)
  • Re: Tenacity should be rewarded (08/10/04)
  • Re: Tenacity should be rewarded (08/10/04)
  • Re: Tenacity should be rewarded (08/10/04)
  • Re: RosAsm still isn't marketed right. (08/10/04)
  • Re: Note to "The Wannabee" on religion (08/10/04)
  • Re: Tenacity should be rewarded (08/09/04)
  • Re: RosAsm V.1.28a released (08/09/04)
  • Re: Tenacity should be rewarded (08/09/04)
  • Re: Tenacity should be rewarded (08/09/04)
  • Re: Tenacity should be rewarded (08/08/04)
  • Tenacity should be rewarded (08/08/04)
  • Re: HLA is a text converter (text to object code) (08/07/04)
  • Re: Whats so bad about HLA ? (08/06/04)
  • Re: RosAsm V.1.28a released (08/06/04)
  • Re: Whats so bad about HLA ? (08/06/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/06/04)
  • Re: Will HLA2.0 Support rosasm? (08/06/04)
  • RosAsm V.1.28a released (08/06/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/06/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/06/04)
  • Re: HLA is a text converter (text to object code) (08/06/04)
  • Re: Will HLA2.0 Support rosasm? (08/06/04)
  • Re: Will HLA2.0 Support rosasm? (08/06/04)
  • Re: Will HLA2.0 Support rosasm? (08/06/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/05/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/05/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/05/04)
  • Re: Will HLA2.0 Support rosasm? (08/05/04)
  • Re: Will HLA2.0 Support rosasm? (08/05/04)
  • Re: Will HLA2.0 Support rosasm? (08/05/04)
  • Re: Will HLA2.0 Support rosasm? (08/05/04)
  • Re: Will HLA2.0 Support rosasm? (08/05/04)
  • Re: Will HLA2.0 Support rosasm? (08/05/04)
  • Re: Will HLA2.0 Support rosasm? (08/05/04)
  • Re: Will HLA2.0 Support rosasm? (08/05/04)
  • Re: HLA is a text converter (text to object code) (08/05/04)
  • Re: Will HLA2.0 Support rosasm? (08/05/04)
  • Re: HLA is a text converter (text to object code) (08/04/04)
  • Re: Will HLA2.0 Support rosasm? (08/04/04)
  • Re: Will HLA2.0 Support rosasm? (08/04/04)
  • Re: Will HLA2.0 Support rosasm? (08/04/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/04/04)
  • Re: HLA is a text converter (text to object code) (08/04/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/04/04)
  • Re: HLA is a text converter (text to object code) (08/04/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/04/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/03/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/03/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/03/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/03/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/02/04)
  • Re: HLA v1.68 is now available (08/01/04)
  • Re: HLA v1.68 is now available (08/01/04)
• Betov
  • Re: IA64 and beyond (08/10/04)
  • Re: IA64 and beyond (08/10/04)
• Beyond2000!
  • Re: Structures in Assembly Language (08/24/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/20/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/20/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/20/04)
  • Re: Structures in Assembly Language (08/20/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/20/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/18/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/17/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/17/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/17/04)
  • Re: OT: incredible 64kb demo (08/16/04)
  • Increadible Olympics opening (08/13/04)
  • Re: Interesting Correspondence with the Manager (Pierre Vandevenne) of www.datarescue.com (08/13/04)
  • Re: Interesting Correspondence with the Manager (Pierre Vandevenne) of www.datarescue.com (08/13/04)
  • Re: Interesting Correspondence with the Manager (Pierre Vandevenne) of www.datarescue.com (08/13/04)
  • Re: Interesting Correspondence with the Manager (Pierre Vandevenne) of www.datarescue.com (08/13/04)
• Bill Marcum
  • Re: order of operands in HLA (08/22/04)
  • Re: R: BIOS (08/10/04)
  • Re: We should close down alt.lang.asm. (08/10/04)
• bronte004
  • Re: multiplication and division (08/18/04)
  • Re: =, += -=, loop, etc (08/10/04)
  • Re: HLA v1.68 is now available (08/02/04)
  • Re: HLA v1.68 is now available (08/01/04)
  • Re: HLA v1.68 is now available (08/01/04)
  • Re: HLA v1.68 is now available (07/31/04)
• Bx.C
  • Re: Interesting Correspondence with the Manager (Pierre Vandevenne) of www.datarescu (08/12/04)
  • Re: Interesting Correspondence with the Manager (Pierre Vandevenne) of www.datarescu (08/12/04)
• Bx.Cornwell
  • Re: <=> (08/03/04)
  • Re: <=> (08/01/04)
• C
  • Re: Using Structures to write Readable and Maintainable Assembly (08/30/04)
  • Re: order of operands in HLA (08/21/04)
  • Re: Structures in Assembly Language (08/20/04)
  • Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler" (08/19/04)
  • Re: a common belief or a wrong C[++] compiler? (08/17/04)
  • Re: a common belief or a wrong C[++] compiler? (08/17/04)
  • Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler" (08/17/04)
  • Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler" (08/17/04)
  • Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler" (08/17/04)
  • Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler" (08/16/04)
  • Re: What is an Assembler (08/13/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/04/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/03/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/03/04)
• C
  • Re: IA64 and beyond (08/05/04)
• cb0f...
  • Re: US Election Special Update News Report Special (08/13/04)
  • Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler" (08/13/04)
  • Re: Note to "The Wannabee" on religion (08/13/04)
  • Re: ADK/HLA v2.0 Update (08/13/04)
  • Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler" (08/13/04)
  • Re: Note to "The Wannabee" on religion (08/13/04)
  • Re: Note to "The Wannabee" on religion (08/11/04)
  • Re: US Election Special Update News Report Special (08/11/04)
  • Re: Note to "The Wannabee" on religion (08/11/04)
  • Re: Note to "The Wannabee" on religion (08/11/04)
  • Re: Note to "The Wannabee" on religion (08/11/04)
  • Re: Note to "The Wannabee" on religion (08/11/04)
  • Re: We should close down alt.lang.asm. (08/10/04)
  • Re: Note to "The Wannabee" on religion (08/10/04)
  • Re: The Assembly "Rebirth" has Begun (08/10/04)
  • Re: Tenacity should be rewarded (08/10/04)
  • Re: =, += -=, loop, etc (08/10/04)
  • Re: HLA is a text converter (text to object code) (08/09/04)
  • Re: =, += -=, loop, etc (08/08/04)
  • Re: Tenacity should be rewarded (08/08/04)
  • Re: Will HLA2.0 Support rosasm? (08/08/04)
  • Re: =, += -=, loop, etc (08/08/04)
  • Re: =, += -=, loop, etc (08/08/04)
  • Re: Will HLA2.0 Support rosasm? (08/08/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/08/04)
  • Re: HLA is a text converter (text to object code) (08/08/04)
  • Re: Using processor cache (08/07/04)
  • Re: IA64 and beyond (08/07/04)
  • Re: =, += -=, loop, etc (08/07/04)
  • Re: Will HLA2.0 Support rosasm? (08/07/04)
  • Re: Will HLA2.0 Support rosasm? (08/07/04)
  • Re: HLA is a text converter (text to object code) (08/07/04)
  • Re: HLA is a text converter (text to object code) (08/06/04)
  • Re: HLA is a text converter (text to object code) (08/06/04)
  • Re: HLA is a text converter (text to object code) (08/05/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/05/04)
  • Re: HLA is a text converter (text to object code) (08/05/04)
  • Re: Will HLA2.0 Support rosasm? (08/05/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/05/04)
• Chewy509
  • Re: Ia32 (08/31/04)
  • Re: I've seen the future...and it works! (was: my view on this assembler is blah) (08/28/04)
• cool_hand_rick_at_hotmail.com
  • ChASM (08/22/04)
• Dag Viken
  • Re: is there an easy way to call int 10h on Windows XP? (08/03/04)
• David J. Craig
  • Re: IA64 and beyond (08/05/04)
• Dirk Wolfgang Glomp
  • Re: is there an easy way to call int 10h on Windows XP? (08/02/04)
• Dunny
  • Re: I've seen the future...and it works! (was: my view on this assembler is blah) (08/29/04)
  • Re: I've seen the future...and it works! (was: my view on this assembler is blah) (08/29/04)
  • Re: I've seen the future...and it works! (was: my view on this assembler is blah) (08/29/04)
  • Re: Unions in Assembly Language (08/27/04)
  • Re: I've seen the future...and it works! (was: my view on this assembler is blah) (08/27/04)
  • Re: Unions in Assembly Language (08/26/04)
  • Re: Using Structures to write Readable and Maintainable Assembly (08/26/04)
  • Re: Using Structures to write Readable and Maintainable Assembly (08/26/04)
  • Re: Unions in Assembly Language (08/26/04)
  • Re: ADK/HLA v2.0 Update (08/26/04)
  • Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler" (08/26/04)
  • Re: Using Structures to write Readable and Maintainable Assembly (08/26/04)
  • Re: HLA v1.69 crashes over this source! (08/25/04)
  • Re: Using Structures to write Readable and Maintainable Assembly (08/25/04)
  • Re: Hi (08/23/04)
  • Re: Hi (08/23/04)
  • Re: New HIDE (HLA IDE) version is available (08/23/04)
  • Re: Using Structures to write Readable and Maintainable Assembly (08/23/04)
  • Re: Structures in Assembly Language (08/23/04)
  • Re: Structures in Assembly Language (08/23/04)
  • Re: Using Structures to write Readable and Maintainable Assembly (08/23/04)
  • Re: Using Structures to write Readable and Maintainable Assembly (08/23/04)
  • Re: order of operands in HLA (08/22/04)
  • Re: order of operands in HLA (08/21/04)
  • Re: ADK/HLA v2.0 Update (08/21/04)
  • Re: order of operands in HLA (08/21/04)
  • Re: ADK/HLA v2.0 Update (08/15/04)
  • Re: What is an Assembler (08/13/04)
  • Re: incredible 64kb demo (08/12/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/12/04)
  • Re: RosAsm still isn't marketed right. (08/11/04)
  • Re: Note to "The Wannabee" on religion (08/11/04)
  • Re: Note to "The Wannabee" on religion (08/11/04)
  • Re: Note to "The Wannabee" on religion (08/11/04)
  • Re: Interesting Correspondence with the Manager (Pierre Vandevenne) of www.datarescue.com (08/11/04)
  • Re: Interesting Correspondence with the Manager (Pierre Vandevenne) of www.datarescue.com (08/11/04)
  • Re: We should close down alt.lang.asm. (08/10/04)
  • Re: RosAsm V.1.28a released (08/09/04)
  • Re: HLA is a text converter (text to object code) (08/09/04)
  • Re: Tenacity should be rewarded (08/09/04)
  • Re: =, += -=, loop, etc (08/08/04)
  • Re: Will HLA2.0 Support rosasm? (08/06/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/05/04)
  • Re: Will HLA2.0 Support rosasm? (08/05/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/05/04)
  • Re: Will HLA2.0 Support rosasm? (08/04/04)
  • Re: Will HLA2.0 Support rosasm? (08/04/04)
  • Will HLA2.0 Support rosasm? (08/04/04)
• E P Chandler
  • Re: is there an easy way to call int 10h on Windows XP? (08/02/04)
• E. Rosten
  • Re: Using processor cache (08/11/04)
  • Re: Using processor cache (08/10/04)
  • Re: Using processor cache (08/09/04)
• Ed Beroset
  • Re: I think i finally got a definition of an Assembler! (08/31/04)
  • Re: string (08/31/04)
  • Re: I think i finally got a definition of an Assembler! (08/30/04)
  • Re: Namespaces in assembly language (08/29/04)
  • Re: Namespaces in assembly language (08/29/04)
  • Re: How to get Code Segment Base Address in PM (08/29/04)
  • Re: TASM Ideal Mode sadness (08/29/04)
  • Re: Namespaces in assembly language (08/29/04)
  • Re: Unions in Assembly Language (08/28/04)
  • Re: Namespaces in assembly language (08/28/04)
  • Re: I've seen the future...and it works! (was: my view on this assembler is blah) (08/28/04)
  • Re: Unions in Assembly Language (08/28/04)
  • Re: I've seen the future...and it works! (was: my view on this assembler is blah) (08/28/04)
  • Re: I've seen the future...and it works! (was: my view on this assembler is blah) (08/28/04)
  • Re: Unions in Assembly Language (08/28/04)
  • Re: order of operands in HLA (08/25/04)
  • size vs. type (08/25/04)
  • Re: order of operands in HLA (08/25/04)
  • Re: order of operands in HLA (08/25/04)
  • Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler" (08/25/04)
  • Re: order of operands in HLA (08/24/04)
  • Re: Structures in Assembly Language (08/24/04)
  • Re: order of operands in HLA (08/24/04)
  • Re: Structures in Assembly Language (08/24/04)
  • Re: All structures make "Ghost variables" (08/24/04)
  • Re: order of operands in HLA (08/23/04)
  • Re: Structures in Assembly Language (08/23/04)
  • Re: Structures in Assembly Language (08/22/04)
  • Re: Structures in Assembly Language (08/22/04)
  • Re: Structures in Assembly Language (08/22/04)
  • Re: Structures in Assembly Language (08/22/04)
  • Re: Structures in Assembly Language (08/22/04)
  • Re: Structures in Assembly Language (08/22/04)
  • Re: Structures in Assembly Language (08/21/04)
  • Re: Structures in Assembly Language (08/21/04)
  • Re: multiplication and division (08/15/04)
  • Re: Note to "The Wannabee" on religion (08/12/04)
  • Re: =, += -=, loop, etc (08/09/04)
  • Re: =, += -=, loop, etc (08/08/04)
  • Re: =, += -=, loop, etc (08/08/04)
  • Re: =, += -=, loop, etc (08/07/04)
  • Re: HLA is a text converter (text to object code) (08/05/04)
• Ed Beroset
  • Re: IA64 and beyond (08/24/04)
  • Re: IA64 and beyond (08/10/04)
  • Re: IA64 and beyond (08/07/04)
  • Re: IA64 and beyond (08/06/04)
  • Re: IA64 and beyond (08/06/04)
  • Re: IA64 and beyond (08/06/04)
  • Re: IA64 and beyond (08/06/04)
• eGze
  • Please send mi IMGHDR.INC for MASM :) (08/20/04)
• Erdemal
  • Re: How to get Code Segment Base Address in PM (08/30/04)
  • How to get Code Segment Base Address in PM (08/29/04)
• Eric
  • Re: a common belief or a wrong C[++] compiler? (08/15/04)
  • Re: 32 bit processor ?. (08/15/04)
• Evenbit
  • Re: Wow, hanging out on a .ASM group is mucho fun! (08/15/04)
  • Re: RosAsm V.1.28a released (08/07/04)
• f0dder
  • Re: RosAsm is a compiler, not an assembler (08/30/04)
  • Re: How to get Code Segment Base Address in PM (08/30/04)
  • Re: RosAsm is a compiler, not an assembler (08/29/04)
  • Re: I've seen the future...and it works! (was: my view on this assembler is blah) (08/29/04)
  • Re: RosAsm is a compiler, not an assembler (08/29/04)
  • Re: Unions in Assembly Language (08/29/04)
  • Re: Unions in Assembly Language (08/28/04)
  • Re: Unions in Assembly Language (08/27/04)
  • Re: Unions in Assembly Language (08/27/04)
  • Re: Unions in Assembly Language (08/26/04)
  • Re: Unions in Assembly Language (08/26/04)
  • Re: Unions in Assembly Language (08/26/04)
  • Re: Unions in Assembly Language (08/26/04)
  • Re: Unions in Assembly Language (08/26/04)
  • Re: Unions in Assembly Language (08/26/04)
  • Re: Unions in Assembly Language (08/26/04)
  • Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler" (08/25/04)
  • Re: Ia32 (08/25/04)
  • Re: HLA v1.69 crashes over this source! (08/25/04)
  • Re: Ia32 (08/25/04)
  • Re: Ia32 (08/25/04)
  • Re: New HIDE (HLA IDE) version is available (08/25/04)
  • Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler" (08/25/04)
  • Re: New HIDE (HLA IDE) version is available (08/25/04)
  • Re: New HIDE (HLA IDE) version is available (08/25/04)
  • Re: Ia32 (08/25/04)
  • Re: Ia32 (08/25/04)
  • Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler" (08/25/04)
  • Re: Ia32 (08/24/04)
  • Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler" (08/24/04)
  • Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler" (08/24/04)
  • Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler" (08/24/04)
  • Re: ADK/HLA v2.0 Update (08/24/04)
  • Re: ADK/HLA v2.0 Update (08/24/04)
  • Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler" (08/24/04)
  • Re: Structures in Assembly Language (08/24/04)
  • Re: Structures in Assembly Language (08/24/04)
  • Re: Structures in Assembly Language (08/23/04)
  • Re: Structures in Assembly Language (08/23/04)
  • Re: Structures in Assembly Language (08/23/04)
  • Re: Structures in Assembly Language (08/23/04)
  • Re: Structures in Assembly Language (08/23/04)
  • Re: Structures in Assembly Language (08/23/04)
  • Re: Structures in Assembly Language (08/23/04)
  • Re: Structures in Assembly Language (08/23/04)
  • Re: Structures in Assembly Language (08/23/04)
  • Re: Structures in Assembly Language (08/23/04)
  • Re: Structures in Assembly Language (08/20/04)
  • Re: Structures in Assembly Language (08/20/04)
  • Re: Structures in Assembly Language (08/20/04)
  • Re: a common belief or a wrong C[++] compiler? (08/20/04)
  • Re: Structures in Assembly Language (08/20/04)
  • Re: Is it possible to get the caller's name ? (08/20/04)
  • Re: Is it possible to get the caller's name ? (08/20/04)
  • Re: Structures in Assembly Language (08/20/04)
  • Re: a common belief or a wrong C[++] compiler? (08/19/04)
  • Re: a common belief or a wrong C[++] compiler? (08/19/04)
  • Re: Structures in Assembly Language (08/19/04)
  • Re: a common belief or a wrong C[++] compiler? (08/19/04)
  • Re: Structures in Assembly Language (08/19/04)
  • Re: What is an Assembler (08/15/04)
  • Re: a common belief or a wrong C[++] compiler? (08/14/04)
  • Re: What is an Assembler (08/14/04)
  • Re: What is an Assembler (08/14/04)
  • Re: Interesting Correspondence with the Manager (Pierre Vandevenne) of www.datarescue.com (08/13/04)
  • Re: Interesting Correspondence with the Manager (Pierre Vandevenne) of www.datarescue.com (08/13/04)
  • Re: What is an Assembler (08/13/04)
  • Re: What is an Assembler (08/13/04)
  • Re: incredible 64kb demo (08/12/04)
  • Re: Interesting Correspondence with the Manager (Pierre Vandevenne) of www.datarescue.com (08/11/04)
  • Re: The Assembly "Rebirth" has Begun (08/10/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/05/04)
  • Re: is there an easy way to call int 10h on Windows XP? (08/02/04)
• fabio de francesco
  • Re: order of operands in HLA (08/21/04)
  • order of operands in HLA (08/20/04)
  • Re: Tenacity should be rewarded (08/10/04)
  • Re: HLA is a text converter (text to object code) (08/08/04)
  • Re: HLA is a text converter (text to object code) (08/08/04)
• Frank Kotler
  • Re: Conditional Assembly (08/31/04)
  • Re: Using Structures to write Readable and Maintainable Assembly (08/30/04)
  • Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler" (08/30/04)
  • Re: TASM Ideal Mode sadness (08/29/04)
  • Re: I've seen the future...and it works! (was: my view on this assembler is blah) (08/28/04)
  • Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler" (08/27/04)
  • Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler" (08/26/04)
  • Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler" (08/25/04)
  • Re: Argue about this (08/25/04)
  • Re: Using Structures to write Readable and Maintainable Assembly (08/25/04)
  • Re: New HIDE (HLA IDE) version is available (08/25/04)
  • Re: Using Structures to write Readable and Maintainable Assembly (08/24/04)
  • the Nasm licence/license (08/23/04)
  • Re: Using Structures to write Readable and Maintainable Assembly (08/22/04)
  • Re: order of operands in HLA (08/22/04)
  • Re: Structures in Assembly Language (08/22/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/21/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/21/04)
  • Re: order of operands in HLA (08/21/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/20/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/20/04)
  • Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler" (08/19/04)
  • Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler" (08/18/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/18/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/18/04)
  • Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler" (08/17/04)
  • Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler" (08/17/04)
  • Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler" (08/17/04)
  • Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler" (08/17/04)
  • Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler" (08/16/04)
  • Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler" (08/16/04)
  • Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler" (08/16/04)
  • Re: For Newbies: What is Scientology? (8/14/04) (08/15/04)
  • Re: Note to "The Wannabee" on religion (08/15/04)
  • Re: Note to "The Wannabee" on religion (08/14/04)
  • Re: defining & accessing structures? (08/14/04)
  • Re: Note to "The Wannabee" on religion (08/14/04)
  • Re: Note to "The Wannabee" on religion (08/13/04)
  • Re: Note to "The Wannabee" on religion (08/13/04)
  • Re: Note to "The Wannabee" on religion (08/12/04)
  • Re: We should close down alt.lang.asm. (08/11/04)
  • Re: Will HLA2.0 Support rosasm? (08/09/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/09/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/08/04)
  • Re: HLA v1.68 is now available (08/08/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/04/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/04/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/04/04)
  • Re: HLA v1.68 is now available (08/04/04)
  • Re: HLA v1.68 is now available (08/02/04)
  • Re: HLA v1.68 is now available (08/02/04)
  • Re: HLA v1.68 is now available (08/02/04)
  • Re: HLA v1.68 is now available (08/01/04)
• Frank Kotler
  • Re: IA64 and beyond (08/09/04)
  • Re: IA64 and beyond (08/09/04)
  • Re: IA64 and beyond (08/09/04)
  • Re: IA64 and beyond (08/07/04)
  • Re: IA64 and beyond (08/06/04)
• FreeZ
  • Re: Argue about this (08/30/04)
  • Re: Namespaces in assembly language (08/30/04)
  • Re: Namespaces in assembly language (08/29/04)
  • Re: RosAsm is a compiler, not an assembler (08/29/04)
  • Re: Get HLA Training (08/29/04)
  • Re: Unions in Assembly Language (08/28/04)
  • Re: Unions in Assembly Language (08/27/04)
  • Re: Test (08/27/04)
  • Re: Will HLA2.0 Support rosasm? (08/06/04)
  • Re: HLA is a text converter (text to object code) (08/05/04)
  • Re: Will HLA2.0 Support rosasm? (08/05/04)
• Gerbrand van Dieijen
  • Re: Database design issue (08/14/04)
• gpcea
  • Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler" (08/18/04)
  • Re: a common belief or a wrong C[++] compiler? (08/14/04)
  • Re: What is an Assembler (08/14/04)
  • Re: a common belief or a wrong C[++] compiler? (08/14/04)
  • Re: We should close down alt.lang.asm. (08/14/04)
  • Re: defining & accessing structures? (08/14/04)
  • Re: a common belief or a wrong C[++] compiler? (08/13/04)
  • Re: defining & accessing structures? (08/13/04)
  • defining & accessing structures? (08/13/04)
• Herbert Kleebauer
  • Re: Who said registers are born equal ? (08/31/04)
  • Re: Helpful Practical Uses of Conditional Assembly (08/31/04)
  • Re: Namespaces in assembly language (08/30/04)
  • Re: repe cmpsb instruction (08/30/04)
  • Re: Namespaces in assembly language (08/29/04)
  • Re: I've seen the future...and it works! (was: my view on this assembler is blah) (08/29/04)
  • Re: Unions in Assembly Language (08/28/04)
  • Re: Unions in Assembly Language (08/27/04)
  • Re: Unions in Assembly Language (08/27/04)
  • Re: Unions in Assembly Language (08/26/04)
  • Re: Unions in Assembly Language (08/26/04)
  • Re: Test (08/26/04)
  • Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler" (08/26/04)
  • Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler" (08/25/04)
  • Re: a common belief or a wrong C[++] compiler? (08/24/04)
  • Re: a common belief or a wrong C[++] compiler? (08/24/04)
  • Re: ADK/HLA v2.0 Update (08/24/04)
  • Re: order of operands in HLA (08/24/04)
  • Re: ADK/HLA v2.0 Update (08/24/04)
  • Re: Hi (08/23/04)
  • Re: a common belief or a wrong C[++] compiler? (08/23/04)
  • Re: a common belief or a wrong C[++] compiler? (08/22/04)
  • Re: a common belief or a wrong C[++] compiler? (08/22/04)
  • Re: a common belief or a wrong C[++] compiler? (08/22/04)
  • Re: a common belief or a wrong C[++] compiler? (08/22/04)
  • Re: a common belief or a wrong C[++] compiler? (08/21/04)
  • Re: order of operands in HLA (08/21/04)
  • Re: a common belief or a wrong C[++] compiler? (08/21/04)
  • Re: a common belief or a wrong C[++] compiler? (08/20/04)
  • Re: a common belief or a wrong C[++] compiler? (08/20/04)
  • Re: a common belief or a wrong C[++] compiler? (08/19/04)
  • Re: a common belief or a wrong C[++] compiler? (08/19/04)
  • Re: a common belief or a wrong C[++] compiler? (08/19/04)
  • Re: a common belief or a wrong C[++] compiler? (08/19/04)
  • Re: a common belief or a wrong C[++] compiler? (08/19/04)
  • Re: a common belief or a wrong C[++] compiler? (08/19/04)
  • Re: a common belief or a wrong C[++] compiler? (08/18/04)
  • Re: a common belief or a wrong C[++] compiler? (08/18/04)
  • Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler" (08/18/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/18/04)
  • Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler" (08/17/04)
  • Re: a common belief or a wrong C[++] compiler? (08/17/04)
  • Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler" (08/17/04)
  • Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler" (08/17/04)
  • Re: a common belief or a wrong C[++] compiler? (08/17/04)
  • Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler" (08/17/04)
  • Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler" (08/17/04)
  • Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler" (08/16/04)
  • Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler" (08/16/04)
  • Re: What is an Assembler (08/12/04)
  • Re: What is an Assembler (08/12/04)
  • Re: What is an Assembler (08/12/04)
  • Re: Note to "The Wannabee" on religion (08/11/04)
  • Re: Note to "The Wannabee" on religion (08/11/04)
  • Re: Using processor cache (08/10/04)
  • Re: Tenacity should be rewarded (08/10/04)
  • Re: Windows Version (08/09/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/08/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/08/04)
  • Re: =, += -=, loop, etc (08/08/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/07/04)
  • Re: HLA is a text converter (text to object code) (08/05/04)
  • Re: HLA is a text converter (text to object code) (08/04/04)
  • Re: <=> (08/02/04)
  • Re: <=> (08/01/04)
  • Re: <=> (08/01/04)
  • Re: <=> (08/01/04)
  • Re: <=> (08/01/04)
• Herbert Kleebauer
  • Re: Using processor cache (08/09/04)
• hutch--
  • Re: I think i finally got a definition of an Assembler! (08/31/04)
  • Re: RosAsm is a compiler, not an assembler (08/31/04)
  • Re: RosAsm is a compiler, not an assembler (08/30/04)
  • Re: Argue about this (08/29/04)
  • Re: RosAsm is a compiler, not an assembler (08/29/04)
  • Re: the Nasm licence/license (08/29/04)
  • Betov's view and how it effects learners (08/29/04)
  • Re: Argue about this (08/27/04)
  • Re: RosAsm still isn't marketed right. (08/26/04)
  • Re: Unions in Assembly Language (08/26/04)
  • Re: Argue about this (08/26/04)
  • Re: Argue about this (08/26/04)
  • Re: Argue about this (08/24/04)
  • Re: Argue about this (08/24/04)
  • Re: Structures in Assembly Language (08/24/04)
  • Re: Using Structures to write Readable and Maintainable Assembly (08/24/04)
  • Re: ADK/HLA v2.0 Update (08/23/04)
  • Re: High Level Assemblers and High Level Assembly Languages do exist. (08/23/04)
  • Re: Using Structures to write Readable and Maintainable Assembly (08/23/04)
  • Re: Structures in Assembly Language (08/22/04)
  • Re: Structures in Assembly Language (08/20/04)
  • Re: Structures in Assembly Language (08/20/04)
  • Re: Structures in Assembly Language (08/20/04)
  • Re: Structures in Assembly Language (08/19/04)
  • Re: IA64 and beyond (08/15/04)
  • Re: We should close down alt.lang.asm. (08/15/04)
  • Re: What is an Assembler (08/14/04)
  • Re: a common belief or a wrong C[++] compiler? (08/14/04)
  • Re: What is an Assembler (08/13/04)
  • Re: Tenacity should be rewarded (08/12/04)
  • Re: We should close down alt.lang.asm. (08/12/04)
  • Re: We should close down alt.lang.asm. (08/11/04)
  • Re: Tenacity should be rewarded (08/11/04)
  • Re: Tenacity should be rewarded (08/10/04)
  • Re: Will HLA2.0 Support rosasm? (08/09/04)
  • Re: Tenacity should be rewarded (08/09/04)
  • Re: IA64 and beyond (08/07/04)
  • Re: IA64 and beyond (08/06/04)
  • Re: f0dder's fabulous folly. (08/01/04)
  • Re: f0dder's fabulous folly. (08/01/04)
• IIJIMA Hiromitsu
  • Re: a common belief or a wrong C[++] compiler? (08/16/04)
  • Re: a common belief or a wrong C[++] compiler? (08/14/04)
  • Re: a .bat file (08/10/04)
• IIJIMA Hiromitsu
  • Re: IA64 and beyond (08/10/04)
• InuY4sha
  • Re: ASM MIPS (08/20/04)
  • ASM MIPS (08/16/04)
• Ivan Korotkov
  • Re: IA64 and beyond (08/24/04)
  • Re: IA64 and beyond (08/23/04)
  • Re: IA64 and beyond (08/06/04)
  • Re: IA64 and beyond (08/06/04)
  • Re: IA64 and beyond (08/06/04)
  • Re: IA64 and beyond (08/04/04)
  • Re: is there an easy way to call int 10h on Windows XP? (08/02/04)
• J. Yazel
  • Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler" (08/13/04)
• Jack Klein
  • Re: Ia32 (08/25/04)
  • Re: High Level Assemblers and High Level Assembly Languages do exist. (08/22/04)
  • Re: =, += -=, loop, etc (08/08/04)
• James Van Buskirk
  • Re: ASM MIPS (08/16/04)
• Jim Carlock
  • Re: Conditional Assembly (Pre-Compilers) (08/31/04)
  • Re: string (08/31/04)
  • Re: string (08/31/04)
  • Re: Argue about this (08/31/04)
  • Re: Namespaces in assembly language (08/29/04)
  • Re: Interesting Correspondence with the Manager (Pierre Vandevenne) of www.datarescue.com (08/11/04)
  • Re: HLA is a text converter (text to object code) (08/04/04)
  • Re: <=> (08/01/04)
• John Casey
  • Re: order of operands in HLA (08/21/04)
  • Re: order of operands in HLA (08/21/04)
  • Re: What is an Assembler (08/13/04)
  • Re: What is an Assembler (08/13/04)
  • Re: What is an Assembler (08/12/04)
  • Re: =, += -=, loop, etc (08/12/04)
  • Re: =, += -=, loop, etc (08/08/04)
  • Re: HLA is a text converter (text to object code) (08/05/04)
• John P. Streetman
  • Re: TASM Ideal vs MASM mode (08/26/04)
• johnnyb_at_eskimo.com
  • Re: =, += -=, loop, etc (08/09/04)
• João Manuel Moura Paredes
  • Re: a common belief or a wrong C[++] compiler? (08/17/04)
• Juan Hernandez
  • m68000 (08/31/04)
• Kain
  • Re: RosAsm is a compiler, not an assembler (08/31/04)
  • Re: I think i finally got a definition of an Assembler! (08/31/04)
  • Re: RosAsm is a compiler, not an assembler (08/30/04)
  • Re: RosAsm is a compiler, not an assembler (08/30/04)
  • Re: I think i finally got a definition of an Assembler! (08/30/04)
  • Re: RosAsm is a compiler, not an assembler (08/30/04)
  • Re: Using Structures to write Readable and Maintainable Assembly (08/29/04)
  • Re: New HIDE (HLA IDE) version is available (08/29/04)
  • Re: New HIDE (HLA IDE) version is available (08/29/04)
  • Re: New HIDE (HLA IDE) version is available (08/28/04)
  • Re: Namespaces in assembly language (08/28/04)
  • Re: Unions in Assembly Language (08/27/04)
  • Re: New HIDE (HLA IDE) version is available (08/26/04)
  • Re: New HIDE (HLA IDE) version is available (08/26/04)
  • Re: New HIDE (HLA IDE) version is available (08/26/04)
  • Re: New HIDE (HLA IDE) version is available (08/25/04)
  • Re: All structures make "Ghost variables" (08/25/04)
  • Re: order of operands in HLA (08/25/04)
  • Re: Argue about this (08/24/04)
  • Re: Using Structures to write Readable and Maintainable Assembly (08/24/04)
  • Re: New HIDE (HLA IDE) version is available (08/24/04)
  • Re: New HIDE (HLA IDE) version is available (08/24/04)
  • Re: All structures make "Ghost variables" (08/24/04)
  • Re: New HIDE (HLA IDE) version is available (08/24/04)
  • Re: ADK/HLA v2.0 Update (08/16/04)
  • Re: ADK/HLA v2.0 Update (08/15/04)
  • Re: Will HLA2.0 Support rosasm? (08/08/04)
  • Re: HLA v1.68 is now available (08/02/04)
• Kleidemos
  • Re: string (08/27/04)
  • Re: string (08/26/04)
  • Re: string (08/26/04)
  • Re: string (08/26/04)
  • string (08/26/04)
  • Re: Test (08/26/04)
  • Re: Test (08/26/04)
  • Re: Test (08/26/04)
  • Test (08/26/04)
  • Re: Ia32 (08/25/04)
  • Re: Ia32 (08/25/04)
  • Re: Ia32 (08/25/04)
  • Re: Ia32 (08/25/04)
  • Re: Ia32 (08/24/04)
  • Re: Ia32 (08/24/04)
  • Re: Ia32 (08/24/04)
  • Ia32 (08/24/04)
• Lemming
  • Re: Random number question? (08/23/04)
  • Re: Random number question? (08/23/04)
• Liz
  • Re: Database design issue (08/16/04)
  • Re: Database design issue (08/15/04)
• lucy
  • reading monitor information EDID? (08/02/04)
  • is there an easy way to call int 10h on Windows XP? (08/02/04)
• luvr
  • Re: RosAsm is a compiler, not an assembler (08/31/04)
  • Re: string (08/31/04)
  • Re: Christina Aguilera NUDE (08/31/04)
  • Re: string (08/31/04)
  • Re: I've seen the future...and it works! (was: my view on this assembler is blah) (08/31/04)
  • Re: I've seen the future...and it works! (was: my view on this assembler is blah) (08/31/04)
  • Re: I've seen the future...and it works! (was: my view on this assembler is blah) (08/31/04)
  • Re: repe cmpsb instruction (08/31/04)
  • Re: I've seen the future...and it works! (was: my view on this assembler is blah) (08/30/04)
  • Re: Argue about this (08/30/04)
  • Re: I've seen the future...and it works! (was: my view on this assembler is blah) (08/30/04)
  • Re: order of operands in HLA (08/30/04)
  • Re: Argue about this (08/30/04)
  • Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler" (08/29/04)
  • Re: HLA v1.69 crashes over this source! (08/26/04)
  • Re: ADK/HLA v2.0 Update (08/25/04)
  • Re: Using Structures to write Readable and Maintainable Assembly (08/25/04)
  • Re: Argue about this (08/25/04)
  • Re: RosAsm still isn't marketed right. (08/24/04)
  • Re: Argue about this (08/24/04)
  • Re: order of operands in HLA (08/24/04)
  • Re: ADK/HLA v2.0 Update (08/24/04)
  • Re: order of operands in HLA (08/23/04)
  • Re: order of operands in HLA (08/23/04)
  • Re: order of operands in HLA (08/22/04)
  • Re: Structures in Assembly Language (08/22/04)
  • Re: order of operands in HLA (08/22/04)
  • Re: order of operands in HLA (08/22/04)
  • Re: order of operands in HLA (08/21/04)
  • Re: order of operands in HLA (08/21/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/20/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/20/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/20/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/20/04)
  • Re: Structures in Assembly Language (08/19/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/19/04)
  • Re: Note to "The Wannabee" on religion (08/16/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/16/04)
  • Re: ADK/HLA v2.0 Update (08/15/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/15/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/14/04)
  • Re: RosAsm V.1.28a released (08/14/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/13/04)
  • Re: Increadible Olympics opening (08/13/04)
  • Re: Interesting Correspondence with the Manager (Pierre Vandevenne) of www.datarescu (08/13/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/12/04)
  • Re: Will HLA2.0 Support rosasm? (08/08/04)
• m sergei
  • 32 bit processor ?. (08/15/04)
• Mark Gibson
  • Re: 32 bit processor ?. (08/15/04)
  • Re: What is an Assembler (08/15/04)
  • Re: What is an Assembler (08/14/04)
  • Re: Using processor cache (08/14/04)
  • Re: What is an Assembler (08/14/04)
  • Re: Note to "The Wannabee" on religion (08/14/04)
  • Re: Using processor cache (08/14/04)
  • Re: HLA is a text converter (text to object code) (08/14/04)
  • Wow, hanging out on a .ASM group is mucho fun! (08/14/04)
  • Re: Note to "The Wannabee" on religion (08/14/04)
  • Re: Note to "The Wannabee" on religion (08/14/04)
  • Re: Tenacity should be rewarded (08/14/04)
  • Re: Tenacity should be rewarded (08/14/04)
  • Re: =, += -=, loop, etc (08/14/04)
  • Re: =, += -=, loop, etc (08/14/04)
  • Re: RosAsm V.1.28a released (08/14/04)
  • Re: RosAsm still isn't marketed right. (08/14/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/14/04)
  • Re: US Election Special Update News Report Special (08/14/04)
  • Re: US Election Special Update News Report Special (08/13/04)
  • Re: Tenacity should be rewarded (08/10/04)
  • Re: Tenacity should be rewarded (08/10/04)
  • Re: Tenacity should be rewarded (08/10/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/10/04)
• Matt Taylor
  • Re: IA64 and beyond (08/11/04)
  • Re: IA64 and beyond (08/08/04)
  • Re: IA64 and beyond (08/08/04)
  • Re: IA64 and beyond (08/06/04)
  • Re: IA64 and beyond (08/05/04)
• NoDot
  • Re: Get HLA Training (08/31/04)
  • Re: I think i finally got a definition of an Assembler! (08/30/04)
  • Re: Get HLA Training (08/29/04)
  • Re: Get HLA Training (08/28/04)
  • Re: New HIDE (HLA IDE) version is available (08/28/04)
  • Re: Get HLA Training (08/25/04)
  • High Level Assemblers and High Level Assembly Languages do exist. (08/22/04)
  • Re: Get HLA Training (08/22/04)
  • Re: Get HLA Training (08/22/04)
  • Re: HLA v1.69 crashes over this source! (08/21/04)
  • Re: HLA v1.69 is now Available (08/19/04)
  • Re: Structures in Assembly Language (08/19/04)
  • Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler" (08/17/04)
  • Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler" (08/17/04)
  • Re: Will HLA2.0 Support rosasm? (08/11/04)
  • We should close down alt.lang.asm. (08/10/04)
  • Re: HLA is a text converter (text to object code) (08/08/04)
  • Re: Whats so bad about HLA ? (08/07/04)
  • Re: HLA is a text converter (text to object code) (08/06/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/05/04)
  • Re: HLA is a text converter (text to object code) (08/04/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/04/04)
  • From the LuxAsm list. (08/03/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/03/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/02/04)
  • Re: HLA v1.68 is now available (08/01/04)
  • Re: HLA v1.68 is now available (07/31/04)
• Percival
  • Re: I think i finally got a definition of an Assembler! (08/31/04)
  • Re: I think i finally got a definition of an Assembler! (08/31/04)
  • Re: string (08/31/04)
  • Re: I've seen the future...and it works! (was: my view on this assembler is blah) (08/31/04)
  • Re: RosAsm is a compiler, not an assembler (08/31/04)
  • Re: RosAsm is a compiler, not an assembler (08/31/04)
  • Re: I think i finally got a definition of an Assembler! (08/30/04)
  • Re: RosAsm is a compiler, not an assembler (08/30/04)
  • Re: RosAsm is a compiler, not an assembler (08/30/04)
  • Re: I think i finally got a definition of an Assembler! (08/30/04)
  • Re: I think i finally got a definition of an Assembler! (08/30/04)
  • Re: RosAsm is a compiler, not an assembler (08/30/04)
  • I think i finally got a definition of an Assembler! (08/30/04)
  • Re: Namespaces in assembly language (08/30/04)
  • Re: Namespaces in assembly language (08/29/04)
  • Re: Namespaces in assembly language (08/29/04)
  • Re: Namespaces in assembly language (08/29/04)
  • Re: Namespaces in assembly language (08/29/04)
  • Re: RosAsm is a compiler, not an assembler (08/29/04)
  • Re: Namespaces in assembly language (08/29/04)
  • Re: RosAsm is a compiler, not an assembler (08/29/04)
  • Re: RosAsm is a compiler, not an assembler (08/29/04)
  • Re: How to get Code Segment Base Address in PM (08/29/04)
  • Re: Using Structures to write Readable and Maintainable Assembly (08/29/04)
  • Re: Namespaces in assembly language (08/29/04)
  • Re: Namespaces in assembly language (08/28/04)
  • Re: Namespaces in assembly language (08/27/04)
  • Re: Namespaces in assembly language (08/27/04)
  • Re: Namespaces in assembly language (08/27/04)
  • Re: Namespaces in assembly language (08/27/04)
  • Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler" (08/27/04)
  • Re: RosAsm Licence part 1 : Preamble (08/27/04)
  • Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler" (08/27/04)
  • Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler" (08/27/04)
  • Re: I've seen the future...and it works! (was: my view on this assembler is blah) (08/27/04)
  • Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler" (08/27/04)
  • Re: Unions in Assembly Language (08/27/04)
  • Re: string (08/27/04)
  • Re: Unions in Assembly Language (08/27/04)
  • Re: string (08/27/04)
  • Re: Unions in Assembly Language (08/27/04)
  • Re: Unions in Assembly Language (08/26/04)
  • Re: Unions in Assembly Language (08/26/04)
  • Re: Unions in Assembly Language (08/26/04)
  • Re: ADK/HLA v2.0 Update (08/25/04)
  • Re: ADK/HLA v2.0 Update (08/25/04)
  • Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler" (08/25/04)
  • Re: ADK/HLA v2.0 Update (08/25/04)
  • Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler" (08/25/04)
  • Re: a common belief or a wrong C[++] compiler? (08/25/04)
  • Re: Using Structures to write Readable and Maintainable Assembly (08/25/04)
  • Re: Ia32 (08/25/04)
  • Re: Ia32 (08/24/04)
  • Re: Ia32 (08/24/04)
  • Re: Ia32 (08/24/04)
  • Re: a common belief or a wrong C[++] compiler? (08/24/04)
  • Re: Ia32 (08/24/04)
  • Re: Hi (08/24/04)
  • Re: All structures make "Ghost variables" (08/24/04)
  • Re: Argue about this (08/24/04)
  • Re: Hi (08/23/04)
  • Re: Hi (08/23/04)
  • Re: order of operands in HLA (08/23/04)
  • Re: Hi (08/23/04)
  • All structures make "Ghost variables" (08/23/04)
  • Re: Using Structures to write Readable and Maintainable Assembly (08/23/04)
  • Re: Structures in Assembly Language (08/23/04)
  • Re: Structures in Assembly Language (08/23/04)
  • Re: Using Structures to write Readable and Maintainable Assembly (08/23/04)
  • Re: ChASM (08/22/04)
  • Re: High Level Assemblers and High Level Assembly Languages do exist. (08/22/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/22/04)
  • Re: order of operands in HLA (08/21/04)
  • Re: order of operands in HLA (08/21/04)
  • Re: ADK/HLA v2.0 Update (08/21/04)
  • Re: ADK/HLA v2.0 Update (08/20/04)
  • Re: order of operands in HLA (08/20/04)
  • Re: Structures in Assembly Language (08/20/04)
  • Re: order of operands in HLA (08/20/04)
  • Re: Structures in Assembly Language (08/20/04)
  • Re: Structures in Assembly Language (08/20/04)
  • Re: Structures in Assembly Language (08/20/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/20/04)
  • Re: Structures in Assembly Language (08/20/04)
  • Re: Structures in Assembly Language (08/20/04)
  • Re: Structures in Assembly Language (08/19/04)
  • Re: Structures in Assembly Language (08/18/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/18/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/18/04)
  • Re: Note to "The Wannabee" on religion (08/17/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/16/04)
  • Re: Note to "The Wannabee" on religion (08/16/04)
  • Re: Note to "The Wannabee" on religion (08/16/04)
  • Re: Note to "The Wannabee" on religion (08/16/04)
  • Re: What is an Assembler (08/15/04)
  • Re: a common belief or a wrong C[++] compiler? (08/15/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/15/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/14/04)
  • Re: Note to "The Wannabee" on religion (08/14/04)
  • Re: Note to "The Wannabee" on religion (08/14/04)
  • Re: Note to "The Wannabee" on religion (08/14/04)
  • Re: a common belief or a wrong C[++] compiler? (08/13/04)
  • Re: defining & accessing structures? (08/13/04)
  • Re: Note to "The Wannabee" on religion (08/13/04)
  • Re: What is an Assembler (08/13/04)
  • Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler" (08/13/04)
  • Re: US Election Special Update News Report Special (08/13/04)
  • Re: Note to "The Wannabee" on religion (08/13/04)
  • My view on this "Is blah an assembler" (08/13/04)
  • Re: =, += -=, loop, etc (08/13/04)
  • Re: What is an Assembler (08/12/04)
  • Re: =, += -=, loop, etc (08/12/04)
  • Re: Note to "The Wannabee" on religion (08/12/04)
  • Re: Note to "The Wannabee" on religion (08/12/04)
  • Re: What is an Assembler (08/12/04)
  • Re: What is an Assembler (08/12/04)
  • Re: Note to "The Wannabee" on religion (08/12/04)
  • Re: Note to "The Wannabee" on religion (08/12/04)
  • Re: Note to "The Wannabee" on religion (08/11/04)
  • Re: Note to "The Wannabee" on religion (08/11/04)
  • Re: US Election Special Update News Report Special (08/11/04)
  • Re: Note to "The Wannabee" on religion (08/11/04)
  • Re: Note to "The Wannabee" on religion (08/11/04)
  • Re: Note to "The Wannabee" on religion (08/11/04)
  • Re: Interesting Correspondence with the Manager (Pierre Vandevenne) of www.datarescue.com (08/11/04)
  • Re: We should close down alt.lang.asm. (08/10/04)
  • Re: Note to "The Wannabee" on religion (08/10/04)
  • Re: Tenacity should be rewarded (08/10/04)
  • Note to "The Wannabee" on religion (08/10/04)
  • Re: Tenacity should be rewarded (08/10/04)
  • Re: RosAsm V.1.28a released (08/10/04)
  • Re: Tenacity should be rewarded (08/09/04)
  • Re: =, += -=, loop, etc (08/08/04)
  • Re: =, += -=, loop, etc (08/08/04)
  • Re: HLA is a text converter (text to object code) (08/08/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/08/04)
  • Re: Using processor cache (08/07/04)
  • Re: Will HLA2.0 Support rosasm? (08/07/04)
  • Re: HLA is a text converter (text to object code) (08/07/04)
  • Re: Whats so bad about HLA ? (08/06/04)
  • Re: Whats so bad about HLA ? (08/06/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/06/04)
  • Re: IA64 and beyond (08/06/04)
  • Whats so bad about HLA ? (08/06/04)
  • Re: Will HLA2.0 Support rosasm? (08/06/04)
  • Re: Will HLA2.0 Support rosasm? (08/06/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/06/04)
  • Re: Will HLA2.0 Support rosasm? (08/05/04)
  • Re: Will HLA2.0 Support rosasm? (08/05/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/05/04)
  • Re: Will HLA2.0 Support rosasm? (08/05/04)
  • Re: Will HLA2.0 Support rosasm? (08/05/04)
  • Re: Will HLA2.0 Support rosasm? (08/05/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/05/04)
  • Re: Will HLA2.0 Support rosasm? (08/05/04)
  • Re: Will HLA2.0 Support rosasm? (08/05/04)
  • Re: HLA is a text converter (text to object code) (08/05/04)
  • Re: Will HLA2.0 Support rosasm? (08/05/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/05/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/05/04)
  • Re: Will HLA2.0 Support rosasm? (08/05/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/05/04)
  • Re: HLA is a text converter (text to object code) (08/05/04)
  • Re: HLA is a text converter (text to object code) (08/04/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/04/04)
  • Re: HLA is a text converter (text to object code) (08/04/04)
  • Re: Will HLA2.0 Support rosasm? (08/04/04)
  • Re: HLA is a text converter (text to object code) (08/04/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/04/04)
  • Re: Will HLA2.0 Support rosasm? (08/04/04)
  • Re: Will HLA2.0 Support rosasm? (08/04/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/04/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/04/04)
  • Re: HLA is a text converter (text to object code) (08/04/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/04/04)
  • Re: HLA is a text converter (text to object code) (08/04/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/04/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/03/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/03/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/03/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/03/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/03/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/03/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/03/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/03/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/03/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/03/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/02/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/02/04)
  • Re: HLA v1.68 is now available (07/31/04)
• Peter
  • Re: Database design issue (08/20/04)
  • Re: Database design issue (08/16/04)
  • Database design issue (08/12/04)
• Phil Carmody
  • Re: HLA is a text converter (text to object code) (08/09/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/09/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/09/04)
  • Re: =, += -=, loop, etc (08/09/04)
  • Re: =, += -=, loop, etc (08/09/04)
  • Re: =, += -=, loop, etc (08/09/04)
  • Re: =, += -=, loop, etc (08/09/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/09/04)
  • Re: =, += -=, loop, etc (08/08/04)
  • Re: =, += -=, loop, etc (08/08/04)
  • Re: <=> (08/03/04)
  • Re: shift and failure to exceed compiler in speed (08/01/04)
• Pierre Vandevenne
  • Re: Interesting Correspondence with the Manager (Pierre Vandevenne) of www.datarescue.com (08/11/04)
  • Re: Interesting Correspondence with the Manager (Pierre Vandevenne) of www.datarescue.com (08/10/04)
• Pierre Vandevennne
  • Re: Interesting Correspondence with the Manager (Pierre Vandevenne) of www.datarescue.com (08/13/04)
  • Re: Interesting Correspondence with the Manager (Pierre Vandevenne) of www.datarescue.com (08/12/04)
  • Re: Interesting Correspondence with the Manager (Pierre Vandevenne) of www.datarescu (08/11/04)
  • Re: Interesting Correspondence with the Manager (Pierre Vandevenne) of www.datarescue.com (08/11/04)
  • Re: Interesting Correspondence with the Manager (Pierre Vandevenne) of www.datarescue.com (08/11/04)
  • Re: Interesting Correspondence with the Manager (Pierre Vandevenne) of www.datarescue.com (08/11/04)
  • Re: Interesting Correspondence with the Manager (Pierre Vandevenne) of www.datarescue.com (08/11/04)
• psi
  • Re: ASM vs HLL : absurd war (08/02/04)
• Purple_Cochoa
  • HLA v1.69 crashes over this source! (08/21/04)
• R.Wieser
  • Re: All structures make "Ghost variables" (08/26/04)
• Randall Hyde
  • Re: Helpful Practical Uses of Conditional Assembly (08/31/04)
  • Re: RosAsm is a compiler, not an assembler (08/31/04)
  • Re: Conditional Assembly (Pre-Compilers) (08/31/04)
  • Re: Helpful Practical Uses of Conditional Assembly (08/31/04)
  • Re: Conditional Assembly (08/31/04)
  • Re: Conditional Assembly (08/31/04)
  • Re: Argue about this (08/31/04)
  • Re: Conditional Assembly (08/31/04)
  • Re: Conditional Assembly (08/30/04)
  • Conditional Assembly (08/30/04)
  • Roger's multi-room chat app writting in assembly (08/30/04)
  • Re: I think i finally got a definition of an Assembler! (08/30/04)
  • Re: RosAsm is a compiler, not an assembler (08/30/04)
  • Re: Namespaces in assembly language (08/30/04)
  • Re: Namespaces in assembly language (08/30/04)
  • Re: Namespaces in assembly language (08/30/04)
  • Re: RosAsm is a compiler, not an assembler (08/29/04)
  • Re: Namespaces in assembly language (08/29/04)
  • Re: Namespaces in assembly language (08/29/04)
  • Re: RosAsm is a compiler, not an assembler (08/29/04)
  • Re: Namespaces in assembly language (08/29/04)
  • RosAsm is a compiler, not an assembler (08/29/04)
  • Re: Get HLA Training (08/29/04)
  • Re: Unions in Assembly Language (08/28/04)
  • Re: Namespaces in assembly language (08/28/04)
  • Re: Unions in Assembly Language (08/28/04)
  • Re: Namespaces in assembly language (08/27/04)
  • Re: Namespaces in assembly language (08/27/04)
  • Re: Unions in Assembly Language (08/27/04)
  • Re: Namespaces in assembly language (08/27/04)
  • Re: I've seen the future...and it works! (was: my view on this assembler is blah) (08/27/04)
  • Re: Namespaces in assembly language (08/27/04)
  • Namespaces in assembly language (08/27/04)
  • Re: I've seen the future...and it works! (was: my view on this assembler is blah) (08/27/04)
  • Re: Unions in Assembly Language (08/27/04)
  • Re: string (08/26/04)
  • Re: Unions in Assembly Language (08/26/04)
  • Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler" (08/26/04)
  • Re: Unions in Assembly Language (08/26/04)
  • Re: Unions in Assembly Language (08/26/04)
  • Re: HLA v1.69 crashes over this source! (08/25/04)
  • Re: Argue about this (08/25/04)
  • Re: ADK/HLA v2.0 Update (08/25/04)
  • Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler" (08/25/04)
  • Re: Get HLA Training (08/25/04)
  • Re: ADK/HLA v2.0 Update (08/25/04)
  • Re: ADK/HLA v2.0 Update (08/25/04)
  • Re: ADK/HLA v2.0 Update (08/25/04)
  • Re: ADK/HLA v2.0 Update (08/24/04)
  • Unions in Assembly Language (08/24/04)
  • Re: Argue about this (08/24/04)
  • Re: ADK/HLA v2.0 Update (08/24/04)
  • Re: All structures make "Ghost variables" (08/24/04)
  • Re: Argue about this (08/24/04)
  • Re: Using Structures to write Readable and Maintainable Assembly (08/24/04)
  • Re: Hi (08/24/04)
  • Re: Argue about this (08/23/04)
  • Re: Hi (08/23/04)
  • Re: Hi (08/23/04)
  • New HIDE (HLA IDE) version is available (08/23/04)
  • Re: HLA v1.69 crashes over this source! (08/23/04)
  • Re: Structures in Assembly Language (08/23/04)
  • Re: Using Structures to write Readable and Maintainable Assembly (08/23/04)
  • Using Structures to write Readable and Maintainable Assembly (08/22/04)
  • Re: order of operands in HLA (08/21/04)
  • Re: order of operands in HLA (08/21/04)
  • Re: ADK/HLA v2.0 Update (08/20/04)
  • Re: order of operands in HLA (08/20/04)
  • ADK/HLA v2.0 Update (08/20/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/20/04)
  • Re: Structures in Assembly Language (08/20/04)
  • Re: order of operands in HLA (08/20/04)
  • Get HLA Training (08/20/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/20/04)
  • Re: Structures in Assembly Language (08/19/04)
  • Re: HLA v1.69 is now Available (08/19/04)
  • Re: Structures in Assembly Language (08/19/04)
  • Re: New Memory Management code in HLA stdlib (08/19/04)
  • Re: Structures in Assembly Language (08/19/04)
  • New Memory Management code in HLA stdlib (08/18/04)
  • HLA v1.69 is now Available (08/18/04)
  • Re: Structures in Assembly Language (08/18/04)
  • Structures in Assembly Language (08/18/04)
  • Re: 32 bit processor ?. (08/15/04)
  • Re: What is an Assembler (08/14/04)
  • Re: What is an Assembler (08/14/04)
  • Re: ADK/HLA v2.0 Update (08/13/04)
  • Re: What is an Assembler (08/13/04)
  • Re: Note to "The Wannabee" on religion (08/13/04)
  • Re: What is an Assembler (08/13/04)
  • ADK/HLA v2.0 Update (08/13/04)
  • Re: =, += -=, loop, etc (08/13/04)
  • Re: What is an Assembler (08/12/04)
  • What is an Assembler (08/12/04)
  • Will it be easy to write an HLA v2.0 back end? (08/11/04)
  • Re: =, += -=, loop, etc (08/11/04)
  • Re: Interesting Correspondence with the Manager (Pierre Vandevenne) of www.datarescue.com (08/11/04)
  • Re: Interesting Correspondence with the Manager (Pierre Vandevenne) of www.datarescue.com (08/11/04)
  • Re: Interesting Correspondence with the Manager (Pierre Vandevenne) of www.datarescue.com (08/11/04)
  • Re: Interesting Correspondence with the Manager (Pierre Vandevenne) of www.datarescue.com (08/11/04)
  • Re: Will HLA2.0 Support rosasm? (08/10/04)
  • Re: =, += -=, loop, etc (08/10/04)
  • Re: Interesting Correspondence with the Manager (Pierre Vandevenne) of www.datarescue.com (08/10/04)
  • Re: Interesting Correspondence with the Manager (Pierre Vandevenne) of www.datarescue.com (08/10/04)
  • Re: =, += -=, loop, etc (08/10/04)
  • Re: We should close down alt.lang.asm. (08/10/04)
  • Re: Interesting Correspondence with the Manager (Pierre Vandevenne) of www.datarescue.com (08/10/04)
  • Re: We should close down alt.lang.asm. (08/10/04)
  • Re: Interesting Correspondence with the Manager (Pierre Vandevenne) of www.datarescue.com (08/10/04)
  • Re: Interesting Correspondence with the Manager (Pierre Vandevenne) of www.datarescue.com (08/10/04)
  • Re: Interesting Correspondence with the Manager (Pierre Vandevenne) of www.datarescue.com (08/10/04)
  • Re: The Assembly "Rebirth" has Begun (08/10/04)
  • Re: RosAsm still isn't marketed right. (08/10/04)
  • The Assembly "Rebirth" has Begun (08/10/04)
  • Re: Tenacity should be rewarded (08/10/04)
  • Re: Note to "The Wannabee" on religion (08/10/04)
  • Re: =, += -=, loop, etc (08/10/04)
  • Re: IA64 and beyond (08/10/04)
  • RosAsm crowd talking about HLA rather than RosAsm (08/10/04)
  • Re: Tenacity should be rewarded (08/10/04)
  • Re: Will HLA2.0 Support rosasm? (08/09/04)
  • RosAsm still isn't marketed right. (08/09/04)
  • Re: Tenacity should be rewarded (08/09/04)
  • Re: =, += -=, loop, etc (08/09/04)
  • Re: RosAsm V.1.28a released (08/09/04)
  • Re: Will HLA2.0 Support rosasm? (08/09/04)
  • Re: HLA is a text converter (text to object code) (08/09/04)
  • Re: HLA is a text converter (text to object code) (08/09/04)
  • Re: IA64 and beyond (08/09/04)
  • Re: Tenacity should be rewarded (08/09/04)
  • Re: Tenacity should be rewarded (08/09/04)
  • Re: RosAsm V.1.28a released (08/09/04)
  • Re: Will HLA2.0 Support rosasm? (08/09/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/09/04)
  • Re: HLA is a text converter (text to object code) (08/09/04)
  • Re: HLA is a text converter (text to object code) (08/09/04)
  • Re: Tenacity should be rewarded (08/09/04)
  • Re: Will HLA2.0 Support rosasm? (08/09/04)
  • Re: RosAsm V.1.28a released (08/09/04)
  • Re: =, += -=, loop, etc (08/09/04)
  • Re: HLA is a text converter (text to object code) (08/06/04)
  • Re: RosAsm V.1.28a released (08/06/04)
  • Re: Will HLA2.0 Support rosasm? (08/06/04)
  • Re: HLA is a text converter (text to object code) (08/06/04)
  • Re: Whats so bad about HLA ? (08/06/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/06/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/06/04)
  • Re: Will HLA2.0 Support rosasm? (08/06/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/06/04)
  • Re: Will HLA2.0 Support rosasm? (08/06/04)
  • Re: Will HLA2.0 Support rosasm? (08/06/04)
  • Re: HLA is a text converter (text to object code) (08/06/04)
  • Re: HLA is a text converter (text to object code) (08/06/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/06/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/06/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/06/04)
  • Re: Will HLA2.0 Support rosasm? (08/05/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/05/04)
  • Re: Will HLA2.0 Support rosasm? (08/05/04)
  • Re: Will HLA2.0 Support rosasm? (08/05/04)
  • Re: Will HLA2.0 Support rosasm? (08/05/04)
  • Re: Will HLA2.0 Support rosasm? (08/05/04)
  • Re: Will HLA2.0 Support rosasm? (08/05/04)
  • Re: HLA is a text converter (text to object code) (08/05/04)
  • Re: HLA is a text converter (text to object code) (08/05/04)
  • Re: IA64 and beyond (08/05/04)
  • Re: HLA is a text converter (text to object code) (08/05/04)
  • Re: HLA is a text converter (text to object code) (08/05/04)
  • Re: Will HLA2.0 Support rosasm? (08/05/04)
  • Re: Will HLA2.0 Support rosasm? (08/05/04)
  • Re: Will HLA2.0 Support rosasm? (08/05/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/05/04)
  • Re: HLA is a text converter (text to object code) (08/04/04)
  • HLA is a text converter (text to object code) (08/04/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/04/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/03/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/02/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/02/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/02/04)
  • Re: HLA v1.68 is now available (08/02/04)
  • Re: HLA v1.68 is now available (08/01/04)
  • Re: HLA v1.68 is now available (08/01/04)
• Relvinian
  • Re: RosAsm is a compiler, not an assembler (08/30/04)
  • Re: Test (08/26/04)
  • Re: a common belief or a wrong C[++] compiler? (08/18/04)
  • Re: a common belief or a wrong C[++] compiler? (08/17/04)
  • Re: a common belief or a wrong C[++] compiler? (08/17/04)
  • Re: a common belief or a wrong C[++] compiler? (08/17/04)
  • Re: a common belief or a wrong C[++] compiler? (08/16/04)
  • Re: Will HLA2.0 Support rosasm? (08/05/04)
  • Re: HLA is a text converter (text to object code) (08/04/04)
  • Re: HLA is a text converter (text to object code) (08/04/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/04/04)
• Reni
  • Re: Using processor cache (08/10/04)
• Ro
  • Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler" (08/18/04)
  • Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler" (08/18/04)
• Robert Redelmeier
  • Re: RosAsm is a compiler, not an assembler (08/30/04)
  • Re: Namespaces in assembly language (08/30/04)
  • Re: I think i finally got a definition of an Assembler! (08/30/04)
  • Re: Is it possible to get the caller's name ? (08/20/04)
  • Re: 32 bit processor ?. (08/15/04)
  • Re: What is an Assembler (08/15/04)
  • Re: What is an Assembler (08/14/04)
  • Re: =, += -=, loop, etc (08/11/04)
  • Re: We should close down alt.lang.asm. (08/10/04)
  • Re: IA64 and beyond (08/10/04)
  • Re: IA64 and beyond (08/10/04)
  • Re: IA64 and beyond (08/09/04)
  • Re: IA64 and beyond (08/07/04)
  • Re: IA64 and beyond (08/07/04)
  • Re: IA64 and beyond (08/06/04)
  • Re: IA64 and beyond (08/06/04)
  • Re: HLA is a text converter (text to object code) (08/04/04)
  • Re: HLA is a text converter (text to object code) (08/04/04)
• Socket
  • Re: RosAsm still isn't marketed right. (08/11/04)
  • Re: RosAsm still isn't marketed right. (08/10/04)
• SysCold
  • Using processor cache (08/07/04)
• T.M. Sommers
  • Re: Interesting Correspondence with the Manager (Pierre Vandevenne) of www.datarescu (08/30/04)
  • Re: Argue about this (08/30/04)
  • Re: order of operands in HLA (08/23/04)
  • Re: Structures in Assembly Language (08/23/04)
  • Re: order of operands in HLA (08/22/04)
  • Re: order of operands in HLA (08/21/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/18/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/18/04)
  • Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler" (08/17/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/17/04)
  • Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler" (08/16/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/16/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/16/04)
  • Re: Note to "The Wannabee" on religion (08/14/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/08/04)
  • Re: HLA v1.68 is now available (08/08/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/08/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/07/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/06/04)
  • Re: Will HLA2.0 Support rosasm? (08/06/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/05/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/04/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/04/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/04/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/04/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/04/04)
  • Re: HLA v1.68 is now available (08/04/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/03/04)
  • Re: HLA v1.68 is now available (08/02/04)
  • Re: HLA v1.68 is now available (08/02/04)
  • Re: HLA v1.68 is now available (08/02/04)
• The Mosquito
  • Re: Listen to this shit : (08/28/04)
  • Re: incredible 64kb demo (08/16/04)
  • Re: Using processor cache (08/14/04)
  • Re: incredible 64kb demo (08/12/04)
  • OT: incredible 64kb demo (08/12/04)
  • Re: Database design issue (08/12/04)
  • Re: Using processor cache (08/10/04)
  • Re: Using processor cache (08/10/04)
  • Re: We should close down alt.lang.asm. (08/10/04)
  • Re: Using processor cache (08/10/04)
• The Wannabee
  • Who said registers are born equal ? (08/31/04)
  • Re: m68000 (08/31/04)
  • Re: a common belief or a wrong C[++] compiler? (08/31/04)
  • Re: Helpful Practical Uses of Conditional Assembly (08/31/04)
  • Re: m68000 (08/31/04)
  • Re: I think i finally got a definition of an Assembler! (08/31/04)
  • Re: repe cmpsb instruction (08/31/04)
  • Re: repe cmpsb instruction (08/31/04)
  • Re: I think i finally got a definition of an Assembler! (08/31/04)
  • Re: Argue about this (08/30/04)
  • Re: Argue about this (08/30/04)
  • Re: RosAsm is a compiler, not an assembler (08/30/04)
  • Re: I think i finally got a definition of an Assembler! (08/30/04)
  • Re: repe cmpsb instruction (08/30/04)
  • Re: RosAsm is a compiler, not an assembler (08/30/04)
  • Re: I think i finally got a definition of an Assembler! (08/30/04)
  • Re: Namespaces in assembly language (08/30/04)
  • Re: Namespaces in assembly language (08/30/04)
  • Re: Namespaces in assembly language (08/30/04)
  • Re: Namespaces in assembly language (08/29/04)
  • Re: Namespaces in assembly language (08/29/04)
  • Re: Namespaces in assembly language (08/29/04)
  • Re: Namespaces in assembly language (08/29/04)
  • Re: Namespaces in assembly language (08/29/04)
  • Re: Namespaces in assembly language (08/29/04)
  • Re: RosAsm is a compiler, not an assembler (08/29/04)
  • Re: Listen to this shit : (08/29/04)
  • Re: New HIDE (HLA IDE) version is available (08/28/04)
  • Re: New HIDE (HLA IDE) version is available (08/28/04)
  • Re: New HIDE (HLA IDE) version is available (08/28/04)
  • Re: New HIDE (HLA IDE) version is available (08/28/04)
  • Re: New HIDE (HLA IDE) version is available (08/28/04)
  • Listen to this shit : (08/28/04)
  • RosAsm Licence part 1 : Preamble (08/27/04)
  • Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler" (08/27/04)
  • Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler" (08/27/04)
  • Re: I've seen the future...and it works! (was: my view on this assembler is blah) (08/27/04)
  • Re: I've seen the future...and it works! (was: my view on this assembler is blah) (08/27/04)
  • Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler" (08/27/04)
  • Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler" (08/27/04)
  • Re: Unions in Assembly Language (08/27/04)
  • Re: string (08/27/04)
  • Re: string (08/26/04)
  • Re: string (08/26/04)
  • Re: string (08/26/04)
  • Re: New HIDE (HLA IDE) version is available (08/26/04)
  • Re: string (08/26/04)
  • Re: string (08/26/04)
  • Re: Test (08/26/04)
  • Re: Test (08/26/04)
  • Re: string (08/26/04)
  • Re: string (08/26/04)
  • Re: Test (08/26/04)
  • Re: Unions in Assembly Language (08/26/04)
  • Re: Using Structures to write Readable and Maintainable Assembly (08/26/04)
  • Re: Unions in Assembly Language (08/26/04)
  • Re: Unions in Assembly Language (08/26/04)
  • Re: Unions in Assembly Language (08/26/04)
  • Re: Unions in Assembly Language (08/26/04)
  • Re: Unions in Assembly Language (08/26/04)
  • Re: Unions in Assembly Language (08/26/04)
  • Re: Unions in Assembly Language (08/26/04)
  • Re: Unions in Assembly Language (08/26/04)
  • Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler" (08/26/04)
  • Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler" (08/26/04)
  • Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler" (08/26/04)
  • Re: Unions in Assembly Language (08/26/04)
  • Re: Unions in Assembly Language (08/26/04)
  • Re: New HIDE (HLA IDE) version is available (08/26/04)
  • Re: Unions in Assembly Language (08/26/04)
  • Re: Argue about this (08/26/04)
  • Re: RosAsm still isn't marketed right. (08/26/04)
  • Re: Unions in Assembly Language (08/26/04)
  • Re: New HIDE (HLA IDE) version is available (08/26/04)
  • Re: Using Structures to write Readable and Maintainable Assembly (08/26/04)
  • Re: New HIDE (HLA IDE) version is available (08/26/04)
  • Re: Using Structures to write Readable and Maintainable Assembly (08/25/04)
  • Re: Argue about this (08/25/04)
  • Re: New HIDE (HLA IDE) version is available (08/25/04)
  • Re: New HIDE (HLA IDE) version is available (08/25/04)
  • Re: New HIDE (HLA IDE) version is available (08/25/04)
  • Re: New HIDE (HLA IDE) version is available (08/25/04)
  • Re: Structures in Assembly Language (08/24/04)
  • Re: Interesting Correspondence with the Manager (Pierre Vandevenne) of www.datarescu (08/24/04)
  • Re: Argue about this (08/24/04)
  • Re: New HIDE (HLA IDE) version is available (08/24/04)
  • Re: Argue about this (08/24/04)
  • Re: order of operands in HLA (08/24/04)
  • Re: All structures make "Ghost variables" (08/24/04)
  • Re: Argue about this (08/24/04)
  • Re: Argue about this (08/24/04)
  • Re: New HIDE (HLA IDE) version is available (08/24/04)
  • Re: New HIDE (HLA IDE) version is available (08/24/04)
  • Re: Structures in Assembly Language (08/23/04)
  • Re: Hi (08/23/04)
  • Re: Structures in Assembly Language (08/23/04)
  • Re: Structures in Assembly Language (08/23/04)
  • Re: Structures in Assembly Language (08/23/04)
  • Re: Structures in Assembly Language (08/23/04)
  • Re: Structures in Assembly Language (08/23/04)
  • Re: Structures in Assembly Language (08/23/04)
  • Re: New HIDE (HLA IDE) version is available (08/23/04)
  • Re: Structures in Assembly Language (08/22/04)
  • Re: High Level Assemblers and High Level Assembly Languages do exist. (08/22/04)
  • Re: High Level Assemblers and High Level Assembly Languages do exist. (08/22/04)
  • Re: Structures in Assembly Language (08/22/04)
  • Re: Structures in Assembly Language (08/21/04)
  • Re: For Newbies: What is Scientology? (8/14/04) (08/21/04)
  • Re: Is it possible to get the caller's name ? (08/21/04)
  • Re: Get HLA Training (08/21/04)
  • Re: order of operands in HLA (08/21/04)
  • Re: Structures in Assembly Language (08/21/04)
  • Re: Structures in Assembly Language (08/21/04)
  • Re: Structures in Assembly Language (08/20/04)
  • Re: Get HLA Training (08/20/04)
  • Re: Structures in Assembly Language (08/20/04)
  • Re: Structures in Assembly Language (08/20/04)
  • Re: Structures in Assembly Language (08/20/04)
  • Re: Structures in Assembly Language (08/20/04)
  • Re: Structures in Assembly Language (08/20/04)
  • Re: Structures in Assembly Language (08/20/04)
  • Re: Structures in Assembly Language (08/20/04)
  • Re: Structures in Assembly Language (08/20/04)
  • Re: Is it possible to get the caller's name ? (08/20/04)
  • Re: Structures in Assembly Language (08/20/04)
  • Re: Structures in Assembly Language (08/20/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/19/04)
  • Re: a common belief or a wrong C[++] compiler? (08/19/04)
  • Re: a common belief or a wrong C[++] compiler? (08/19/04)
  • Re: Structures in Assembly Language (08/19/04)
  • Re: Structures in Assembly Language (08/19/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/18/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/18/04)
  • Re: Note to "The Wannabee" on religion (08/18/04)
  • Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler" (08/18/04)
  • Re: a common belief or a wrong C[++] compiler? (08/17/04)
  • Re: a common belief or a wrong C[++] compiler? (08/17/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/14/04)
  • Re: Note to "The Wannabee" on religion (08/14/04)
  • Re: Note to "The Wannabee" on religion (08/14/04)
  • Re: Note to "The Wannabee" on religion (08/14/04)
  • Re: Note to "The Wannabee" on religion (08/11/04)
  • Re: Note to "The Wannabee" on religion (08/11/04)
  • Re: Note to "The Wannabee" on religion (08/10/04)
  • Re: Note to "The Wannabee" on religion (08/10/04)
  • Re: Note to "The Wannabee" on religion (08/10/04)
  • Re: RosAsm crowd talking about HLA rather than RosAsm (08/10/04)
  • Re: Tenacity should be rewarded (08/10/04)
  • Re: Tenacity should be rewarded (08/10/04)
  • Re: RosAsm V.1.28a released (08/10/04)
  • Re: RosAsm V.1.28a released (08/09/04)
  • Re: Will HLA2.0 Support rosasm? (08/09/04)
  • Re: RosAsm V.1.28a released (08/09/04)
  • Re: Will HLA2.0 Support rosasm? (08/09/04)
  • Re: RosAsm V.1.28a released (08/09/04)
  • Re: Will HLA2.0 Support rosasm? (08/06/04)
  • Re: Will HLA2.0 Support rosasm? (08/06/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/06/04)
  • Re: Will HLA2.0 Support rosasm? (08/06/04)
  • Re: Will HLA2.0 Support rosasm? (08/05/04)
  • Re: Will HLA2.0 Support rosasm? (08/05/04)
  • Re: HLA is a text converter (text to object code) (08/05/04)
  • Re: HLA is a text converter (text to object code) (08/05/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/05/04)
  • Re: Will HLA2.0 Support rosasm? (08/05/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/05/04)
  • Re: Will HLA2.0 Support rosasm? (08/05/04)
  • Re: Will HLA2.0 Support rosasm? (08/05/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/05/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/05/04)
  • Re: Will HLA2.0 Support rosasm? (08/05/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/05/04)
  • Re: Will HLA2.0 Support rosasm? (08/05/04)
  • Re: Will HLA2.0 Support rosasm? (08/05/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/05/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/05/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/04/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/04/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/04/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/04/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/04/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/03/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/03/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/03/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/03/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/03/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/03/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/03/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/03/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/02/04)
  • From the LuxAsm list. (08/02/04)
• The_Sage
  • Re: Namespaces in assembly language (08/29/04)
  • Re: order of operands in HLA (08/26/04)
  • Re: order of operands in HLA (08/26/04)
  • Re: order of operands in HLA (08/25/04)
  • Re: order of operands in HLA (08/23/04)
  • Re: order of operands in HLA (08/23/04)
  • Re: order of operands in HLA (08/23/04)
  • Re: High Level Assemblers and High Level Assembly Languages do exist. (08/22/04)
  • Re: order of operands in HLA (08/22/04)
  • Re: order of operands in HLA (08/21/04)
  • Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler" (08/20/04)
  • Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler" (08/19/04)
  • Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler" (08/18/04)
  • Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler" (08/18/04)
  • Re: Note to "The Wannabee" on religion (08/17/04)
  • Re: Note to "The Wannabee" on religion (08/17/04)
  • Re: Note to "The Wannabee" on religion (08/17/04)
  • Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler" (08/17/04)
  • Re: Note to "The Wannabee" on religion (08/16/04)
  • Re: Note to "The Wannabee" on religion (08/15/04)
  • Re: a common belief or a wrong C[++] compiler? (08/15/04)
  • Re: Database design issue (08/15/04)
  • Re: Note to "The Wannabee" on religion (08/14/04)
  • Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler" (08/14/04)
• Thomas Nilsen
  • Re: Using processor cache (08/09/04)
• Tight_Coder_EX
  • Re: IA64 and beyond (08/06/04)
  • Re: IA64 and beyond (08/06/04)
  • IA64 and beyond (08/04/04)
• Toby Thain
  • Re: ASM MIPS (08/19/04)
  • Re: We should close down alt.lang.asm. (08/11/04)
• TS
  • Re: Ia32 (08/25/04)
  • Re: incredible 64kb demo (08/15/04)
• W Crav
  • Re: order of operands in HLA (08/23/04)
  • Re: For Newbies: What is Scientology? (8/14/04) (08/15/04)
• Wei Li
  • Re: Is it possible to get the caller's name ? (08/20/04)
  • Is it possible to get the caller's name ? (08/20/04)
• wolfgang kern
  • Re: I think i finally got a definition of an Assembler! (08/31/04)
  • Re: a common belief or a wrong C[++] compiler? (08/31/04)
  • Re: a common belief or a wrong C[++] compiler? (08/29/04)
  • Re: I've seen the future...and it works! (was: my view on this assembler is blah) (08/28/04)
  • Re: a common belief or a wrong C[++] compiler? (08/28/04)
  • Re: Test (08/27/04)
  • Re: string (08/27/04)
  • Re: Ia32 (08/26/04)
  • Re: Ia32 (08/26/04)
  • Re: Using Structures to write Readable and Maintainable Assembly (08/26/04)
  • Re: Argue about this (08/26/04)
  • Re: a common belief or a wrong C[++] compiler? (08/26/04)
  • Re: order of operands in HLA (08/26/04)
  • Re: Ia32 (08/25/04)
  • Re: Ia32 (08/25/04)
  • Re: order of operands in HLA (08/25/04)
  • Re: order of operands in HLA (08/25/04)
  • Re: order of operands in HLA (08/24/04)
  • Re: order of operands in HLA (08/24/04)
  • Re: order of operands in HLA (08/22/04)
  • Re: High Level Assemblers and High Level Assembly Languages do exist. (08/22/04)
  • Re: ChASM (08/22/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/20/04)
  • Re: a common belief or a wrong C[++] compiler? (08/20/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/19/04)
  • Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler" (08/19/04)
  • Re: a common belief or a wrong C[++] compiler? (08/19/04)
  • Re: My view on this "Is blah an assembler" (08/16/04)
  • Re: a common belief or a wrong C[++] compiler? (08/15/04)
  • Re: a common belief or a wrong C[++] compiler? (08/15/04)
  • Re: a common belief or a wrong C[++] compiler? (08/15/04)
  • Re: multiplication and division (08/15/04)
  • Re: Using processor cache (08/15/04)
  • Re: Note to "The Wannabee" on religion (08/15/04)
  • Re: a common belief or a wrong C[++] compiler? (08/14/04)
  • Re: Using processor cache (08/14/04)
  • Re: What is an Assembler (08/14/04)
  • Re: What is an Assembler (08/14/04)
  • Re: Note to "The Wannabee" on religion (08/14/04)
  • Re: What is an Assembler (08/13/04)
  • Re: What is an Assembler (08/13/04)
  • Re: Note to "The Wannabee" on religion (08/13/04)
  • Re: Note to "The Wannabee" on religion (08/12/04)
  • Re: We should close down alt.lang.asm. (08/10/04)
  • Re: Will HLA2.0 Support rosasm? (08/10/04)
  • Re: =, += -=, loop, etc (08/10/04)
  • Re: Using processor cache (08/10/04)
  • Re: =, += -=, loop, etc (08/09/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/09/04)
  • Re: Will HLA2.0 Support rosasm? (08/09/04)
  • Re: Will HLA2.0 Support rosasm? (08/09/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/08/04)
  • Re: Using processor cache (08/07/04)
  • Re: shift and failure to exceed compiler in speed (08/07/04)
  • Re: Will HLA2.0 Support rosasm? (08/05/04)
  • Re: Will HLA2.0 Support rosasm? (08/05/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/05/04)
  • Re: shift and failure to exceed compiler in speed (08/04/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/04/04)
  • Re: <=> (08/03/04)
  • Re: From the LuxAsm list. (08/03/04)
  • Re: shift and failure to exceed compiler in speed (08/03/04)
  • Re: <=> (08/03/04)
  • Re: <=> (08/02/04)
  • Re: ASM vs HLL : absurd war (08/02/04)
• Woody
  • Re: I've seen the future...and it works! (was: my view on this assembler is blah) (08/28/04)
  • Re: What is an Assembler (08/13/04)
  • Re: Interesting Correspondence with the Manager (Pierre Vandevenne) of www.datarescue.com (08/10/04)
  • Re: Will HLA2.0 Support rosasm? (08/08/04)
  • Re: Will HLA2.0 Support rosasm? (08/08/04)
• xby
  • Re: order of operands in HLA (08/25/04)
  • Re: order of operands in HLA (08/22/04)
  • Re: What is an Assembler (08/12/04)
• yessopotamus
  • Re: Listen to this shit : (08/30/04)
  • Re: TASM Ideal Mode sadness (08/30/04)
  • Re: Listen to this shit : (08/29/04)
  • TASM Ideal Mode sadness (08/29/04)
  • Re: TASM Ideal vs MASM mode (08/27/04)
  • TASM Ideal vs MASM mode (08/26/04)

Last message date: 08/31/04
Archived on: 08/31/04 CEST

---

1871 messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ]